Joy of Equivocating and Fear of Fog

Scientific Theology: The Method to the Texts

2012-02-21T10:25:00.005-05:00

Scientific Theology in a Time of Elections
Candidate Claims, Biblical Political Positions
Multi-tasker Approach

.
Scientific theology applies the scientific method to beliefs: observe the stated belief; measure its components against texts and evolution of meaning; follow the money; develop a theory as to connection (if any) between belief and texts; consider role of culture-promotion in the belief rather than the text as its foundation. And experiment: what other words would have to have been used in the texts, in order to support the belief. See http://www.experiment-resources.com/what-is-the-scientific-method.html
.
Scientific method and theology -- observation, measurement, theory, testing, repeat, conclude, test again, revise. Science even now is looking at "real" beginnings, see http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/science/space/cosmologists-try-to-explain-a-universe-springing-from-nothing.html?scp=1&sq=more%20to%20nothing&st=cse. That interferes not at all with tracking the figurative, the interpretations cultures give to their own stories. If those interpretations go too far, however, religion stops and simple people-jockeying result. Is that so? So, check out what they say about religion: Text based, and if not, on what. We want to know so we can decide what to do.
.
1. Vet Areas of public policy.
.
For example, should religious institutions be exempt from all secular laws. Do any texts support that? If not, track the evolution of the idea. Ask: Are religious institutions engaged in secular commercial activity. Do they receive taxpayer dollars. Does that that change the picture about exemption from secular laws. See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/health/policy/growth-of-catholic-hospitals-may-limit-access-to-reproductive-care.html?scp=1&sq=catholic%20hospitals&st=cse.
.
2. Vet Areas of private belief
.
For example, how trustworthy are our assumptions? See analysis of concepts surrounding mankind, roles, divine intent, or "man", as central and supreme in creation; and similar topics, following the formula of several open windows dealing with texts, lexicons of words used, translations, transliterations.
.

Junior High, Middle School students excel at this kind of research. It does not require a program or software. All the tools are online. It is a multi-tasker's delight.
Teach your child to test out theology. Come back from church and start looking things up. It is a matter of hand-over-hand, toe-hold climbing up the Rocks of Ages. Looking up, not down.
.

3. Religious Assertion Fact Check; statements in Public Life
.
What someone says in church can stay in church, despite past practice to demonize a candidate for what clergy said. See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/us/politics/01obama.html?scp=9&sq=obamas%20leave%20home%20parish&st=cse.
.
If the candidate himself, however, makes a theological claim on the stump, fair game on vetting the theological claim. Fact Check. Texts, grounding, all of it.
.

See this area as another giant step toward transparency, accountability. There are commercial speech-parallels to requiring time, place and manner restrictions on speech -- where a product is being sold, apply the tests. A religion is being sold here, in speeches of candidates. Is religion now a commercial venture? Institutions have made themselves so. Commerce and religion: bounds blur. So then do exemptions.

Religion, charity as commerce? Differences? Here Murten, Switzerland

Must the religious hawkers when speaking in the public forum be under similar restrictions, as the car salesmen: no fraudulent misrepresentation, FDA truth in experiments rules, etc. Blurred religion and commerce require that. Where time is not of the essence, get out more speech to counter the misrepresentations, the misleading half-truths. Where time is of the essence, there has to be a faster corrective.
.
4. Promote Vetting in an age of Bought Elections
.
Proposal:
.
A qualified, neutral Halo-filled FactCheck shall check, according to scientific method of original text analysis, the religious claims of any candidate. Does the candidate oppose climate concerns because man comes first? Religious. Does a candidate say he shall decide body matters for women, that she is not as morally qualified as he? Religious. Run to KNGDV. Does a candidate make accusations that an opponent is Anti-American, "socialism" -- code including for End Times Theology? Environment is for exploiting, US for us whites? Look it up.
.
Any assertions of belief not validated by text shall be deemed opinion; or evolved self-promotion. That is, label belief belief, but if the belief is free-floating, without foundation in text, we have a right to know that. If the foundation of the belief is someone's inspiration only, we have a right to know that, too.
.
On the panel shall be a multi-denominational, institution and private scholar researchers, particularly any who can translate from earliest Paleo Hebrew (before, say 585 BC) to the Hebrew. What slips occurred there? Any? Had culture already tainted the forms?
.

There are of course highly conscientious individuals and groups and institutions. A measure of their contribution to the common good might be if they are willing to see other roots to what they say. Personally, I find many are interested. Ideas of mutual caring do not rely on technicalities of form criticism at all. Just add it to the repertoire.
Some can't help the lack of inclusivity in their places: it just happened. Does it matter?

Teach them to vet. Children can handle complexity. Ask Grimm.

.
5. Programs and Entertainment Needed in an age of bites.
.
Junior High, Middle School:
.
Lay out for us a Lexicon Board Game, a scavenger hunt, where the player searches the tools, looks up specific words, then reviews the dogma, and gets extra points for finding a Paleo-Hebrew to Hebrew lexicon and transliteration.
.
Go.

Siepacque: CPAC UnMasked. Potlatch. Social Researchers Explore Siepacquian Economic Customs

2012-02-14T10:21:00.001-05:00

Update CPAC in 2012
CPAC Anthropological Analysis
.
The Siepacque Potlatch
(The CPAC Potlatch)
.
Siepacque Ideology Research Ongoing

WikiDC Reporting. Quick Looks at Washington.
.
CPAC UnMasked

Required Reading for Potlatch:

Economic Systems, Distribution and Exchange, at http://anthro.palomar.edu/economy/econ_3.htm/

Rational Choice Theory at http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~scottj/socscot7.htm
Jstor Potlatch article by Stuart Piddocke
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3629231 (never pay Jstor. Go to the library - copyright has gone too far. Let there be a pool [tax?] and pay the author per click)
..........................................

Update to 2012. CPAC.

Gingrich is back, see NYT Caucus Blog, Gingrich at CPAC. He was there before, see Parse Gingrich CPAC Speech.
Reagan also has been to CPAC, see Parse Reagan CPAC Speech (sounds like a Democrat)
Mitch was there and loves violent sound bites, see NYT Loyal Opposition Blog;
Romney looks for luv, see http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/us/politics/romney-tries-to-woo-conservatives-at-cpac.html?scp=5&sq=CPAC&st=cse.

Again this year, researchers attending CPAC BCB events (Bed, cocktails and breakfasts), look for signs of cultural change. CPAC originated as practices in the anthropological Siepacque Tribe, a political party faction island ideology discovered amid the coral of other societies.
.
Social policy and practice experts are attending, observing, and note-taking at the island's equivalent of a two-year equivalent of a Potlatch Ceremony -- the Siepacques' custom of exchange and distribution of gifts to further economic and social gains among themselves. See Economic Systems, Distribution and Exchange, at http://anthro.palomar.edu/economy/econ_3.htm/
.
Researchers seek to collect data to test two theories of exchanges and distribution of benefits, and measure them in order to define the Siepacque System. See Economic Systems site.
.
I. Potlatch and The Reciprocal Theory of Exchange
.
These economic interactions, the Political Potlatch range:
.
A. Broad-based exchange

These include generalized or inclusive exchanges and distributions already well established at societal events such as funerals, where all mourners are invited to attend and participate. There is no immediate expected return to the giver. The reciprocal benefit comes over time, enhancing social connections and group identification. This interaction does not result in a broad disparity of incomes and property. Rather, the reciprocal pattern of this kind of open event creates a time-extended circulation-recirculation of assets and incomes, resulting in an increasingly stable society.
.
B. Balanced exchange

These include an exchange of money for goods and services results in maintaining the immediate status quo. No added value. A balanced exchange can be subtle, where there is indeed a perceived benefit by the giver, as in altruism, and later tax benefit, or in immediate exchanges where the giver may receive back a benefit different in kind, such as Good Repute, esteem of other tribesmen, attention and recognition. See
http://anthro.palomar.edu/economy/econ_3.htm
.
C. Narrow-based interactions
.
These are often negative exchanges, such as exchanges that exclude elements of the population,the negative exchange tend to destabilize society by concentrating increasingly assets and incomes at the chosen ones' level.
.
The one with the goods seeks to pass it on to another and get a greater value in return, so that the one exchanging something of his for the goods of the other, gets rooked. These negative exchange practices are known also as

trickery, also known as the Rock Island Line, Johnny Cash
"hard bargaining,"
taking advantage
coercion.

II. Siepacque's Choice
.
These forms, particularly the Negative, example c above, seem to be favored by the Siepacquians.
.
This is measured by the applause meters, stimulated by images and words of violence against interloping interests -- a result also measured in Neuro-Fussed brain wave researchers also present. The Negative Exchange is particularly beloved by Siepacquians especially since most of the people identifying with that group rooked others out of their wealth by getting their own tax breaks, letting others pay for goods and services needed to keep the entire shebang, including Siepacque, motoring.
.
Is this also a matter of loss aversion? That, for Siepacquians, the fear of losing something, just the fear of a loss, offsets even a likelihood of a greater gain to come. by losing that bit now? That may be the case, see http://loss-aversion.behaviouralfinance.net/ This has been true, apparently, in business contexts, see http://www.businessinsider.com/the-psychology-of-loss-aversion-and-how-it-applies-to-venture-capital-2010-8/ and may well apply to status-social cultural matters as well. People can't see beyond what they know and hold on to now, is that so?
.
III. The Redistributive Theory of Exchange
.
These economic exchanges are generally rejected by Siepacque, it is believed.
.
The Redistributive is a form of distribution-exchange and is a mechanism for leveling economic disparities caused by unjust, bad schools, lack of mobility, prejudices A-Z, tricky, superiority mythologies, hard-bargaining, taking advantage and coercion; or sheer luck of inheritance and other freebies; activities of those On Top or in the Top Two PerCent. Examples: charity; progressive income tax. Competitive speech-making, notes the article; big parties; assertions of ownership of privilege, and reaping in admiration for it.
.
Researchers note that among the original Potlatchers of the Northwest (indigenous peoples' custom of cultural give-aways; this does not include Modern Alaska), the give-aways of goods did not impoverish the giver at all. Instead, the giver was rewarded down the road with benevolences coming his way. The exchange of goods in a timely way enhanced life, not detracted from it.
.
Siepacquers interviewed checked the hate this box. Hate it. Hate it. We got ours, say they in notes passed from desk to desk; now just let anybody try to claw it back.
.
IV. Commercial Exchanges Within This Society and With Other Societies
.
Economic systems do not exist in a vacuum, contrary to Siepacque dogma. Ongoing deficits, if offset by increasing gross national product, have no negative impact, but this is ideologically anathema, for example. Instead, Siepacque addresses only deficits, an approach virtually guaranteed to reduce gross national product. Trade balances are relevant and functionally important.
.
Contacts and exchanges are increasingly necessary, within a nation (Siepacquers deny any obligation to others, despite their receipt of benefits over years -- now safely in their bank accounts for their own health care, productivity and retirement). Researchers noted a motion pending whereby every dollar printed here shall stay here; and to reduce the census counts so that their hue remains perpetually in the majority.
.
Another aspect of commercial exchanges with other societies may resemble the taking advantage aspect of the negative reciprocal exchange in section II herein. The effect of the advantage is to drain surpluses from the lesser-empowered nation, thus keeping them Down; this also is like draining anything extra from basic life needs from the lesser-empowered just outside Siepacque's borders, and keeping them Down.
.
V. Rational Analysis - Overlay on a Squirming Siepacque Island
.
Analysis of any economic theory or practice is complicated by the fact that people are involved. The Rational Analysis approach of some in the field of Social Policy and Practice (social work) lists many criteria that are rationally to be assessed, such as fairness, effectiveness, clarity, sustainability and improvement of the lot of the less empowered so they can avoid the Negative Reciprocal Exchange conundrum.
.
What is the role of rational analysis, when "rational" is defined as an attribute of the self-interest of a group, disregarding the larger whole.
.
Problem with rational analysis: People aren't rational. Present company not excepted -- dark laughter down the hall, under the roof hahahaha.
.
Involved here are people. People are in all strata: on top and on bottom, and in the isolated self-admiring society of Siepacque. People join groups, act for many reasons known and unknown to themselves and others, and are susceptible to manipulation. They have their own reasons for joining groups that may be

irrational,
emotional,
results of psychological conditioning (see authoritarian child-rearing, neurological-based advertising (NeuroFocus? Are you at home?),
assessment of costs vs. benefits of joining, rather then merits of the ideology itself
well-placed or ill-placed norms of trust, reciprocity, altruism, applied to the group being joined, and one's own self-image related thereto (I am doing this for the good of the nation, while the organizer makes a pile)
absorption of mis-definitions to terms bandied about (person is ill informed, or misinformed)
there may be unintended consequences of individual action, see Rational Choice Theory at http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~scottj/socscot7.htm

As events unfold at CPAC -- er, Siepacque -- this news network will keep you informed so you can decide if you want them at the helm.
.
Disclosure:
.
Our preference, by way of disclosure, is to measure each proposal against a firm objective standard of fairness, given past history and positioning, timing of budget cuts in light of need of the nation for a productive population first, then balance budgets when the ground lost over the last 12 years is regained, at least somewhat.
.
All we have is our rationality. Let all the other motivations swirl, but measure by the needs of the nation, rationally. How to get everyone productive, in a position to be productive. Wire the country, basic access to productivity for all -- and that means health and sustenance, with something left (lots of people don't get inheritances, or all that -- some even had the fruits of their labor stolen from them for hundreds of years, etc.)
.
That said, keep watching here at Joy of Equivocating.

Recalculate or Reinstate Taxes? or the Roman 200?

2012-02-11T12:35:00.001-05:00

The Roman 200

.
In about 240 BC, Rome tapped its top 200 citizens to equip its naval battle against Carthage, off Sicily. It worked. Rome won. The top 200 represented 1 in 600. How does their fund-raising approach compare to rationales our gang is discussing? Limited governmental and family budgets have two tools: cutting out peripheral "wants" from needs, and adding to revenues. For revenues: Our choices include: reinstate Bush tax cuts on those taxpayers over a certain income figure; raise taxes by another formula, including considering The Roman Two Hundred. Les jeux sont faits (diversion).
.
The White House budget - it has weighed in. See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget
.

Rome's Wolf, On a Pedestal. Aosta, Italy

Rome used an individuals approach: tap the richest 200.
.
1. Rome, that Great Empire, tapped its richest 200 citizens in order to beat Carthage, also known for its elephants. At that time, Rome focused on naval materiel for the war against Carthage; see http://rnanuntius.blogspot.com/2011/12/trapani-roman-naval-victory-over.html, quoting http://www.sicilyroadways.blogspot.com/#!/2011/12/trapani-roman-naval-victory-over.html. That was in some 240 BC, see http://www.livius.org/cao-caz/carthage/carthage.html. Rome's population was some 120,000, see http://www.blurtit.com/q361950.html. We believe the 120,000 population represents "citizens" who were worth counting (excluding slaves, women, foreign-born, etc). So we will use the 120,000 population as a counting of citizens until we find out more. How to find out?
.
Until we learn otherwise, we assume that the 200 Roman citizens represented was 1 out of every 600. That is, 200 out of the total120,000. Citizens had rights that are like ours in many ways, and it is difficult to imagine that a Roman census (who counted the 120,000 anyway?) would count slaves, or women, or foreign-born, in their counts. Did they?
.
Roman citizens were like our taxpayers in many ways.

Citizens had important rights. A citizen had to be male, however. A citizen enjoyed the right to vote, make legal contracts, lawfully marry. Roman citizens were immune from torture. A citizen had a right to a trial and to defend, and could not be subject to capital punishment unless guilty of treason. If accused of treason, a citizen could go back to Rome for trial. Capital punishment: beheading for a citizen, like St. Paul, crucifixions for non-citizens like St. Peter and Jesus. A citizen was required to join the Roman Legions, but there were ways around this just as we let connected people off from serving. See http://www.aboutroma.com/romans.html.

2. United States. A wannabe empire, being artificially fiscally starved in the interest of private asset holders holding on.
.
We now need revenues to pay for our real governmental common-good needs like education, sustenance security (related to social stability, health and opportunity), infrastructure, health; and ongoing wars of culture and turf.
.
Our population is some 313,000,000. See http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html. Of that total US population, some 217,000,000 are taxpayers, roughly, see http://www.numberof.net/number-of-taxpayers-in-the-u-s/
.
3. Some ideas
.
If we tap the richest 1 out of every 600, like Rome, we tap some 361,666 rich taxpayers. That 361,665: Does tapping them, a parallel to the top 200 of Rome, raise more or less revenue than other approaches? Does tapping the richest 200 actually raise more? What rates? We need numbers here. And we need comparisons of needed amounts with the Bush tax cuts, Washington Post .
.
Either way, this is about reinstating taxes as to the Bush cuts or even earlier levels, not increasing them. What base line?

How does Rome's approach, whether the top 200 or as 1 of every 600 to get the top one to hit, compare to the 1%, in terms of revenue, or to all those earning over $250,000? Or could we tap the Forbes 400, the personal approach, names already public knowledge, see http://www.forbes.com/2004/09/22/rl04land.html? What difference in revenue? The Forbes top 200?
In 2008, about 1 in 50 people made over 250,000 per year, see http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/americans-making-more-than-250000/.

Caucus Race: Mitch Mouse and Alice in Election Year

2011-12-28T11:54:00.000-05:00

The Caucus Race in Election Year
Rules of the Caucus-race, MitchMouse, The Thimble Prize, and the Confits.

Caucus Race. Earlier Greats in Governance are Appalled

.
Offered here is a further installment of a modified Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, in modern election-year view, from the framework (original) at http://www.authorama.com/alice-in-wonderland-3.html. For background, see Mitch Mouse and the Mad Hatter's Tea Party.
...............................................................................
.

Kind of open quote here, but not all a quote:

OPEN KIND OF QUOTE

Quotish -- The Caucus-Race

" (This one set of quotes shall serve on and off for the whole, as it may apply. Paragraphing is creative.)
.
They were, indeed, a queer-looking party that assembled on the midwestern Ioway bank at that early stage — the Candidate Birds with draggled feathers, the caucus-voting animals with their fur clinging close to them, and all dripping wet, cross, and uncomfortable. They needed to dry out. They had all fallen into a pool of Alice's Tears, the dear girl -- also the only Democrat present.
.
Alice, as was her wont, had reacted with feeling to the sad future of her fine country if all sharing and giving officially stopped, now that Some had got to the Top; as was proposed by the Candidates and the Me-Me-Me meme enticing many voters, judging by polls. And those who were not yet Rich aspired to be, and so they approved and were in the entourage of these particular Rich Candidates. Such a collection! See http://www.shmoop.com/alice-in-wonderland-looking-glass/dodo-duck-lory.html. See an overview of characters, The Lory is also there, so peek first if you must, and then continue here.
.
The first question of course was, how to get dry again: they had been quite inundated with media and their own verbosities for a very long time. They had a consultation about this, and after a few minutes it seemed quite natural to Alice, whose emotionalism about firming ladders for people, apparently caused the inconvenient flooding. What need for rungs? Complained the Candidates. Education? Structures? Jobs? Health? We got ours. Don't look to us to fix it for the next in line! And so it went.
.
Nonetheless, to better understand them, Alice found herself talking familiarly with them, as if she had known them all her life. Indeed, their prior incarnations she had indeed known, and even respected. It was these Tea-addled ones she sought to observe closely now. She had quite a long argument with the Lory, one of their number, who at last turned sulky, and would only say, “I’m older than you, and must know better.”
.
And this Alice would not allow, without knowing how old it was, and, as the Lory positively refused to tell its age, there was no more to be said.
.
At last the Mouse, the same MitchMouse from the Abominable Tea Party, see http://sassafrasthicket.blogspot.com/2011/07/hebdomadal-vol-1-4-mad-hatters-tea.html#!/2011/07/hebdomadal-vol-1-4-mad-hatters-tea.html, who seemed to be a person of some authority among them, called out, “Sit down, all of you, and listen to me! I’ll soon make you dry enough! As a matter of fact, I'll see that everyone is wrung quite dry!”

They all sat down at once, in a large ring, with the Mitch Mouse in the middle. Alice kept her eyes anxiously fixed on it, for she felt sure she would catch a bad cold if she did not get dry very soon. And yet, she felt discomfited by the idea of being wrung out to dry. Hung out to dry? Was that better?
.
“Ahem!” said MitchMouse with an important air. “Are you all ready? This is the driest thing I know. Silence all round, if you please! And he proceeded with this very dry narrative: ’William the Conqueror, whose cause was favored by the pope, was soon submitted to by the English, who wanted leaders, and had been of late much accustomed to usurpation and conquest. Edwin and Morcar, the earls of Mercia and Northumbria—’” He left out that William did not ever speak English and was illiterate, but then again, anything can be twisted.
.
Of course, Alice also knew the real story of William the Conqueror to be quite interesting, see http://franceroadways.blogspot.com/view/sidebar#!/2006/08/caen-bayeux-tapestry-and-william.html; but everything from the narrowness of MitchMouse somehow became fact-free floating exclusions and conclusions regardless.
.
“Ugh!” said the Lory, with a shiver (remember to look back at the Schmoop site, above, if you have forgotten already who the Lory is).
.
“I beg your pardon!” said Mitch Mouse, frowning, but very politely. “Did you speak?”
.
“Not I!” said the Lory, hastily.
.
“I thought you did,” said MitchMouse. “I proceed. ’Edwin and Morcar, the earls of Mercia and Northumbria, declared for him; and even Stigand, the patriotic archbishop of Canterbury, found it advisable—’”
.
“Found what!” said the Duck.
.
“Found it,” MitchMouse replied, rather crossly: “of course you know what ’it’ means.”
.
“I know what ’it’ means well enough, when I find a thing,” said the Duck; “it’s generally a frog, or a worm. The question is, what did the archbishop find?”
.
The Mouse did not notice this question, but hurriedly went on,“’—found it advisable to go with Edgar Atheling to meet William and offer him the crown. William’s conduct at first was moderate. But the insolence of his Normans—’ How are you getting on now, my dear?” it continued, turning to Alice as it spoke.
.
“As wet as ever,” said Alice, in a melancholy tone: “it doesn’t seem to dry me at all.”
.
“In that case,” said the Dodo, solemnly, rising to its feet, “I move that the meeting adjourn, for the immediate adoption of more energetic remedies—”
.
“Speak English!” said Eaglet. “I don’t know the meaning of half those long words, and, what’s more, I don’t believe you do either!” And the Eaglet bent down its head to hide a smile: some of the other birds tittered audibly. They also knew that William, bless his heart, also spoke no English.
.
“What I was going to say,” said the Dodo in an offended tone, “was, that the best thing to get us dry would be a Caucus-race.”
.
“What is a Caucus-race?” said Alice; not that she much wanted to know, but the Dodo had paused as if it thought that somebody ought to speak, and no one else seemed inclined to say anything.
.
“Why,” said the Dodo, “the best way to explain it is to do it.” (And, as you might like to try the thing yourself, some winter day, I will tell you how the Dodo managed it.)
.
First it marked out a race-course, in a sort of circle and starting right there in Ioway ("the exact shape doesn’t matter,” it said), and then all the party were placed along the course, here and there. Some made it to the official list at each stop after Ioway, some did not, but that is the way of Candidates.
.
This led to a diversion, a beach-side discussion of Rules.
.
A dissenting voice, to the great surprise of MitchMouse, was heard from the voters:

"Hey, Candidates. You tout consistency. But look at your Rules. You love rules when they help you get elected, like keeping somebody off a ballot; and keeping opponents from voting. And not when they don't, like when rules foster transparency and hinder shady moneymaking at our expense."

And another: "It's all about YOU. You put rules in our bedrooms and in our doctor visits then complain about big government? Yeesh! If no rules for the free market, then no rules for the marriage and autonomous living market."

And another, "Your 'religion' is just another word for controlling other people. Back to the Founder! Skip your dogma! Get your umbrellas out of our noses!"

Tea Party Platform. Aim your pokers.

.
"Quiet!" squealed MitchMouse. "That is for us, the 1 percent to decide. We decide what is culture, what is religion, and what we shall control because we know how to win! We rule the Great Bed of Ware! Not you, Fodder!"

"And, besides, we also have needs," he went on, turning out his pockets.

MitchMouse's Constituency: The Religion of No Give, No Share

.
And so there was a quieting of obedient ones, but the others muttered, yes, they muttered; and some gestured; even did a little step or two in time.
.
The Caucus Race began.

There was no “One, two, three, and away!” but they began running when they liked, and left off when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over. However, when they had been running half an hour or so, and were quite dry again, the Dodo suddenly called out“The race is over!” and they all crowded round it, panting, and asking, “But who has won?”

This question the Dodo could not answer without a great deal of thought, and it stood for a long time with one finger pressed upon its forehead (the position in which you usually see Shakespeare, in the pictures of him), while the rest waited in silence.
.
At last the Dodo said, “Everybody has won, and all must have prizes.” At this, Alice perked up because this was one gathering where nobody at all got prizes unless the 1 percent said so, after consulting their offshore bank accounts for impact and hoping their SuperPacs had their eyes on optics.
.
“But who is to give the prizes?” quite a chorus of voices asked. Alice herself wondered what the prizes would be. Real? Or optics?
.
“Why, she, of course,” said the Dodo, pointing to Alice with one finger; and the whole party at once crowded round her, calling out, in a confused way, “Prizes! Prizes!”
.
Alice was delighted at the role, because she believed deeply that everyone should have the basic human prizes of sustenance and opportunity -- her own pledge of allegiance was this: Liberty, and Justice, and Sustenance for all. Yes, governments must stay within its means, and if it needs more to do what is important for all, add to the means! So she was pleased at the thought, and wondered why MitchMouse was so quiet. He, however, was tweeting with lobbyists and had not noticed that largesse was going on.
.
Alice had no idea what to do, however, with no prizes ready at hand (revenues would have to be had) and in despair she put her hand in her pocket, and pulled out a box of comfits (luckily the salt water had not got into it), and handed them round as prizes. There was exactly one a-piece, all round. Alice was a little surprised that she was to produce the prizes, and not the Group around the Candidates, but they just hummed and looked at the sky.
.
“But she must have a prize herself, you know,” said MitchMouse.
.
“Of course,” the Dodo replied very gravely. “What else have you got in your pocket?” it went on, turning to Alice.
.
“Only a thimble,” said Alice sadly.
.
“Hand it over here,” said the Dodo.
.
Then they all crowded round her once more, while the Dodo solemnly presented the thimble, saying:
.
“We beg your acceptance of this elegant thimble"; and, when it had finished this short speech, they all cheered.
.
Alice thought the whole thing very absurd, because where was the opportunity and sustenance she valued so highly, but they all looked so grave that she did not dare to laugh; and, as she could not think of anything to say, she simply bowed, and took the thimble, looking as solemn as she could. This would not take the place of schools, bridges, building repair, roads, jobs or health, but at least the idea of sharing had made a small inroad into this hard group. Funny religion theirs, with no giving anything that meant they had to give up something to do it!
.
The next thing was to eat the comfits: this caused some noise and confusion, as the large birds complained that they could not taste theirs, and the small ones choked and had to be patted on the back.
.
However, it was over at last, and they sat down again in a ring, and begged MitchMouse to tell them something more.
.
“You promised to tell me your history, you know,” said Alice, “and why it is you hate—C and D,” she added in a whisper, half afraid that it would be offended again.
.
What is C and D??
“Mine is a long and a sad tale!” said MitchMouse, turning to Alice, and sighing.
.
“It is a long tail, certainly,” said Alice, looking down with wonder at Mitch the Mouse’s tail, that mysteriously grew much as Pinocchio's, with every spinspanspun bit of ludicrousness emerging from his nibbly mouth; “but why do you call it sad?” And she kept on puzzling about it while the MitchMouse was speaking, so that her idea of the tale was something like this, and very confused it was:
.

“Fury said to a mouse, That he met in the house, Let us both go to law: I will prose— cute you.— Come I’ll take no denial: We must have the trial; For really this morning I’ve nothing to do. Said the mouse to the cur, ’Such a trial, dear sir. With no jury or judge, would be wasting our breath.’ ’I’ll be judge, I’ll be jury,’ said cunning old Fury: ’I’ll try the whole cause, and condemn you to death.’”

.
Capital punishment! Oh, no, thought Alice. That is no deterrent, and is often applied most unjustly. She had just come back from a fact-finding tour of the issue, and had been impressed with Brits on Capital Punishment
.
“You are not attending!” said MitchMouse to Alice, severely. “What are you thinking of?”
.
“I beg your pardon,” said Alice very humbly: “you had got to the fifth bend, I think?”
.
“I had not!” cried MitchMouse, sharply and very angrily, showing his little teeth.
.
“A knot!” said Alice, always ready to make herself useful, and looking anxiously about her. “Oh, do let me help to undo it!”
.
“I shall do nothing of the sort,” said MitchMouse, getting up and walking away. “You insult me by talking such nonsense!”
.
“I didn’t mean it!” pleaded poor Alice. “But you’re so easily offended, you know! And you are the one who talks nonsense.”
.
Mitch the Mouse only growled in reply.
.
“Please come back, and finish your story!” Alice called after it. And the others all joined in chorus, “Yes, please do!” But MitchMouse only shook its head impatiently, and walked a little quicker.
.
“What a pity it wouldn’t stay!” sighed the Lory, as soon as it was quite out of sight.
.
And an old Crab took the opportunity of saying to her daughter, “Ah, my dear! Let this be a lesson to you never to lose your temper!” “Hold your tongue, Ma!” said the young Crab, a little snappishly. “You’re enough to try the patience of an oyster!”
.
“I wish I had our Dinah here, I know I do!” said Alice aloud, addressing nobody in particular. “She’d soon fetch it back!”
.
“And who is Dinah, if I might venture to ask the question?” said the Lory.
.
Alice replied eagerly, for she was always ready to talk about her pet:“Dinah’s our cat. And she’s such a capital one for catching mice, you can’t think! And oh, I wish you could see her after the birds! Why, she’ll eat a little bird as soon as look at it!”
.

Dinah's favorite bird feeder

.
This speech caused a remarkable sensation among the party. Some of the birds hurried off at once: one old Magpie began wrapping itself up very carefully, remarking, “I really must be getting home: the night-air doesn’t suit my throat!” And a Canary called out in a trembling voice to its children, “Come away, my dears! It’s high time you were all in bed!” On various pretexts they all moved off, and Alice was soon left alone.
.
“I wish I hadn’t mentioned Dinah!” she said to herself in a melancholy tone. “Nobody seems to like her down here, and I’m sure she’s the best cat in the world! Oh, my dear Dinah! I wonder if I shall ever see you any more!” And here poor Alice began to cry again, for she felt very lonely and low-spirited. In a little while, however, she again heard a little pattering of footsteps in the distance, and she looked up eagerly, half hoping that MitchMouse had changed his mind, and was coming back to finish his story.
.
But, of course, it wasn't MitchMouse at all. He makes his confused points and then ducks off, to his counting house. And so the Caucus Race did indeed dry everybody off, but it solved nothing else. Alice's concerns that led to the sadness, never broached at all. Broach? Brooch? Tiffany!

Constituent need? Don't look to us for aid.

END KIND OF QUOTE

Occupy Songbook, for Marchers. We Are Occupy -y -y

2011-11-15T08:23:00.017-05:00

Occupy Songbook
Occupy's Songs and Marches.
.
For Those Put, Yet Again, On the Move *
.

Occupy Songbook for Marchers dedication: To Having Enough to Walk on your Own

Constantly Updated with Milieu Change

From traditional contemplative, to peacefully nasal
.
INDEX

Sing-a-longs

Supplement A. Occupy's Nix 'Em All - Candidate overpopulation
.
Main Book
1. Occupy's We Shall Overcome - We are Occupy-y-y

2. Occupy's Down in the Valley -- Down in Financial Alley

3. Occupy's Clementine

4. Occupy's I Gotta Robe -- I Gotta Tent

5. Occupy's Down in the Valley Where the Green Grass Grows -- Green Bucks Grow

6. Occupy's Head and Shoulders, Knees and Toes: Schools and Structures, Jobs and Health

7. Occupy's Swing Low, Sweet Chariot -- Sweet Super PAC
8. Occupy's O, You'll Never Get to Heaven -- On Sound-Bites Glib
.

Marches and Chants

9. Occupy's March -- I Left My Wife (Newt's March)
10. Occupy's Colonel Bogey March -- Reagan Was a Democrat. Reagan's March.
11. Occupy's Colonel Bogey March -- Putin is a Republican. Putin's March.
....................................................................................................
.

SUPPLEMENT A.
Occupy's Nix 'Em All
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUQKFt2-b7Q
Lyrics at http://www.west-dunbarton.gov.uk/mww/html/songs02.html
.
[Chorus]
.
Nix 'em all, nix 'em all
The long and the short and the tall
Nix group supremacism, CEO's, hired ad-Guns
Time-expired twerps * failed idea reruns
For we're saying good-bye, hucksters all
As back to their mansions they crawl
They deserve no promotion for greed's locomotion
So cheer up lads and lasses, Nix 'em all.
.
.*That time-expired twirps idea is from the original lyrics
..................................................................

Comment: Reject 'em all Nix 'em all. NYT on Nix 'em All. This is not a new idea but it gets no coverage that stays up there for long. See NYT 1/3/2012 at A12, Title: "A Last Frenetic Push as Iowa Campaign Wraps Up" re the madness in the activity of the Caucuses -- Frenetic. Photo is of a barn with a big X in the No One slot for the vote.

Then see the later online NYT edition: new title, mild, "On Eve of Voting, a Last Pitch" and no photo showing the X for a vote for No One. No photo of the voter who is saying, reject 'em all.
The Nix line.

What is going on, NYT. Your online version is censored. Is there a mole changing things for online readers, to suit those who pay for ads? You expect us to trust your NYT tainted online version??

..........................................................................................

.MAIN BOOK

1. Occupy's We are Occupy

Contemplative choice to start with, linking arms

.
We are Occupy -y -y.
We are Occupy -y -y.
We are Occupy
And say -y -y -y -y,
.
Tha-at deep in our hearts
We do believe,
Schools, roads, jobs, health:
Make the Real USA.
.
We are Occupy -y -y.
We are Occupy -y -y.
We are Occupy
And say -y -y -y -y,
.
Tha-at deep in our hearts
We do believe,
Top 1% must pay
Their share today.

Etc.
...............................................
* http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-15/u-s-mayors-crack-down-on-occupy-wall-street.html
...........................................................
.

2. Occupy's Down in Financial Al-ley

Nasal
Video of Lew Dite at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z39QwP7_4Fc

Down in Financial Al-ley

Where morals are low
See slick money-changers
And their accounts grow.
.
Down in the Bank vaults

Bank Vaults, the 1 Percent, Underground at Granby, Old Newgate, CT

.
They hike fees and crow.
Laugh at 99-ers
And steal their mojo.
------------------
.

3. Occupy's Clementine

Rowdy-like Steam-Releasing
.
Video of Lew Dite at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUzQy4mmT3Q

.
Cut off folks. Bless
Financial canyons!
How can Justice re-align?
See 99-ers
Getting shiners
From Norquist's signers
Pinching dimes.

Occupy's 99-ers getting shiners

TD Bank now?

Wants to skim: Two

Dozen of my bucks a year,

To let me view the checks

Writ on my account!

Rich have on-line, and own their printers.

This hits the poorer.

Fee nadir. **

..........................................

** $2 per month to continue to get a copy of your canceled checks on the back of your statement. Banks are not loaning out our money so they can get their own income. Bilk us instead. Extortion? Yes, those of us with online banking can click to see, and print out, but how about the unconnected? Additional charge for reconstruction when IRS calls. Complain! Complain! See One Bank Fee May Be Going Away, But Others Lurk (Reuters)

....................................................

4. Occupy's I Gotta Tent

Campfire or Outdoor Cooker Song

Video of Olivia Winslow at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUzQy4mmT3Q

a. I gotta tent

You gotta tent

All Occupy's got a tent.

Gonna

Grab my tent,

The 1% wants my tent,

Where can I next

Pitch my tent,

Te-ent,

Te-ent.

The 1% wants my tent,

To add to their billion tents,

Gotta defend 'gainst malicious intent.

---

b. I gotta message

You gotta message

All Occupy's got a message.

Gonna speak up our message,

Opportunity's the message,

Gonna keep on talkin' our message,

Message,

Message.

Gonna speak up our message,

Educate for the message,

Vote to get the country back on the message.

---

.c. They own the news

They own the ads

1% own news and media-ads

Gonna make our own news,

Quietly do our own ads,

Opportunity for all, is our Message

Message,

Message.

They may round up our tents

And pretend we're violent

But The Top fears competition, our message.

............................................

5. Occupy's Down in the Valley where the Green Bucks Grow

See skip-rope chant at http://www.garrard.k12.ky.us/traditions/projects/claps/claps.htm

Jump Rope, Skip Rope

Down in the valley where the green bucks grow,

There sat some ladies, pretty as a rose

Along came Cain, intentions tongue in cheek.

How many complaints were filed that week?*

1-2-3-4- .....

* Wives who were not there know nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Character is what happens in the darkness.

-----

6. Occupy's Head and Shoulders, Knees and Toes

Video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbknGfQbzhk

Occupy's Mantra: Schools and Structures, Jobs and Health,

(Call) Schools and structures, jobs and health

Jobs and health.

Schools and structures, jobs and health

Jobs and health; and

Schools and structures

Jo-obs and health.

Schools and structures, jobs and health

Jobs and health.

(Response) Not for us, say one per cent

One per cent.

Not for us, say one percent

One per cen-e-e-ent

Money's in our pockets

And it stays

We like our wealth.
Money's in our pockets, ha ha ha

We like our wealth.

(Call) They got party lackeys fixing taxes

For their wealth.

They got party lackeys

Fixing taxes for their wea-e-e-ealth and

All those loopholes for their wealth

For their wealth.

All those corp-rate loopholes for their wealth.

(Response) We bought Wa$hington for our wealth,

For our wealth,

We're smart with our$ offshore

Away from taxes, for our wealth. And

We got more from old grand-dad,

You think that smellth?

Tough luck with your

Schools and structures, jobs and health

Jobs and health.

(No response)
------------

7. Occupy's Swing Low, Sweet SuperPAC

For this scale, see Wintley Phipps at Carnegie Hall, the black notes scale, spirituals

a. I looked over the Potomac

And what did I see?

Comin' for to carry

Th' election home?

Propaganda tactics,

Block all talk of merit.

Sell but don't inform:

A land where politico-elephants roam.

(Chorus)

Swing low, sweet Super PAC

Comin' for to carry th' election home

Swing low, sweet Super PAC

Comin' for to carry th' election home

b. I looked over Wall Street

And what did I see

Comin' for to carry

Th' election home?

Profits skimmed, and disappearing.

Balance sheets skewed out of hearing.

Photo ID's keep voters out.

A blue Sheep Shearing.

(Chorus)

Swing low, sweet Voter Suppression

Comin' for to carry th' election home

Swing low, sweet Voter Suppression

Comin' for to carry th' election home.

8. Occupy's Oh, You'll Never Get to Heaven ---

on Soundbites Glib

Video at http://www.49thscoutgroup.co.uk/all/campfiresongs/nevergettoheaven.htm

Oh, you'll never get to heaven,

(Oh, you'll never get to heaven),

On soundbites glib,

(On soundbites glib),

'Cause soundbites glib,

('Cause soundbites glib)

Sit next to fib --

(Sit next to fib).

Oh, you'll never get to heaven on soundbites glib

'Cause the gosh-darned things

Sit next to fib.

Ain't gonna vote for glib no more.

Oh, you'll never get to heaven,

(Oh, you'll never get to heaven),

On Scrooge's train,

(On Scrooge's train),

'Cause Scrooge's train,

('Cause Scrooge's train),

Runs on others' pain,

(Runs on others' pain).

Oh, you'll never get to heaven on Scrooge's train

"Cause the gosh-darned thing

Runs on others' pain,

Ain't gonna vote for Scrooge no more.

9. Occupy's Newt's March

Marching Chant.

Scroll down with a Find to "I Left My ..."

for another version at http://www.geocities.ws/sweidentha/allonebook.html

I LEFT my wife and forty-eight kids

Alone in the closet without any gingerbread.

Did I do RIGHT?

He LEFT his wife and forty eight kids

Alone in the closet without any gingerbread.

Did he do RIGHT?

What he wants is RIGHT.

10. Occupy's Colonel Bogey: as Reagan Was a Democrat

Marching Song.

See and hear video at http://www.blogger.com/goog_1223205571

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvWLMkxSwIo

Reagan.

He was a Democrat.

Reagan.

He was a Democrat.

Reagan.

He valued people.

Opened doors,

Even at CPAC,

A Democrat.

11. Occupy's Colonel Bogey: Putin Is a Republican

Marching Song

Putin's March

Putin.

Is a Republican.

Putin.

Is a Republican.

Putin.

Chesty Putin,

Hates the voters,

Hides from Sun,

Repub-Putin.

........................................................

Brought to you by the Occupy's PAC, the Visceral Voter Support Network.

In the evening, Occupy visits the Theater. Meet Common Mantony at http://www.plainmeaning.blogspot.com/#!/2011/12/shakespeare-and-occupy-vision-funeral.html

Deny thy Father. Does Heritage Affect Immigration Views. Should It? Romney as Roma? Other Politicians and Immigrant Backgrounds

2011-10-04T19:02:00.012-04:00

Ethnic Background Shout-Out to Benefit Immigrants
Can and Should Heritage affect Candidates' Views.

Can recognition of heritage serve the Common Good
.

Update: Where are Mitt Romney's English family graves? The family dates back to the 1700's there, is that so. Who were they? Church of England and Catholic parishes kept records, have stones. Where are the Romney graves? It should not be hard to find. If hard to find, then they were not Church of England or Roman Catholic, or propertied (same thing in those days?). If his family was industrial poor, as so many were, there also may not be grave records. Somebody find out. Attitudes to ethnic or economic disadvantaged people should increase sensitivity to those issue, if sensitivity there is.
.
Heritage comes in issue with each election season, for a variety of reasons, some laudable, some not. Who is the candidate, how or does background inform his or her views, on immigration, how downtrodden people achieve success, who "deserves" recognition.

Any name carries possibilities for ethnicity; and other roots. Explore, for example, Romney. Is it a surname connected in England or Wales (remotely perhaps), with Romany populations, Roma, Rom, Travelers, Gypsy. Would that Rom connection suggest warmth toward ethnic discrimination, immigrant needs? Or, is tracking Romney just interesting because it is a place, a surname, roots in divergent cultures. Weck up to thees: a heritage can be multiple. Acknowledge all possibilities, merit in varying positions in politics, social, family life. Weck up to thees. Don't miss the human sagas of old, relevant to the new, and will Romney weck up, http://www.epinions.com/review/Gates_of_Fire_by_Steven_Pressfield/content_36435103364

Here:

1. History, Romney as example; all families have (or claim) the rich and the poor somewhere. Ask how people came to success here despite the poor backgrounds.

2. Proposal for a background recognition shout-out for candidates. Bring who they are into the open. Will that help soften immigration stances, for example?

3. Surnames may be indecipherable or inconclusive, but the exercise in looking back is worth it in opening up the past. For example, Romney: not necessarily Traveler, Gypsy, Rom in root, but more mundane --

We find a Romney Marsh in Kent, England; and a breed of sheep (Romney sheep) who thrive in said marsh, and are resistant to foot rot and parasites, see http://www.askshepway.com/history/romney-marsh/

.............................................................................................

1. History

Romney: English roots, ethnicity not clear, but lots of options. Just takes someone finding the birth and death records, in churches, or not, etc.

Consider Romney in particular as to the Mormons, and who converted to it in its early years. The religion was founded in 1830; tens of thousands of converts were sought in England in the 1840's and on, and the effort was highly successful. The converts were largely disaffected working class, living in terrible conditions, and we use as main source the BBC.

What lessons are learned from the Mormons in getting the downtrodden back on an economically successful track? Pay to convert. Offer ideas that meet their needs, spark their interest, and self-interest. People did and it worked.

a) What financial resources and rewards did Mormonism offer in connection or exchange with converting English working class persons, in the throes of their dastardly economic conditions. Get them to emigrate to America.

The BBC offers details of the 1840's, 1850's in Sheffield, England, and elsewhere; and the Perpetual Emigration Fund set up by the Mormons to pay for the passage, with the converts repaying once they were in Utah, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/legacies/immig_emig/england/south_yorkshire/article_4.shtml.

In a sense, the Mormons offered a bailout. Persuasion could not enough to get them to come. Buy the converts. The working classes, many out of work, were in dire straits anyway. The BBC article specifically references conditions in Sheffield, Kent, at the time; and one particular family, the Memmotts.

The purchase policy worked. By 1877 there were 140,000 Mormons in Utah, and half were from England.

b) What beliefs were so attractive that people left the mainstream. The beliefs offered an alternative to creeds and catechisms, role stratification in economics and society, indulgence and novelty (polygamy, God also can marry and have children, when you die you can become a god, etc.)(read the BBC article for the outline) and also this: a belief in the individual, the individual's possibilities, how they could rise up and enjoy a better life, that religious mainstream groups found threatening. The economics and eschatology of the Mormon missionaries was alien to the establishment.

Mormonism was founded in 1830. Its founder was assassinated in 1844. It met with resistance from institutions in America and abroad where its missionaries spread the message. The message? Again, go to the BBC for clarity. This references a four page article, this page 2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/legacies/immig_emig/england/south_yorkshire/article_2.shtml

In 1850, there were apparently 47,000 Mormons in England, and only 27,000 in America. The disaffected flocked. Like Romney sheep? Joke. Were there Travelers who also moved to the Mormons? Had Romneys assimilated earlier? Is Romney the place totally separate from Rom? who knows.

..............................................................................................

2. Background Recognition

How does anyone's family history stay over their shoulders. For example, if you are a pacifist, are you happy to find that Napoleon and his army is behind your family's great prosperity? Is Dan, here, uncomfortable to find he has some unsavory types in his heritage? Smooth talkers?

Dan Widing with Napoleonic soldier, Bratislava, Slovakia

Nobody gets away from heritage, or should. If you sit on the bench, the figure is there. Embrace it.So: Enact a new invitation. Ethnic Background Shout-Out Month. What were your "people" before they embraced a later religion or political mindset.

For the Rom threads, we have found interesting angles, but nothing firm, see http://hellofodderhellobuyer.blogspot.com/#!/2011/12/candidates-and-their-own-minority-roots.html.

We understand that your forebears in 1837 adopted the new religion of Joseph Smith, Mormonism, while they were in England, in an area that had many Travelers, Gypsies (Cumbria, Dalton) as did much of the rest of England.

What were they before that change? What made them change and follow? As to money, it took the Mormons' Perpetual Emigration Fund for many. See sites there that note the poverty of the working classes, and the thousands that converted to come here. BBC site. Was there any acceptability at any time in England for Traveler families to convert. Probably not, we conclude now. Ethnic or minority roots whatever they arre are also part of you. McConnell, Boehner. And all of us. What roots can you/we use benevolently from your/our heritages, to urge help for others.

New Rule, even.

Each candidate shall address for 30 days preceding the nation election his own ethnic background, and how America and its government policies in effect at various times of any of his family events made a difference positively, or hindered it.

Avoid the obvious charge of expedience, appealing to bigotry. Instead of "Deny thy father, and refuse thy name," ask for votes on grounds that we all come from immigrants, for example.

Romney could do a great service. Roma also seek. See http://www.nytimes.com/2000/07/31/news/31iht-gypsy.2.t.html?scp=2&sq=A%20Manual%20of%20Xenophobia&st=cse Is anyone at all in Washington considering the interests of the Roma, the Gypsies, the Travelers among us, who do not fund the voting, and may not even have the photo ID's needed to vote in some places

(why should that be required for a Constitutional right?), see http://plainmeaning.blogspot.com/2010/07/pariah-creation-gypsifying-of.html. And no lobby or Super PAC.

........................................................................

3. Other Ethnic Surnames and Immigrration: Romney, McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, Pelosi.
.
Look up yours at http://www.surnamedb.com/ Immigrant sensibilities. How long is it, how many generations, before the individual thinks he or she did it all himself, and can dump the forebears. Find immigrant groups' histories at this site: http://library.thinkquest.org/20619/ Search for Romney gypsy. Search for anybody.

Also Herman Cain, although by way of update, he is no longer running in this race. His is a surname plucked, out of necessity from somewhere, since real names were lost, is that so. What loyalties does he have to the surname, then? See http://www.eurweb.com/2011/10/between-the-lines-who-stole-the-soul-herman-cain/ Actually, there can be no Mark of Cain because Cain and his family took off, and then there was the flood that killed everybody but Noah and his sons, so the Cain surname cannot refer to that. But was that selection of name a bad joke by someone back when? Herman?
.
Watch centuries of others unjustly enriched, unclean hands, all that. Reparations? Why not. Argue for that, Mr. Cain. You're entitled. See http://library.thinkquest.org/20619/Africans.html/ Stockholm syndrome elements? Why not add a 9 for social security, and a 9 for healthcare, and a 9 for access to opportunity. Double the Triple Nine 9-9-9-9-9-9.
.
Does heritage inform mindset? Of course. I recall Grandma in the rocker at Thanksgiving (English-Irish) with a part of the turkey, joking about chewing on the Pope's Nose. Did I remember it? Obviously.
.
Salute the melting pot, a concept from the 1500's, word origins including crucible, softening, blending back to the 1200's, a play from 1908 ("The Melting Pot" by Israel Zangwill, http://www.pbs.org/fmc/timeline/emeltpot.htm) see http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=melting+pot&searchmode=none
.
Mitt Romney:
.
Sounds gypsy. Is it? Probably. Possibly. At one time? Why not claim it, if it is. We know that people change shapes all the time, but the topic is of interest. What are the origins of any of us. What did our forbears to do survive better?
.
A name of English Traveller, gypsy, Roma, Rom, Romnichal, Rom'nie, Romana heritage by appearance and spelling. Have you checked, Mr. Romney. Are these your people? Use the Mormon ancestry site. http://www.ancestorhunt.com/mormon_church_records.htm We have looked up our own name on various sites, and find all sorts of backgrounds, some a surprise. Is Romney a gypsy name? Is this so? If so, if this is your heritage, what have you done for your ethnic people?
.
Any role for heritage? Is there a place for earmarks favoring heritage or dumping on heritage so long as the process is transparent and objectively meritorious. Pushback, at http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2389305.
.
The surname and heritage of Romney is an ongoing interest, and not laid to rest from the last election cycle, see http://gypsiesroma.blogspot.com/2011/04/candidate-romney-immigration-policy-of.html

Other surnames, FN 1
..................................................................................
.
FN 1

a. Mitch McConnell:
.
Sounds Irish. Is it? Probably. Scots-Irish? They're good for vengeance, say the stories of retribution. Cross the path of an Irish, or a Scot, or a Scots-Irish, perish the thought, and you are in big trouble for generations. Is that so? We are in that group, so we can say.
.
A name of Irish immigrant heritage, whether Catholic or Protestant we know not, neither do we care except if it conflicts with national interest representation.
.
If you are part of Ireland, as we are -- then ask, what Ireland. The famine-driven -- people who fled or died because of famine, and it later was revealed that there was plenty of food, but it was shipped out for profit by the landowners? Was that you? The clearances? run people off the land? If so, why then pass that on other groups? Artificially induced deprivation, where there are resources available but those making money won't release it. Do you pass on that cycle of abuse? Do you care? See http://hellofodderhellobuyer.blogspot.com/2011/08/economic-potato-induced-famine-historys.html#!/2011/08/economic-potato-induced-famine-historys.html
.
What have you done for your ethnic people not just in your district. Have you an obligation to national wellbeing? Or, if they as laborers, politicians, PhD's. what have you, done well; what have your done for your ethnic people? McConnell. Any role for heritage? Son of Dan. http://www.irishsurnames.com/cgi-bin/gallery.pl?name=mcconnell&capname=McConnell&letter=c
.
Son of Dan McConnell as derived from Tribe of Dan? http://denmarkroadways.blogspot.com/2011/08/origin-of-danes-danmark-dan-etymologies.html#!/2011/08/origin-of-danes-danmark-dan-etymologies.html. Evangelicals may be interested there. http://www.hope-of-israel.org/i000035a.htm
.
b. John Boehner:
.
Sounds German. Is it? Yes. Neat and tidy neighborhoods, moms at home, etc. Scrub, scrub, say the stereotypes of Keeping Order. See, fair use, at http://www.ancestry.com/facts/boehner-family-history.ashx

occupational name from an agent derivative of Middle Low German bönen ‘to board’, ‘to lay a floor’
topographic name for someone who lived in a loft, a variant of Boehne + the suffix -er denoting an inhabitant.

German immigrant history overall -- http://library.thinkquest.org/20619/German.html
.
c. Eric Cantor:
.
Sounds Jewish. Is it? Yes, in this case, but not necessarily (as with anyone's name, there are others who have that name).
.
See, fair use, at http://www.ancestry.com/facts/cantor-family-history.ashx

English: variant spelling of Canter.
German and Jewish (Ashkenazic): variant spelling of Kantor.
French (Picardy): learned form of chantre ‘singer’. Compare Canter 1.

Is there an identification to the detriment of other American ethnic groups that affects his policies against those seeking access to opportunity, now that his group has Arrived. Cantor surname. Does it inform him of his heritage. http://library.thinkquest.org/20619.Jewish.html
.
Can he identify with others persecuted, fleeing, disadvantaged, misunderstood. See http://worldwar1worldwar2.blogspot.com/2010/11/westerm-ethnic-violence-timeline-put.html
.
d. Nancy Pelosi --
.
Italian? Sure. Maiden name D'Alesandro. We all are one thing or another and usually a number of things. See http://www.ancestry.com/facts/pelosi-family-history.ashx
.
Do we deny our immigrant, our ethnic minority roots, of all of us, depending on advantage and not justice. Anglo-people are apparently the new minority, in America. Will Anglos entrench even further because of identity? Probably. Pelosi surname. Does it inform her of her heritage, and has that affected her positions. Whom to thank. See http://library.thinkquest.org/20619/Italian.html/ With transparency and meeting competitive and objective criteria of merit, a helping hand should be fine.
.
e. Rick Perry

Welsh - Perry. Son of Harry. Run, Reid, Run. See http://www.ancestry.com/facts/Perry-family-history.ashx. Some things that happen in Paint Pot should stay in Paint Pot.

f. Santorum. Do not Google.

CONCLUSION

We, the voters, dare all of you and anybody else in office or seeking it, to deny access to the tools of opportunity for all, in the name of some Ideology that now fits your own pocketbook. Are we going back to feudalism, or already there. http://www.mindmined.com/public_library/nonfiction/david_f_feudalism_aka_capitalism.html. Wall Street Occupations as the latest in long histories of Peasant's Revolts. See http://sloveniaroadways.blogspot.com/2007/10/ljubljana-peasant-uprising-1515-world.html But most of those peasants, and those elsewhere, were indeed overwhelmed in time, or the benefits they extracted, soon reverted. It pays to beat them down.
.
I may well vote for Johnny Faa. See http://www.maybole.org/history/books/legends/johnnyfaa.htm
.
The further we take ourselves from our ethnic roots, the more boring we become, like the sassafras. Its leaves are all one lobe shape at the top, at the canopy. At the thicket level, the understorey, there are different forms even on the same branch, 1-2-3.
.

Sassafras variations at the bottom, but boring (all one lobe on those leaves up there) at the top

Benign Camaraderie and Grail of Haimish: Luka, Salman Rushdie, Fire of Life

2011-09-01T10:11:00.011-04:00

Camaraderie as a Weapon.

Luka's Fire of Life is Camaraderie. Let Yourself and Your Friends Not Be Split.
Works for Obstruction; as well as Progress for the Common Good

The Benign Mutual Support.

Can we Foster Benign Camaraderie?

Or is the Opposition, its Ideology, too Organized.

Autocratic opponents. How to counter? Dare we try benign camaraderie. Companionship. Warfare touts comradeship for war-companions against adversaries. Take it further. Are peace-oriented goals similarly fostered. Is there a way that mutuality goals of compassion, compromise, foster a competitive, survival edge against autocratic opponents, whether religious, or political. Ask Salman Rushdie.

Ask Lukal. The novel: Luka and the Fire of Life. Read a narrative from another culture, how to counterFear and Force with Elements of Humor and Mutual Help. Salman Rushdie's Hero, Luka, Says Yes. The problem is that Salman Rushdie's character does not confront media spin control, with moles in all the media, including the once venerably objective New York Times. See the slant words now, persuading by the highly colored words, under the radar.

Hamish, or haimish, is a Yiddish term for the warm, the convivial, the companion-comfort values in life. Cozy, homey, familiar, says a Yiddish dictionary site, http://www.asinine.com/essays/yiddish.html. It has been used to describe some of the most common childhood experiences, or those where the isolations of luxury are far less enjoyable than rubbing shoulders. The hamish. Human. Humans seek. I seek. You seek. He, she or it seeks. We seek. You (pl) seek. They seek. Seek what? David Brooks found, see http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/opinion/brooks-the-haimish-line.html.

Is an element of the hamish, knowing to a virtual certainty that others are on our side, also a secret of those who prevail for the long term over great odds. Solitary confinement banks on isolation as a tool to defeat courage, is that so.

Prisoners of War sculpture. Red Cross and Red Crescent Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland

Is the environment of haimish (spellings vary) the grounding for competition and achievement, and without the harm to others that fear and force produce. Some say courage is an alone-thing, see http://www.stevepavlina.com/articles/courage-to-live-consciously.htm; others say that idea is only a start. Courage is augmented where there is companionship. The difficult part is finding common ground where companionship can emerge. Fear and force do away with that, to whose benefit.
.
Hamish is not a synonym for the communal. Hamish is often not in the communal. For example, Jante's law is a kind of communal system, and there is not great achievement fostered there. Instead, Hamish fosters individuality and accomplishment, by allowing and not restricting. Hamish instead is an environment that fosters.
.
See Haimish in travel. See also FN 1. Yiddish already knows. See http://becomingajew.org/languages.htm. The hamish in life. Hamish in martyrdom: Saint Lawrence on the grid. Time to turn me over? Well done enough on this side? See him in Bjernede DK, wearing his grid, http://denmarkroadways.blogspot.com/#!/2011/07/bjernede-inside-round-church-rundkirke.html. Humor did not save him, but his perspective lived on.

II. Application - Author, Salman Rushdie, Book, Luka and the Fire of Life

Salman Rushdie's hero, Luka, in the 2010 novel, Luka and The Fire of Life, finds that hamish pathways get him to the top of his mountain, where the maneuverings of frontal assaulters fall short. Not only does respect for community work in great quests, like Frodo with companions, it is desirable and high time for it. Lesson: Old gods of all kinds, including the self-seeking to the exclusion of the group, farewell. Meet with Luka the "Respectorate of I" -- no thinking needed as long as the I is served. This is not really a novel for children; and Respectorate adults, as as the Wall Street Journal, miss the point in focusing on the fantastic linear plot and not meaning. See http://www.randomhouse.com/book/158934/luka-and-the-fire-of-life-by-salman-rushdie.

Is appreciation of the hamish a kind of political and religious climate change. Is it time. Is there Relevance for health: Haimish for health. Who will test? See troubled veterans allowed to function in close-knit but open community, accomplishing much, at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/01/science/earth/01veterans.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

........................................................................

I. The haimish of life. Definitions, Context.

Haimish. Hamish. Spellings vary. English doesn't even have a one-word for it. English is too linear, its thinking too measurement and hierarchy-oriented, fist-proofs required, the language of the denier of sixth sense wisdom.

What encompasses the concept. Definition auras. The hamish is an X that is found, that arises, that is fostered, by an environment, an attitude, a set of relationships, an X that blooms where there is sharing of effort, goals, seeking excellence, without harm to others. At its Yiddish roots, find Warmth. Relationships. Conviviality. Lovingkindness in western religious tradition-texts.

But is it Wuss? Will it sell? Can it Work? If "hamish" fosters warmth, joint enjoyment as well as effort, appreciation of accomplishment rather than victory and static empire, is it doomed when confronted with the jugular competitor and its entourage of restriction and regimentation.

Does it enable success in the drive for difficult goals, or settle for the mediocre.

Macho enthusiasts' versicle: What can Hamish do when confronted by ferocity and threat? Fold? Retreat?
Sanity's response. Hamish includes setting your own goals. Hamish prevails over time because it has a secret: it is a Way, not one conquest after another that ultimately fail. Expect a totally self-serving goal to fail, however, because operating with Hamish will probably steer you to another variant.

Hamish times. Haimish with no English equivalent.

Hamish is definitely not Wuss because it is creative, strengthening and lasts.

Ask: What are the fondest childhood memories made of? The hamish times, people and places. Its context does not lull or weaken. Instead, it encourages any activity that does not harm others. Is that so? In a culture overwhelming itself with disease, stress, tension, anxiety, angst, anger, judging, supremacisms asserted in political thought, religion, color, ethnicity and gender, is it worth examing the Haimish. It takes 18 months to recover from sustained fear, and even then one is not necessarily what one was. See http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/connectasia/stories/201108/s3306842.htm

Climate. Climate change. How does a climate of fear depress other functions, or is stress of regimentation and control easily set aside, see http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro00/web2/Edmundson.html. Mere opposition to the Respectorate will not get to the top: It takes another process too complex to explain: the strength of the hamish.

II. The future and merit of the Hamish as a climate for accomplishment.

It works, and it Fulfills - better.

A. Ask Salman Rushdie in his novel, Luka and the Fire of Life. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/oct/16/luka-fire-life-rushdie-review.

This is not necessarily a children's book at all. Too much may pass over their heads. The Luka-quest concepts address adult, political, religious, social issues. That "children's" designation serves to keep adults from reading it -- clearly a move by the books' Respectorate to keep its old gods in place. It is the tool of the Wall Street Journal in quoting from it - or did they not read it? See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704206804575467840843038812.html. Wall Street note to self: Doing away with worship of old god-forms would include profitism, or did that pass over the WSJ's collateralized head? FN 2.

Salman Rushdie's protagonist, Luka Khalifa in Luka and the Fire of Life, sets out on a great quest, and confronts those very Sorts.

The mission: Luke sets off to restore the fire of life to his apparently dying father, where another being, the genial but agenda-ed Nobodaddy, gains in strength and solidity as the father fades. The forces of regimentation will be set against him. Where does the boy start? Who will join him? Aah - Dog the Bear and Bear the Dog (go back to morphs of Alice in Wonderland to get the flavor of the tale).

Luka, a questor and sojourner like Odysseus or a Hobbit or a Templar of fantasy, seeks a grail, an impossible dream that must be found because it holds where life is. Follow Luka, from the Sea of Stories, tumbling down the Torrent of Words, into the Lake of Wisdom and the River of Time that flows both ways and sideways - time is like that (we learn, but the Respectorate cannot accept in its tick tock way) - up the Mount of Knowledge and to The Fire.

It is not a children's book necessarily at all. It addresses adult, political, religious, social issues. In its other review, the Wall Street Journal (did the reviewer Meghen Cox Gurdon read the book for meaning or just linear plot line?) overlooks how Luka is enabled for his victory - the overturning of old god-forms, the role of caring, rejecting the tit for tat of the Insultana against the Respectorate's Over-Rat. See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703523604575605051509449296.html

The Respectorate's payroll is everywhere.

B. Who does Luka confront on his quest?

Among all the obstacle people and groups and individuals and ideas and gods and circumstances, find these:

1. The Grandmaster Flame himself, Captain Aag. Think Aargh! Luka dares to stand up to him, and it works. But Aag, the Ringmaster of the Great Rings of Fire of the great circus that Luka's curse destroyed, will be back, you can be sure because that is what Aag is and does. Aag wants what he wants and can shape-change to get it.

2. The Respectorate of I, with its Over-Rat.

Regimentation and rules and repression.

Meet the Over-Rat. The one nobody votes for. It votes for itself (like the Pledge-Maker). But eveybody in the Respectorate does essentially what the Over-Rat says, including following P2C2E - "Processes Too Complicated To Explain." The Inquisitor Rat will investigate your patriotism and inquire particularly if you believe that 2+2=5 because all acceptable Rats believe that.

The chorus affirms the principles of the national song of the Respectorate of I:
.

"We all say I, I, I.

There's no need to argue, no need to sussspect (sic),

No need to think when you've got Ressspect.

We all say I, I, I."

Luka and the Fire of Life at page 75-76. Fair use. Sing the national song at page 75ff.

III. Is there hope for those entrapped?

Yes, but by divesting from old forms

Will the Can't-won'ts, like the book's Over-Rat, beat down consideration of the merit of the hamish, in the Respectorate's quest for profit and empire. Or can the hamish - as in the book - by merit confine the Respectorate to their own realms of harm, choose new ways, and move on to better times. Is "upside down the wrong way around" and do 2+2=4 or not? There is a battle at chapter IV, but the opposers of the Respectorate are, in their way, obnoxious as well. What path can Luka choose?

There are indeed opponents of the Respectorate, but they and their songs are insulting and taunting in return: is that progress?

Meet the Insultana of Ott and the Otters pelting rotten fruit on the heads of the Respectorators. Expectorating!

Hear them Otters sing right back at the Rats: insults abounding.

"Two and two make four, not five
The world is round, not flat.
Your Boss is the Smallest Fry alive.
We do not Respect the Rat!
Oh, we do not Respect the Rat!
"And upside down is the wrong way around,
And black is black, not white.
And a squeak is by far the creepiest of sounds,
No, we do not respect your Right,
We do not respect your Right."

*****

"Ai-yi,
Ai-ti,
We all moan ai-yi-yi.
You're fools and you're bullies.
Your thinking is woolly.
Respect? You're not serious?
You're effect's deleterious!
We laugh at you, ai-yi-yi-yi-yi.
We laugh at you, ai-yi-yi."

Luka and the Fire of Life pp.79-81 - fair use.

"We've got to get away!" shouts Luka, page 79, losing more and more of the lives available to him to sustain him on his quest (another part of the story).

Note that it is not enough to join in with the Insultana, although she can be and is helpful. She cannot get to the top, other processes must do that, but she does have chutzpa.

How to save a saving point so he won't regress back further than from whence he came. One solution is to return always to the mindset of the original teller of the tale, and find solutions there, not in later Stuff. Good idea.

So: swapping insults does not achieve the goal. Go back to the original tale teller. What was in the mind of Rashid Khalifa, the father, the Shah of Blah. What was his world-mind like? It leads to truths: What of the stories of the old god figures. Even if they are not to be "worshipped" any more, can the tales be with us on their own. Time to move on from the old god-forms of institutions and barnacles because they have been highjacked and no longer operate as they were intended or once did, is that so, Luka?

IV. Hamishness and Health

Another stop on the quest continues after the novel. Is there a connection. Who will study health and hamish. Who will study human development, maximization of talent, skills, with hamish. The Respectorate Way is one of fear-inducing. Do not dare to individualize. Do not dare to disagree. Do not dare to think. This works. See how other functioning is hampered when fear is introduced: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060920193424.htm

The haimish environment, with its notable lack of fear-fostering, is maligned.

Ask, as Luka in effect does, do we need status threats, supremacism comparisons in daily and business and religious life, to achieve difficult goals, to be fully human?

Respectorate of I followers would say Yesss. No business can make as much profit if it is haimish. Let the consumer know the truth of the transaction, and the consumer may walk away, so fight Elizabeth Warrenness. Keep the fog. Politics: fight, obstruct, demand, dig in, Riptide games emerge as the R's repeat and repeat in our eaRs. We've got you, little fools! And tout the aggressive as the way to Win. To Achieve for this group at the expense, who cares, of others.

Examine The Haimish Way: can it compete.

It has, and works. Empires fall regularly, but not the truths of the common good.

Has Luka, in his quest, found a grail of sorts, the grail of the round, roundtable, the concept of the "round" and not the hierarchical arrowhead, the spear, the empire, the perhaps true meaning of grail as shape and concept for living, not a "thing", see http://kngdv.blogspot.com/2011/02/round-churches-roundtables-labyrinths.html

...............................................................................

FN 1 David Brooks, New York Times columnist, noted the concept after a vacation. On vacation, there is stress: a sub-goal is to get one's money's and effort's worth -- think of the expense of going abroad, for example, the disruption of schedules, the stake that a child may have in having a good time, learning.

Brooks found that his family enjoyed and got more out of the haimishness of the less expensive accommodations on that vacation - people closer at closer tables, chat, even guffaws, welcome, inclusive. Restful. Cheeks below comfy sitting, cheeks up top showing the beginning of a (gasp) smile. He notes the chill of the expensive: the stilt, the distance and distancing, the snoot, nose up and acknowledging no others but those at this par-tic-u-lar ta-ble.

FN 2 How could the Wall Street Journal miss the nobility of the it-Barak at page 214? see the itbarak, from the ancient Greek to Turkish and on, at tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/İtbarak and hit translate; or go to http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=tr&u=http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%25C4%25B0tbarak&ei=h9lfToTsGarG0AGzv5m8AQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dit-Barak%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4GGHP_enUS446US447%26biw%3D1366%26bih%3D564%26site%3Dwebhp%26prmd%3Divns

Hamish competitive edge. Ask Luka. Tell Can't-Won't in the House.

Unbrink the Country. The Big Lie Bars Consensus Without Capitulation. Consumer-Oriented Thinking. Political Consensus. IRAC. I.R.A.C.

2011-08-04T16:55:00.023-04:00

Unbrink the Nation.
The Big Lie Propaganda Technique
Bars Consensus Without Capitulation.
.
Can We Counter the Big Lie.
.
in Political, not just Juror Life
.
Needed: Education. A Political Consumer-Oriented Think Tank,
to Educate Voters against the Big Lies.
.
Truth and Transparency in Political Sales
.

The recent national Credit Rating Downgrade issues continue. At the time, Standard and Poor's highlighted the dysfunctionality of our political process: the contentious inability of house and senate and its funded factions to sway voters, to reach consensus. Voters are lost in fear and force and humiliations of backing away from ideologies rammed down throats, is that so.
.
How to examine whether there are Big Lies in the ideological indoctrinations of either side. The Big Lie: The idea originated with Hitler in Mein Kampf, a worthwhile examination that does not focus on the extremes of genocide, just how he got the job done by persuasion of the people. By way of update, see http://sassafrastree.blogspot.com/2011/02/unser-kampf-our-struggle-paraphrase-of.html
.
Consensus takes groundwork, as is already familiar to those on juries, and the groundwork is agonizing, see http://joyofequivocating.blogspot.com/2008/02/decision-making-choice-consensus-to.html. On juries, failure to reach consensus means that the system will probably begin again with a new jury, or the plaintiff or state will abandon the pursuit. We do not have the luxury of that time, to start over. Identifying any Big Lies can help, if it will be allowed by those whose interest lies in the lies.
.
For those not called to jury duty, the consensus concept may be mistakenly equated with "agreement". Not so. The agreement is not as to terms, but as to willingness to abide by, move forward on those terms. In political life, the concept is as important as it is to a jury, if it is to avoid mistrial by virtue of hung jury, and starting over.

Start with S and P's focus on "consensus." Can we define and meet it in the political context, now that this "judge" has told us what we have to do (no more mere digging in), with persuaders in every media haven trying to conceal facts and get commitment to an ideology regardless.

What is consensus;
What gets in its way; and
How can consumers of the political product (voters) unhook from learned behaviors, just as politicians will have to, in order to reach consensus.

To get to conseusus, try, as a start, the process of I.R.A.C. in communications -- the IRAC paradigm. FN 1

IRAC is known to law students, but apparently avoided by lawyers in government because it works to clarify, lead to sensible positions. Are we overloaded with lawyers in government, trained to think there is no fact until a trier of fact formally finds it. Until then, spin a narrative and hope it flies. There is nothing sincere or necessarily true or "factual" about a trial position. It is aimed to win over a judge or public opinion. Different. The voter should learn what the lawyer-legislators (there is a difference in objective and mindset) already know about persuasion, and use against the voter for their own financial gain, is that so? See http://www.lawyeringskills.com/sorkin/irac.html

I.R.A.C.

IRAC is analysis by defining issues, not just bandying about an ideological vocabulary; identifying relevant rules with historical support; applying those to facts and arguments (including ideologies in multiple forms) and come to conclusion. Can voters vet issues anew, and rein in recalcitrant ideologues making money off all of us. If not, we deserve the downgrade. Don't blame them. Blame us for buying in.

1. Consensus - Agreement to move forward on terms

Those who go to trial seldom think a court decision is totally fair, either.

Why come to consensus:

Now we know why in the political world. If we don't, just as in litigation, a judge will decide for us, and that may contain results that are worse for one side or the other. S&P was only one of the judges (there are other credit groups, and voters remain the ultimate judge, if allowed a clean election). But the lesson is clear: third party decisions will contain errors by the decision-maker, but those will probably not change the result. Factor the likelihood of errors in, and hope they are not too bad. Judicial errors probably only count if they go to the heart of the matter, show an abuse of the discretion of the decision-maker. A mathematical error will not meet the criteria, probably. Live with it.

Here, S&P was the judge. We knew it would be the first judge.
Obama correctly assessed what that judge would need to find the United States' favor.
Republicans walked out of negotiations at the most critical time, because their version was not to be adopted wholesale, and, indeed, even more would be required. Obama was right again.
Where ideology cannot accept what is required in the real world for the common good, shelve the parts of the ideology that bar movement forward.

Consensus is not luck or easy. Consensus is intentional. Acting Together Toward a Goal to Move Forward; acting in concert. Imagery: marriage or divorce; conjoined in vital ways; or going own ways.

Consensus does not require agreement on all the angles of the agreement. Parties choose to act on concert, together, even if one or both parties retain strong reservations and disagreements on particulars. Those get shelved in favor of the totality.

This is familiar in divorce. People sign settlement agreements that then become orders so they can move forward, finally. And the agreement enables them to do so without the expensive, delaying and often copping-out of of passing the issue to a third party to decide at a trial.

The advantage in court practice, however, is enforceability: Any party who had reservations who then obstructs the agreement can be contempt of court anyway.

Contempt of voter.

In that sense, in politics, we need the same kind of enforceability of the consensus of the voter's will in the election. Ongoing obstruction of the voters' will, the consensus from the last election, is contempt of voter. Try that for size, underminers of the last election's government. And stop it.

Political consensus. Pull the tractor together, even if you would rather be in the other line of pullers.

With consent as agreement with position seemingly impossible, work toward consent as agreement to harmonize actions. See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/consensus. Keep your precious disagreement, but shelve its getting in the way of joint action toward a common goal.

2. What gets in the way of consensus
.

a. Learned, trial-lawyer type tactical-acting out behavior.

Playground Bullying.

Add inflammatory language; and use of persuasion techniques that sway based on emotion and imagery rather than the merit of the argument. We need a new rule: nobody argues based on aspersions on the other side. Everybody must present what he or she would do instead.

Proposed rules for the Super Committee: No theater. Boehner blew it. Dysfunctional theatrical displays work against analysis: walking out of negotiations, huffing, all silly things learned and practiced in law school and courts, mislead a decisionmaker and distract from main issues.

No behavioral acting out allowed in the Joint Committee. Behavioral displays of plumage and strut, exacerbate reactions, and do not help solve a problem, Skip puerile bully non-negotiating tactics. These maneuvers are a dime a dozen, all taught behaviors and boringly predictable: Watch a video. Search hardball trial tactics. Enjoy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFFRYiTWbds.

walk-out (do one at least once in each negotiation, lawyers are taught),
demonize proposals of the other side as moving goal posts, while doing such yourself;
refuse to return calls, delay, delay,
then find the media and huff.

All learned behavior, like Pavlov's dog. Put an adversarial lawyer in negotiations and he salivates because he knows he can soon walk out in a huff and bark. Brinking the nation over one side's ideology will abort us all. See http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/08/defusing-fiscal-risk

b. Poor judgment in free speech.

Any speech can retain its freedom, where the speaker exercises some restraint in the interest of consensus. And now we have no choice.

Like free use of guns, responsible use can include reasonable time, place and manner constraints for public safety, and similar. Watch your language if your interest is in analysis, not baiting. The purpose of speech is known by its time, place, manner. Voters, what are your representatives and their funders doing? Is it in your interest?

c. All oaths now to be rendered inoperable. Period.

d. Spun information, incomplete, supporting facts not convincing, agenda-ridden. Look up persuasion, propaganda techniques. Spot them.

e. Insistence on the perfect, for this particular group or person.

Adversarial persons and groups who stand in the way of consensus insist on agreement to their way on each and every point. Not needed for proper consensus, not fair, not appropriate. Political agreements that become law are signed in order to move the process forward overall, a consent to act together, and do not require a giving up of disagreement with some provisions.

3. How can voters unhook from buying the spin process --
Merit over Messaging Technique

How to get back to merit.
.

a. Unhook.

Vet the source, the content. Who is really looking out for your interest. Are the most vociferous the ones who have not vetted on their own, who absorbed the big lies.

b. Explore independent thinking techniques,

Analyze. -- Individually, or in Consumer-Oriented Think Tanks I.R.A.C. as an Analytical Process for Everyman: Reasoning for the People. See FN 1

c. Lighten up.

Uses of imagery.

That last one, little letter c. Can we unbrink the nation with a little humor? Or is somebody going to cry, "Insult!" Look in your own garden. Thumbs up! Both viewpoints here get an image. There are always other uses and interpretations - gardens do that.

Thumbs up.

That could also be pirated for another meaning. Here we choose the thumbs up.

Thumbs down.

Laugh, don't shoot.

That means you, NRA. Public safety, public interest, rights to do whatever, are all part of our democracy's balancing process. Lighten up. Issues are matters of respective merit, not ideology. How else to get consensus, or do you prefer force?

d. Re-frame how we see our Democracy.

No more tricorns and fifes, if we are serious about consensus. Put away the stockings and knickers and muskets, at least until the Super Committee has completed its work.

Ask what image represents what we are at this point.

Is our Democratic way of life, in the total scheme of Planet Earth's cultures, a mere embryo. Is it in danger. Is it worth saving. At what stage. Who decides if it should be destroyed. We are not even 250 years old, one of the lights (we like to think) of the world. Who or what other ideology has the right to destroy it and for what reasons. Familiar imagery of flags has been abused, gets lost. Try another familiar image, but in this unfamiliar setting. Does ideology control, or facts, and what are facts.

The concept brings out issues of who decides what for whom, when, how, what does passage of time do to the issue, all that. Here is our democracy, compared to the age of most other cultures of the world.

Embryonic democracy?

Debate. Facts.

Unhook from ideology as the first analytical tool.

Clashing ideologies and supremacism, before a factual analysis and conclusion, mean war. Unbrink.

e. Object when media treats opinion as "news."

Viewpoints are bought and paid for. Opinions without full statements of supporting facts do not move us forward, are reactionary. They take up time that is better spent on fact presentation. Instead, vote with your remote, with your news subscription. When any media treat views as news, or slips in persuasion to skew objectivity in the journalism, flip. Demand that the opinionator instead lay out what he or she would do. That is news. You can form your own opinion, after you have all the facts.

f. Messages to be based on merit of one's own argument, not demonizing, casting aspersions on the other.

Those who depend on messaging skills (persuasion tactics) rather than merits of an argument will howl.

The bid for public opinion is already in overdrive, but look back at the positions, not the opinions of them by the spinners. Obama was indeed right in his idea of the great bargain all along. We had no time for the nonsense that ensued by Republicans combining unrelated issues. Wrong forum, wrong time, for the debate that cannibalized us all. Needlessly.

Unbrink the nation. S&P may have erred in some calculations, but basic points remain: Unless all tools are available to address problems, we continue to lose.

National stability, socially and ecomically, means matching revenue to needed expenditures so all have access to opportunity.
Time, place, manner. To suddenly stop feeding someone, even though he may well need a reduced diet, is probably to kill him. Failure to feed the democracy aborts it.
Funding goals: cut anything that fails to serves stability and growth.
Productive people require less government support - an immediate savings in spending

Thumbs up on that.

Conclusion

Unbrinking means changes in behavior on both sides. Ideology has been a weapon, and that has not worked. S&P tells us that. Is ideology a mess of pottage when it is separated from context, put first before facts? Pottage. Sell your self for it and what do you get. See http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/03/us/politics/03spend.html?ref=todayspaper

Or are we stuck with this, fair use of an overview of how to persuade, from http://www.washington-report.org/component/content/article/139/6384-in-the-public-print-trial-lawyers-tactics-ideologues-agenda.html

"If the facts don't support your case, argue the law. If the law doesn't support your case, argue the facts. And if neither the law nor the facts support your case, create a smoke screen and obscure everything."

..................................................................................

FN 1 IRAC. Voter tools for analysis. What is the issue here. What solution is proposed. Does the solution address the supposed issue, or another agenda.

Learn how to phrase an issue first -- what is to be decided. Then separate what proven rules should apply. Then apply those rules to the facts and arguments; and see what the conclusion is as to the issue.

In analysis, the principles of IRAC have long been available to professional training schools, see http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/irac.html. Can it be used by voters to demand information from the Super Committee, to explain to the public what is happening without reference to a particular member's ideology. Let ideology come in at the end, to see if it tweaks a result that all can live with, or not.

Bring tools to the public. A little IRAC exposure may enable a voter to spot logical weakness, despite emotional connection that may have already been made.

Examine use of analogies and repetition and other persuasion tactics.
Stop before committing to a position.
IRAC: A step by step analysis tool. Simple.

ISSUE. State the problem as a question to be answered. For example, "Whether the government has a role in job-creation in a recession, such that revenues are properly sought and used to that end." That is already getting thumbs up, as the best way forward even after the debt ceiling fiasco, see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-green/jobs-first----starting-la_b_919582.html
RULE. What basic premises lead to a solution. These will be tested by the Application and Facts. Example,
APPLICATION. Analyze the facts using the Rules.Where has it worked, not worked, in the past; with what conditions, and results.
CONCLUSION. Government has a role in job-creation in a recession, and properly seeks and uses revenues to that end. The new IRAC works. Teach it. See the IRAC paradigm at http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/94840/the_irac_method_of_written_legal_analysis.html
See also http://www.law.msu.edu/rwa/IRAC.pdf

Usefulness:

Balance in any resolution of anything leads to perception of fairness, thus stability. Here, ideology comes at the end of the analysis, not at the beginning. Period. If someone starts with ideology, flip the channel.

Fail-Safe. Debt Ceiling Raised by Pre-Emptive Executive Order. Trompe News

2011-07-22T07:23:00.007-04:00

Fail-Safe

DEBT CEILING RAISED BY ADVANCE ORDER (ADO)

Effective only if Congress does not act adequately in time.

Such debt-limit procedure was delineated and approved, in a further Signing Statement:

That such order meets a) pressing needs, and
b) is appropriate for, all Necessary and Proper governmental functions

threatened by Mad Hatter mental calcification

Much ado about an silly limit to begin with

By Dint

TROMPE NEWS. DATELINE TODAY. For immediate release.

The President has signed an Advance Executive Order, or Advance Order, ADO, postdated for 7:01 A.M. Wednesday, July 27, 2011. In that Advance Executive Order, he directs that the debt ceiling shall be raised effective 7:02 A.M. Wednesday, July 27, 2011, to 3.5 Trillion. Amount. This ADO figure exceeds other amounts proposed, in order to pave the way for legislative removal of the debt ceiling idea to begin with, as clearly arbitrary and irrational.

Effectiveness. This ADO is effective only in the event and to the extent that Congress has not provided to his Desk legislation by 9:01 P.M. Tuesday, July 26, 2011, that raises the ceiling in a way the President can approve.

Time-release. The ADO action falls short of endorsing the Big Trucker view of former President Bill Clinton, to act forthwith. This time-release capsule process will self-destruct, subject to Congressional antidote, if they don't like it. The delay gives Congress a last clear chance to come to agreement in a way that the President could also endorse.

Nature of action. This ADO is a kind of pre-emptive strike, that formally has been denominated an Advance Executive Order because of the association of union activities in pressing for their rights by a strike. Going on strike is an activity which the Mad Hatters take for themselves and themselves only by striking against their obligations, even going home for the weekend while the nation's future wobbles, while depriving others of the same joys.

Constitutional Support. The President alleges support for the Advance Executive Order in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. See FN 1.

Musings. In particular, the President stated that there may be room for interpreting the signing of any partisan oath (fixing in advance loyalty, position, candidacy-promotion) signed as an elected official or one seeking such election, as an act of insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution, the United States' democratic process that requires that voters be represented, and not outside interests; and by thought processes, not robotic knee-jerk.

The President also noted that the validity of the public debt shall not be questioned, a matter not limited at all to the circumstances of the passing, the costs to the North of the Civil War. See FN 1.

He characterized the charade as too-late buyers-remorse: this laches-tainted questioning of what Congress earlier had passed and condoned (the money's been spent, stupid), cannot be tolerated in an era of global markets, reliance, and fairness and balance. You can't wear the prom dress, dummy, and then try to return it. Such disregard of common sense in order to benefit one's own Self, in a multigrain society undermines democracy, he went on. One side cannot be allowed to do whatever it takes to win, at the expense of democratic processes and protections, such behavior to Win being erratic having become addictive and endemic in the Mad Hatter rank ranks. Although Robert's Rules of Disorder (Gang of Robert) has engaged in such recently, we can at least rant back. At this point, someone in the back passed a collection plate.

Response has been mixed. "There is some room for some fungus among us," said one member of Congress not a member of the Mad Hatters, "but thinking people take the Hatters' ideas as a side dish, and with a careful pre-emptive wipe and a little salt. These things only thrive on the dead."

Congressional fungus,genus Mad Hatter, thrives on the dead

Alice? Do you read us? See http://migratorypatterns.blogspot.com/2011/07/tea-party-mad-hatters-and-who-is-alice.html
...............................................................................

FN 1

FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

SECTIONS 3 AND 4. DISQUALIFICATION AND PUBLIC DEBT

"Section 3. No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But congress may by a vote of two thirds of each House, remove such disability."

"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obliga[p.1928]tion incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void"

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt14i_user.html#amdt14i_hd25

And furthermore, if signing oaths in advance setting fixed positions regardless of facts on the ground and voters in the booth, the following may apply, absent special exemption, to such rebellion or insurrection against the laws of democracy and representing voting constitutents, is that so?

United States Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 115§ 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

"Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002383----000-.html

The effect of the loyalty oath: Grain of Salzburg Go to Hellbrun.

.Loyalty oath, rear view

7.25.2011 UPDATE: NYTFOB - New York Times Finally on Board, Adam Liptak
Using 14th Amendment, the Debt Ceiling and a Way Out

No Safety Net. Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch. 1901 Good old days. No Medicare, No Medicaid,

2011-07-08T19:00:00.000-04:00

No Safety Net.
Suddenly it's 1901

Era of No Social Security, No Medicaid, No Medicare,

Only the Dole, after you have sold your bed and chair;

or if you are lucky,

a Benevolent "Better" will appear with a pretty basket

To Keep You and Yours Alive;

oops, one kid's already dead. Coughed a lot.

Sham Humanitarianism. The sham of not helping others perpetuates.
Sham-anism.

Tough luck, lad. Tsk.

But even then, you have to sell your gift turkey for sausage and junk

that will stretch maybe a few more days, the children won't even know.

Thank you, oh, thank you.

Said obsequiously, while smiling and laughing cheerfully,

And there are such amusing things happening with the skinny children, ho ho,

getting paint in their hair, the dears,

So hungry but so cute! Kootchy. No dinner? Not to worry, ha ha.

The eldest got a "situation"? Wonderful!

Two more pennies for the jar~

We are so grateful that you deign to keep us alive. Thank you, Thank you.

Is this republican heaven, or am I dreaming?

Some people can't wait to be superior and be benevolent - feels so good!

when the benevolent sorts feel like it, and it is convenient, but not too much lest the poor get lazy,

please pass the sugar.

I. The 1901 Context for Mrs. Wiggs. Strive and it all works out!

Fog. Equivocating. Fantasy.

A. What was life like in 1901 with no safety net for the poor, children, the sick. Read the 1901 Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch, by one forgotten Alice Caldwell Hegan 1870-1942, The Century Co, publisher, MCMIII. New ones for $88, old ones like ours, for about $8. Think I'll keep it. See ://www.amazon.com/Wiggs-Cabbage-Patch-Alice-Caldwell/dp/0813113911

1903? Look back. The copyright is 1901.

Mrs. Wiggs. Is this Mrs. Wiggs? In 1934, they made a cute movie of the book. The actress was pretty.

II. The Widow Mrs. Wiggs herself. Why, she smiles even when everything goes dead wrong! Ho ho.
A sunny nature can overcome anything!

A. She has a philosophy. No help needed! No sirree. As long as there are benevolent rich people she is fine.

No matter what the scum, something always sings.

She has faith: ways and means will come. She, a widow of an alcohol-tending fellow of mixed background (oh, no! Even Indian blood!) has a barrel of potatoes and a load of coal, her country cottage burned so she and five children came to the town and live at the RR tracks with no road, just higgledy piggledy houses and a store, and she can't find work, and her eldest, Jim, a teen boy, works where he can, off and on, coughs and coughs, and they can't make ends meet, and do they have to go on the dole?

B. No! We won't ask for help! Pull against the debt? We'll never get free! At the dole, they ask if you have a bed and a table, and if you say yes, they say, go sell it then, and come back later. So Jim thinks he can get a night job guarding a wagon of produce, until the market day, next morning, each night, and it leaves him just enough time to get to the factory to start the shift.

C. Enter the chipper cute rich girl with a Christmas basket! Hello! Here you are! Yes, we are wonderful, aren't we! Enjoy! (Thinks to herself, these folks are POOR) So you all call me if you need anything! Bang goes the door.

Oops, think Jim and Mrs. Wiggs -- we can't keep a turkey like that, we have to sell it and get enough sausage to last a little longer for the children. So they do.

Why, Mama here will just add some veggies to the sausage, and maybe have an orange, and it will be wonderful for Christmas! Maybe a little candy at each plate....If you ain't et turkey, yo jes' don' know how good it is!

D. Oh dear, come January, rent due, potatoes getting low, taking in laundry isn't enough, what now.

And poor Jim coughs and dies.

Then Mrs. Wiggs remembers the nice rich girl and goes to her house, where else to go, for help. Skip over her romances with a gent, and fast forward to the nice rich girl writing an article in the local paper about Mrs Wiggs and all she has been through. In come the donations! Thank heavens for benevolence! Not only the rich, but poor people give what they can, a quarter, ten dollars. Bonanza! Thank you, Miss, Rich Lady, thank you!

E. Meanwhile, the second son manages to find a nearly dead horse, says he'll take it and the owner can't get away fast enough because it costs to dispose of a dead horse, and the boy and Mrs. Wiggs manage, with much hilarity, to revive the poor thing. So, the boy has a horse to pull his poor wagon of kindling to sell. Sticks for sale! Sticks for sale!

Meanwhile again, a neighbor in the Cabbage Patch, bedridden as I recall, whose young son has a wooden peg leg, broke his peg leg and couldn't pay $7 for a replacement. So *****

F. Then the rich Christmas Lady girl, and her heart throb, Mr. Bob (that is his name) meet up through various hilarious events with the Wiggses who are trying to stay afloat and can't without the rich Christmas Lady and the benevolence of Mr. Bob, and on it goes, Wiggses hungry, kids patched in their clothes, ha-ha in the restaurant with Mr. Bob who thought he would treat them after a show (little Wiggs boy delivered some kindling in exchange for some tickets, etc) and the Wiggses, meanwhile, have all that money that the Christmas Lady collected after her article, but she, of course, has to keep it and only dole out so much so it will last the year, oh, thank you, thank you, thank you.

Mr.Bob! You have done so much! And now you are finding a place for one of the girls to work, as well as our second boy, the kindling fellow, there. Thank you, thank you! And the rich little Christmas Lady girl and Mr. Bob, of course, connect right up there, and everybody is so happy they are getting married, ho ho ho.

G. And surely there will be some nice rich people, we guess the mother of the author here is one of them, who doles out to the rest of the Wiggses so they don't starve and their other kids don't cough up and die. Newt? Calista? Trompe?

The End.

III. There is never an end.

A. The real Mrs. Wiggs. Is it online? Go check. My copy is from family, blessed with loving libraries and books. Long afternoons paging through. Go to google. Good heavens. In 1934 it became some sort of a comedy film. That is ridiculous. This is a family with nothing, living with death, disease, hunger, no coal, and a cheery heart in the mother. Is that comedy? Go to Amazon: heart-wrenching and hilarious. They must be kidding. Ah -- there it is, in Gutenberg, at http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/4377.

Read it online for free at http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=1455632. It will be nothing like my 7" x 5" or so little book, all shabby, just like 1901, yellowed, creased, and I can read it in the sunshine if I want. And set it down. And pick it up. Smell it. Old paper. Paper can live forever. Is that so?

B. Trivia.

Social issues never resolve because some never have enough and always think others are undeserving so should not get even what they have. The powered ones get back in power and assert their right to decide who deserves food and shelter and who does not. We do! They do not! Unless we benevolent them it. That will never change, so move on.

C. Serious.

Copyright. Ultimate welfare after a period of time during the life of the creator.

Who understands copyright any more? Have you read Mrs. Wiggs?

Heck, let the work die with the worker. Why should anyone else freeload on the welfare of an ancestor? Inheritances, copyright, all welfare. Is that so? Make people work for a living. Go ahead. Get out there, bum. Think the world owes you a living? Hunh. Just 'cause I got an inheritance and have a cushion don't mean you are off the hook. I deserved mine. Hunh.

D. Comment.

This ebook is impossible. Sterile dedication. To the author's mother, who for years was the "angel" of the Cabbage Patch. Nuts. Making people rely on the dole of their "betters" -- not so nice. Read it in the ebook and not even notice. Turning pages takes time. You get to think. What is going on? The ebook: no thinking. Just click. Robot answers by producing the next fake page.

Do not NOT read these online readers for old books. Go to your library, go on Amazon used books, get the real thing where real people write. On online readers, it all is the same typewriter. No cover, no illustrations. No heart.

Benevolence of the rich, if you are lucky. Is that in the cards? Ask Jim Cough, cough.

Legal Limits on Party Discipline. Legislator Changing Partners? Stop the Dance.

2011-06-24T15:02:00.004-04:00

Who gets the reins once elected. Is the voter jilted, and the corporation the winner?

Outside Discipline of Legislators.
Legislators turned into "employees" of a political group.

Who has jurisdiction to reinstate priority to the constituent voter?
Time to Bell the Cat.

You Vote Our Way,

We Pave Your Way.

Examine the forced political conformity contract imposed on legislators, with payment in benefits to them and career support from non-voter interests who set up the contracts, to fix voting services.

Are those void as against public policy,
Are those political parties acting like the union bosses of old? of now?

I. Ask. How can this be?

How can a legislator, an independent contractor hired by the voters to serve them, freely sell self and become an employee effectively hired instead by a third party, a political non-constituent interest. Think people eligible to vote, and their interests; vs. corporations not eligible to vote, and their interests. Is the rationale for the shift, without permission of the voter, legal or ethical.

There is already analysis of the relationship of voter as client of the legislator: see http://posejuxta.blogspot.com/2011/06/voter-as-client-of-legislative.html This carries the idea further: that the legislator legally and ethically cannot abandon the client interest of the voter at will, and enter into an employee relationship with a more lucrative employer -- the political party or group. Of course, the legislator does anyway, and who is to bell the cat?

Who has jurisdiction, in time?

II. ABC's

III. Discussion

IV. Concepts for the Joust

I. Ask

How can the independent contractor, the legislator hired by the constituency, contract away their independent judgment in accomplishing the goals of their political employer, the constituency.

Can they instead choose to serve as employees of a third party non-constituent employer, who decides how they shall act, whether or not that serves the goals of the constituency.

II. ABC's

Can Legislator A

Bargain away his status as independent contractor to B,
Where B is the voter in his district;

Where A had been accountable to B the Voter;

And become instead an employee of C,
C the probably corporate or other organized Unrelated Third party

As to the same subject matter: government function and favor.

Where C as Third Party Corporate
Is not accountable

Either to B the Voter

Or to A the employee Legislator,

Yet C by contract and implied contract (influence)
now has power

To force Legislator A to conform to Corporate C

By means of punishments and rewards

Unavailable to Voter B
Who did the electing, but loses.

Let's see.

III. Discuss.

Minority Leader, Pelosi; and Attorney General, Holder, contemplate issues of the Republic separately

......................................................

#A, the Legislator says

If I signed the conformity contract before the election and disclosed its terms and consequences, the constituents cannot complain if they still hire me.

If I signed the conformity contract after the election, then I think I have a problem with the constituents.

They were first in time, first in right as to my services.

I can always hold a referendum to see if they still want me, after I signed my independence away, so the contract is not void ab initio. It can be ratified by the constituents. And if not, who can catch me?

A, the Legislator. Independent Contractor, turncoats into Employee of Political Corporate-Focused Third Parties

...........................................................

#B, the Voter says

Do what you said you would.

Any implied or express contract enforceable by rewards and punishments, by which you, the legislator (who by definition is an independent contractor serving the goals of the constituency and accountable to them), contracts away my interest as a voter, is void ab initio as against public policy.

There shall be no exchange of services by you for benefits from others outside the constituency, unless those are approved in advance by the constituency, or at least ratified by the constituency after full disclosure and before the acts demanded are done.

No doing what profits you first, and apologizing afterwards.

Voter, who hired independent contractor Legislator, rejects legislator taking binding conflicting employment for profit elsewhere.

..........................................

#C the Employer Profit-Making Political Party Group says

Get real. All I have to do is pay enough in benefits and rewards, and threaten enough withholding of support for people's careers, and I get what I want. Call it what you like. By the time a contracts argument hits the courts, we are past the next three elections. Take that. Public policy be damned. The policy is to win.

Third party profit-making employer of Legislator, now an employee, aims and shoots voter.

..........................................

D. Definitions raise a hand.

An employee is someone in the service of another under an express or implied contract of hire, or oral or written contract of hire, where the employer and not the employee has the power or right to "control or direct the employee in the material details of how the work is to be performed."

Independent contractor: Someone who contracts to do work according to his own judgment and methods, accountable to the employer only as to the end result. See discussion at What Is An Employee ? The Answer Depends on the Federal Law, by Charles J. Muhl, Monthly Labor Review 2002, at http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2002/01/art1full.pdfa

IV. Concepts for the Joust

Ask again, who holds what reins? Are these voters, or special interests? Who are these armed people, even with pony-tails?

Mere agreement with a platform, or promise of support is not at issue. Pelosi and Holder, separately, are concerned with the process. Legislator: employee or independent contractor, to whom?

At issue is the power of an outside group to constructively employ, then penalize or reward an elected official; and so control his vote. Is that it? Control of State?Where is public policy? This is no private matter. See http://plainmeaning.blogspot.com/2011/06/congressional-improper-conduct-purity.html

The issue of how to define and apply public policy to contractual agreements is not new. See http://www.jstor.org/pss/1121162. Public policy is indeed mercurial.

Validity of Conformity Oath

In this corner; Legislator as employee of political party; in that corner, voters who hired legislator as independent contractor to voter. And the purchaser of the referee: the third party employer of the legislator.

TOPICS - Agreements Restricting Decision-Making in Advance

Round I

1. State loyalty oaths have been held void. Example: a teacher cannot be forced to swear that he is not a communist. See http://www.aclu.org/successes-american-civil-liberties-union There are issues of academic freedom involved. That also is a matter of state action, and equal protection comes in.

In academics, loyalty oaths have been overturned: Without turning this into a scholarly tome, or shepardizing, and only doing a quick read for concepts; a sampling of cases in the states turns up some characterizations that are apt. Here is Schmid v. Lovett, 154 Cal. App. 3d 466, 201 Cal. Reptr 424 (1984) at http://www.lawlink.com/research/caselevel3/60761 That case addressed situations of teachers required to take loyalty oaths that they were not communist. A plaintiff signed but objected to it as a form of discrimination in public employment, a different matter than a mere party loyalty oath that is not involved with public employment, but the concepts are interesting. The loyalty oaths were found unconstitutional. Fair use spot quote --

'Loyalty oath requirements have been characterized as "threats to academic freedom." (White v. Davis (1975) 13 Cal.3d 757, 769 [154 Cal.App.3d 478] [120 Cal.Rptr. 94, 533 P.2d 222].) They are "particularly pernicious, "the courts have held, where, as was apparently the case here, no opportunity is afforded one who declines to take the oath to explain that his or her refusal is prompted by conscientious scruples and noble motives. The assumption of "guilt by association" of oaths of this type was automatic and irrefutable. (SeeMonroe v. Trustees of the California State Colleges, supra, 6 Cal.3d 399, 414.)'

Loyalty oaths as threats to academic freedom. Failing to provide opportunity to a refusenik to explain that his or her reason is based on "conscientious scruples and noble motives." Guilt by association: the assumption of such oaths that a refusal meant guilt was automatic and irrefutable -- therefore no go.

Round 2

2. Divorce. Parental agreements fixing in advance pivotal matters as to the dependent child's interest have been held unenforceable. See http://www.divorcesupport.com/divorce/What-do-you-mean-quot-void-as-against-public-1393.html An advance fixation of some matters "violates the precepts of the society we live in." Phrase from Divorcesupport. The best interest of the child cannot be bargained away.

Divorce. Not just contract. Public Policy plays a role.

Round 3

3. Unions can order members to support the union positions, but not always. These are private agreements, and matters of contract. Issues are in flux, see http://www.alternet.org/economy/81923/

Round 4

4. Governments can require loyalty oaths if the issue is already set and proper as to ideology.

Israel has waded into these waters. The cabinet in 2010 approved an oath whereby non-Jewish, and then by amendment Jewish as well, immigrants were to swear loyalty to "a Jewish and democratic State." See http://pennpoliticalreview.org/2011/01/israels-identity-crisis/.

There, however, the issue was not loyalty to a consensus on ideology, ideals made into a legal reality, such as the United States had through the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The Jewish state was founded both as Jewish and as a democratic state, and the issue is unsettled how the two can be reconciled. The article approves the loyalty oath as an important step to that reconciliation. The oath does not seek to set in advance how voters will vote on particular legislation.

Round 5

5. Loyalty oaths imposed by property owners on property buyers -- restrictive covenants -- may or may not be upheld -- restraints on alienation.

Is a loyalty oath analogous to a restraint on alienation in property? We can try.

You shall not sell your land to a Yankee.

There's an interesting idea. Is that enforceable? Find absolute and partial such restraints at Whistling Dixie, the Invalidity and Unconstitutionality of Covenants Against Yankees, by Alfred L. Brophy and Shubha Ghosh, at http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/property/files/whistling.pdf

Partial restraints, if reasonable, can be upheld.

Restrictive covenants: Don't you ever sell to no Yankee, said Mr. Ingram in the deed, FN 1.

Absolutes, probably not.

Look especially at page 7of the Whistling site -- the list of factors that lead to a conclusion of reasonableness or unreasonableness of a restrictive covenant. Then apply to other areas of loyalty or control of disposition: Consider if the Southern state can require the Northern purchaser to take a loyalty oath to the South, or some such.

To be reasonable, as to restraints on property conveyance --

The imposer of the restraint has to have an interest in the land he seeks to protect. A covenant running with the land idea. Concrete connection. See page 11.
Restraint must be limited in time
Restraint must accomplish a worthwhile purpose.
The one restrained probably won't encounter the issue much again
The number of people likely to be so restrained is small
The one restrained is a charity (that gets into land use issues, not relevant here.

So: Pose a political party organization, or other group in politics with power to pass out money and favors, and remove people from desired positions as punishment.

Ask: Does a political party with members outside the geographic constituency have an interest in the vote they seek to compel that will impact on the constituency. Can the restraint extend throughout an individual's elected office term, as to any item of legislation that comes up. Does the restraint do something worthwhile for the constituency, or just the political party. How many are involved in the restraint -- the entire caucus?

Apply to voting restrictions: It is hard to prove that an advance restraint on how to vote as to a public servant is reasonable. For the unreasonable, see FN 2

........................

The neutral referees so far confer and consider: Voting controls.

It is not a far reach to say that controlling votes of those who pass the laws of the states and federal government is similar: not enforcing limits on freedoms based on skin color, but based on whether they are "liberal" or not, with specific buzz phrases triggering the concept. Interesting, if not controlling.

Substitute "Liberals" for "Yankees" in the Whistling site, and all seems the same except, of course, that land property is treated differently than personal property -- a vote would be personal property? Sure. A thing of value. A chattel evidenced by an electronic counting board in the House or the Senate.

Other rationales for voiding political loyalty oaths that carry enforcements, pain or blessing, to keep people in line.

Round 6

6. Is independent judgment of a legislator a duty of citizenship?

Can rules of a group such as a union or political party prohibit a member from exercising duties of citizenship by taking political positions outside or opposed by the union or political party. Can the group force signed agreement to its policies, worded as it chooses, then penalize the member who disavows or refuses to sign, by withholding benefits; or reward others for signing and supporting the party or group position with benefits.

CONCLUSION

Stop the dance. Stop the match.

Pelosi, Holder, somebody, CREW, intervene here. Who has jurisdiction. File something. The corporations have taken over the constituents and the legislators are paid employees.

Practical applications. For example, tax reinstatements are not tax increases. Tax reversions, seen as a reversion to a prior level, are not tax increases. Loyalty oaths that preclude tax increases with no definitions, no voter accountability for voter interests, are against public policy. Null and void ab initio. From the first Show.

...................................

FN 2 To be unreasonable, a restraint on alienation or a covenant that runs with the land would (clearly, we enjoy the Whistling site. Do read it all).

Restraint has to be imposed out of spite, malice, capriciousness, the imposer has no interest in the land affected (the geographic constituency -- i.e. not eligible to vote there), unlimited duration, large number of people restrained.

Apply that standard to voting restrictions.

It is easy to prove a restraint on how to vote is unreasonable: capricious, spite, malice, outsiders influencing in.

Ask: Is there an imprimatur of the State involved in party loyalty oaths? What if the objective of the restraint is to control the State itself?

The oaths and pledges act on the stage of the federal government and state government. This takes more analysis. It does not appear to be state action, however. Not violation of equal protection? Not racially discriminatory -- but politically-ideologically discriminatory. A matter of Beliefs? When does ideology arise to the level of a religion? Are we there yet?

Interesting point:

The Mr. Ingram in the Whistling article, the imposer of the restraint, was trying to revive a lost world by means of a restrictive covenant. He wanted to restore a world where the state enforces limits on freedoms based on skin color.

Rules of Extortion Procedure. Far Side of the Right Introduces Misrepresentation Justification Process to Replace Civil Procedure.

2011-04-08T14:22:00.006-04:00

New Rules of Debate Procedure (Rules of "Extortion" Procedure)
To Replace Rules of Process.

Tactics of Empire Already in Practice
Properly Prevail over the Needs of Democracy,
Says Spokesman Bane

Rule of Tough. Misrepresentation Justification Process.

Shutdown Follies

By DINT
5 minutes ago

WASHINGTON DC -- The Far Side of the Right introduces new Rules of Debate Procedure, using "extortion" in its informal title as a 'humorous' reference to the term as already used by political opponents of its tactics in characterizing issues and facts. Opponents cry foul regarding spin before facts are out, and scooting up red herring alleys in order to persuade the unwary: thus, Rules of Extortion Procedure.

The Far Right, anticipating criticism of its misrepresentation and mercurial tactics in the recent Shutdown Follies, proposes making the covert practice, as indeed commonly used in politics, overt. Its rules incorporate the enumerated successful "extortion-like" tactics of scummy politics into government rules, before suit is filed or letters to editors submitted. The majority Right is enthusiastic about the issue in the House. See our website for a more complete discussion

[consumer of news goes to the website, see FN 1 here]

Political misrepresentation. News consumer goes to website for further information

These Rules purport to make explicit that it shall be consistent with the proper exercise of office or authority to obtain financial and political support by presenting misleading, limited and selective facts as to an issue. These acceptable practices include obfuscating the nature of the issue itself as financial; when it is in reality a social-ideological matter; and financial analysis results of this or that. Proper conduct? If politics is sales, some puffing is acceptable. Misrepresentation is not. See Annenberg fact check site, as an example by which to gauge the gouge ://www.factcheck.org/

The result of no accountability in political communications: the kind of Gendarmism needed to protect the established order, the goal of the group.

The Rules.

The Rules, it must be made clear, are only procedural, and do not affect any substantive law regarding the crime of extortion. The debate rules provide that misrepresentation of an ideological-social preference issue as a substantial budget deficit matter, as to which voters rely and contribute, and its financial effects as certain A or B, shall now be formally acceptable as political speech, so that voters will be on notice and cannot sue.

Spokespeaker John the Bane told reporters today denies that there is any misrepresentationa t all: it is ignorant citizens; and legislators who oppose the new Rules of Extortion who don't do as good a job themselves; who complain. They have only themselves to blame for current legislative stalemates about reasons for imposing the Far Side's moral views (we decide) on other equally adult, equally mindful persons of differing tints and persuasions.

Far Side of the Right. Spokespeaker John the Bane

After all, they disagreed with the people pushing me, said Mr. Bane, and that is simply unacceptable.

Apparently, in the view of the Far Side of the Right, with its hidden minders and funders, it is simply time to get the job they want done, done, their way. If winning means shutdown and giving more people freer access to more guns and feeding them more slogans, those are expensive distractions, but so be it. Go, Empire. Beat the Republic. So quoth a sign by the caffe latte machine. No matter whether a claim is fact-based. Go ahead. Tout it. See The Success of the Big Lie

Mr. Bane asserted that the new unappealable Rules of Extortion Procedure will expedite making laws through compulsion, fear-mongering, spin, scapegoating and sloganeering for persuasion of just folks. Let the misreps roll!

Coming to agreement takes too much time the straight way, and has has an uncertain outcome.

And, he pointed out, women simply cannot be allowed to make moral decisions. When asked if men would then submit to women giving permission before they could obtain personal starch and so exert force on women that otherwise they could not do, Mr. Bane looked surprised and said he didn't think so, and why should women have a say in what men do with their bodies?

Far Side of the Right Introduces Rules of Extortion to Discern Good from Evil, their way

Accordingly, the new Rules of Extortion Procedure are intended to restore medieval back room and Star Chamber tactics to this new Empire group, to force control over others in what cannot be obtained by negotiation and compromise.

When asked where the authority for this broad enforcement-punishment-force mindset, Mr. Bane said that he had read relevant religious texts to check his theories of Government of the Right People, By the Right People, For the Right People.

You mean to tell me what is moral?? Asked the angel guarding Eden, and she was indeed female. Origins of Lady Justice?

As to the religious research, Mr. Bane said that he indeed found that a popular Founder of a usurped religion never enforced anything against anyone except to regulate the money-changers, and that was sorely needed (and didn't last long). Indeed, the illustrious Founder mostly let those who wanted to walk away, walk away. Mr. Bane also acknowledged that that particular Founder limited his conversion strategies to preaching and example; and authorized noone to force anyone else to do anything, or enforce anything against others. The idea is mind yourself, the Founder said in effect; don't cross your neighbor's moat in your own eye.

But Mr. Bane opined that mere talk and example would never sell and are not as much fun as forcing people to do what you want. Heard from the back of the room: "Hoo! Hoo!" And "Go for it Johnny-boy. That'll get the B___________es."

A further press conference is scheduled for midnight, at which time America's Prince Harry Everyman, Champion of Democracy, will counter the Evil Empire's Rules of Extortion Procedure with a mild but firm and reasoned no.

Mild-mannered Prince Harry Everyman, heading for the phone booth on the left, and a quick change of costume

Prince Harry expressed confidence in the American public's ability ultimately, if offered neutral facts before emotional commitment is seduced, 1) to see truly where daylight shines, 2) to access daily the Annenberg Foundation's Fact Check, see ://factcheck.org/; and 3) to weigh objective and full information rather than invective and King Me Shove You strategies in voting. "Abort Democracy by Empire? Not on my watch," he asserted, and welcomed more questions.

Meanwhile, citizens everywhere looked to find daylight.

Citizen looks for daylight, fruitlessly

......................................................

FN 1

[Consumer of news and political garbahge goes to the website] WEBSITE:

"Extortion".

Extortion is the description applied by opponents of the Far Side of the Right
to those machinations of debate
by which misrepresentations of fact that would be actionable in a commercial setting, are common in the political. For example, truth in labeling is required in commerce, to a degree; and sales "puffing" has its limits.
Technically "extortion"? No, agree both sides. Criminal extortion involves an illegal act -- and bad faith and obstructionism are not "illegal". Political speech traditionally readily admits falsehoods and spin, and obstruction of fact disclosure, as mere amuses bouches, despite reliance by voters and financial loss in contributing in reliance on the truth or understanding of the representations, see ://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/misrepresentation/. The effect, however, is to undermine the democratic system, thus a hybrid "legal but to be prohibited in the democratic debate setting" arises.

In criminal extortion, in summary, a person or group abuses its authority or office in some way, and so induces another to give up money or other matters of value.

In everyday terms, see ://dictionary.reference.com/browse/extortion/. The "extorter" thus obtains a desired action that otherwise would not occur. The results of the misrepresentation, say the opponents of the Far Side of the Right, are the same as in technical extortion. The person (voter, supporter) would not have swallowed, not have engaged in the desired conduct of support, giving up time and money, except for the misrepresentation, a kind of force, the "extortion" technique used.

Results are forced by use of means that may be legal. Opponents are examing the effects if such Rules of Debate permitting this extortative misrepresentation will replace Rules of Civil Procedure, Legislative Procedure, Robert's Rules of Order, and perhaps even Rules of Criminal Procedure on the Federal and the State levels.

Rumblings.

Wall Street wins and we lose. Tell the truth.

Consumers of political speech show signs of uniting to object to the misrepresentations to which they are subject, and the Far Right apparently feels vulnerable, more than their opponents. Further, the ducking and weaving of constantly moving goal posts in debate, say the opponents of the Far Right (as they consider filing suit against abuses of political speech by office holders or others in political authority much as a commercial setting), makes a mockery of a system dedicated to truth and reasonable compromise. Sales of ideas and sales of candidates are the same as sales of deodorants, say the opponents. Tell what you sell, label its ingredients, or be sued.

Photos, for the curious: John the Bane, tinted from seaside sculpture at Esbjerg DK . John Boehner impersonator.
Good and Evil, from Victorian Sunday School lesson sewing card
Avenging Angel, Denmark church
Tiptoeing Gent, fair use from Hans Christian Anderson display, Odense DK . Harry Reid impersonator.
Looking for daylight, citizen visiting Horsens DK. Note that Scandinavia appears to have no slums. Worth it. Lifts all boats. Also worth paring how that is done, but the goal is attainable and excellent.

Attack on Humanitarianism. The Struggle to Stay Humane. Inculcate Anti-Altruism

2011-03-31T04:48:00.002-04:00

Demonize and Obliterate Humanitarianism.

Step Number Seven in the Power Playbook *
De-Dutify People

Anti-Humanitarianism in the Name of Budget?

Read: the Self-Interest of Some.

No Moral Duty to Act.

From Republic to Empire in One Step.

Is this so: Anti-humanitarianism is now a stated national goal for the current Congressional majority. We cannot afford the financial and social costs of empathy and opportunity, say R's and some D's in Congress. No more of give us your tired and poor, or setting up mechanisms so people could rise from debilitating poverty. Don't fix what is not working, do away with the entire idea. No meals on wheels because that doesn't work. People still die. Malnourished kids grow up as stunted adults? Pah.

If so, how did this demonizing of humanitarianism evolve. How was this new value inculcated.

Inculcating people is a mechanical matter of pursuit of power. Is that so? Historically, yes.

There are practical, power handbook steps to minding and shaping the mindsets of a population so the minders can get on with the business they have chosen for themselves. And the obliteration of humanitarianism is right in the HIT list of things to do.* Only with eradicating altruism will people go along with the new value: that they and their tribe, as identified, have a superior right to their own happiness and pocketbook regardless of their impact on the happiness and pocketbook of others they see of a different tribe or just below on the Great Ladder. Kick 'em back instead. 'Way back.

So here we focus on the attack on humanitarianism. And why it is working so well. Get the education buses going out there on how people are shaped. Awareness of the process is the first step.

Hiss! Mine!

Attack on humanitarianism

1. Humanitarianism used to be an articulated national American goal.

It used to be that an investment in humanitarian pursuits was seen as a good one, with returns in productivity and quality of life for all. Perpetuating slums demeans those who live there and those who see it. So hide it, is that so? Politically and socially, humanitarianism was valued -- even and especially by moguls whose names remain on philanthropic work. See Gospel of Andrew Carnegie, Victorian Everyman. (novel idea: foster philanthropy by making voluntary divestment desirable where inheritances are limited). Ancient history: Give me your tired, your poor, etc. Huddled masses. Enact laws intended to foster rise from poverty, engagement in productive activities, self-actualizing that only happens when people don't have to forage. Foraging takes all the energy. Set a basic floor so people can set something aside, and accumulate for a better quality of life. That also meant some regulating of greed.

2. Humanitarianism had a rougher road as a major international issue.

There were successes after wars were over, but abuses of populations within nations not our own have gone largely unaddressed as their own internal business. Is that so? And help efforts were not great successes. See the frequent inaction, and the observed undermining of altruism when there were not financial and political results to favor the helpers.

Debates flourish:

see The Death of Humanitarianism, Anatomy of the Attack,Oxford Journal, Refugee Survey Quarterly 1998 article by Joanna MacRae, abstract, UN High Commissioner for Refugees ://rsq.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/1/24.abstract/ The thesis there includes awareness as the starter defense. Unless people are aware of the attack on humanitarian values, those values will continue to be co-opted and marginalized by those carrying flags of anti-imperialism (leave the sufferers alone -- to intervene is to act like a colonial), "developmentalists" and something termed "neo-peaceniks."
see Sierra Leone, An Attack on Humanitarianism, by Philippa Atkinson, from the Humanitarian Practice Network, Overseas Development Network, at ://www.odihpn.org/report.asp?id=1099/ 1998 was a good year for the topic, if not for progress in it: Sierra Leone was undergoing humanitarian crises, with politics overtaking it.
Fast forward to 2010. See the Journal of Humanitarian Assistance, article by Don Hubert and Cynthia Brassard-Boudreau The Shrinking Humanitarian Space, at ://jha.ac/2010/11/24/shrinking-humanitarian-space-trends-and-prospects-on-security-and-access/

3. Humanitarianism as a national issue is now on the rough road.

Anti-humanitarianism in the name of budget. Don't regulate people's economic activities. Investors won't invest until Washington is out of the business world. Hold the economy hostage. Don't feed the poor. Don't prioritize in favor of national access to productivity, including education, nutrition, infrastructure, mobility, basic needs met so a person can "become" more than a forager. The other is the other and on his own. Not of your tribe. Not of our tribe. If they can't read the contract, tough. To be beaten back where he belongs. An invasion of one's right to one's own pocketbook. Git back, Loretta.

Is that the theme of the anti-humanitarian, the one who rejects a moral obligation to the common good in favor of the Individual, say, the school of Ayn Rand. Current Congressional budget lines drawn. The R's say altruism is bad financially now, hasn't worked (people are still poor) but don't fix what isn't working, just get rid, and the elderly will die anyway so no meals on wheels, etc. FN 3

4. How is a national mindset changed. Methodically.

Methodical works. Intentionality. Relentless repetition. Loose the strategies. No accident, no natural "evolution". Interests promote it, and focused energies bring success.

Walk through how a mindset fostering detachment is created. What techniques succeed in the process of de-dutifying a human being. How to undermine any urge to act on a perceived duty to others, to empathize with sufferers, and raise up instead a manufactured just-taking-care-of business objectification on a national, international or individual level. How to de-motivate people, get them not to act. Is there an altruism-like gene-thing, that leads us to want to assist even without political or personal financial or national direct advantage. Arrows come at the bewildered head, from different directions, simultaneously. As soon as public or individual attention focuses on one of them, see that arrow recede into the fug and another take over in clarity and force. Swivel over to address it -- defend, respond -- and that one fades, for now. It does not go away. It just melts away for now when attention and counter-forces rise up against it, and another sharpens.

How many come at the brain and how? No set number, no set format, but in the aggregate, there is little hope of prevailing against the quivers out there.

5. Tactics in de-dutifying.

5.1 Attribute a base motivation, self-interest, to those claiming humanitarianism. Deny that humanitarianism is properly involved.

That makes pursuing one's own self-interest easy. Just project it on others. As to Libya, deny that civilians are more than collateral damage where political movements are afoot; deny a need to act because there may also be some other benefit. Ron Paul ascends (descends) this platform. See and hear this Paul going around humanitarianism by denying it is properly involved, see the video uploaded by Paul himself (says the site), click and find Fox but you wouldn't know that until you click, you sneaky thing, you, see ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8CrJmFmqAc/

The idea is that where there are multiple motivations, the humantarian one has to go. Humanitarianism should only be pursued when it is pure and sole, apparently, in a world of clear opposites.

6. Put religious ideas on the shelf where they belong.

As to the helper, demonize him. Where some may find a religious base for helping others, deny that humanitarianism is even involved. See a Christian critique of politician Ron Paul (see 5.1) making that argument, at this "Christian Community" site at ://brokenflask.com/2011/03/24/ron-paul-attack-on-libya-not-motivated-by-humanitarianism-32211-cavuto/

As to the helpee, frame him as undeserving if he hasn't made it up the ladder yet (with the bottom rung at least six feet over his head). So, let his poor child go malnourished. No generalized health care, particularly in maternity. Nothing to replace health and food programs, just let the people go. Immediate pocketbook interests of the erstwhile aid-extender prevail over long-term ill effects of an uneducated, sick, unproductive permanent underclass, see as deserving of their plight.

7. Pull out the power playbook;

and demonize those who point out what is happening.

Obliterate Humanitarianism

Parry and thrust, with all weapons ready for clever use so people don't even realize, can't defend in time. Those seeking power have a long practice tradition on how to do it. All steps are essential, each little stick rests on all the others in the tangle. Remove all extraneous matter.

On the HIT list is the eradication of humanitarian tendencies in the population.

It's right there. Without that cornerstone, efforts to get large groups to support your consolidation of power and money at the expense of others "less fortunate" will fail. Beat out the empathy factor, so your rapt audience will self-justify their willingness (imposed and they might not even realize the process) to deprive others, or put or leave others on the merry road to destitution or death.

Go back to the Master, but don't let on. See Unser Kampf, Our Struggle.*

And attack humanitarianism. It is right there. That is the new value. Inculcate it. But how? Simple. Inculcation is an art. Inculcation is the result of techniques applied.*

Call out national honor, and in its name dissolve any conflicting issues of humanitarianism. Create fear of obliteration of self and values, so people will march to protect their own survival as the inculcator frames it. Destiny calls, and that is a higher calling. Attack the emotional heart of the masses with this message: skip the thinkers. Thinking is the enemy of inculcators. Reduce a few choice facts to slogans, and sloganeer over and over, ignoring and defeating debate. No half-statements, because ambiguity gives rise to doubt. Be certain, all the time. Unthinking people will then take comfort and leave you alone.

Find the obliteration of humanitarianism as a clear step in inculcation.

Inculcation according to the formula changes mindsets of populations. So get awareness out there -- awareness is the only defense, the only way to muster defense and maintain independent judgment. Awareness of the steps: Fear, spin, slogans, scapegoat, masses, fact-obstruction, obliterate humanitarianism, certainty and never debate, repeat. ISSSFOODR as an impossible mnemonic that may work because it takes a gimmick to remember the steps. If you can't remember with the mnemonic, maybe we'll go back and look it up again. Until we do.

It also is onomatopoeic, sounding like what it is --

Hiss when someone wants a little of your food.

Hiss. New Individualism. Or old idea resurgent? Very tempting.

Conclusion:

Power is diluted where people are distracted by empathy. So our minders must undermine altruism if they are to succeed in exploiting us and others for their own ends.

...................................................................

* A little to-do list for the national change. Obliterate Humanitarianism is Number 7. Empathy distracts. This found at the paraphrase of the power playbook, at the Unser Kampf, Our Struggle site above.

1. I Induce fear, threat
2. S Spin
3. S   Sloganeer
4. S   Scapegoat
5. F   Focus on the masses; skip the thinkers
6. O Obstruct facts,
7. O Obliterate humanitarianism
8. D   Display certainty; don't debate
9. R   Repeat

.............................................................

RepubliGOPoly. The Permanent Underclass Game. Keep Opportunity Out of Reach.

2011-03-14T20:16:00.005-04:00

Monopoly to Create a Permanent Underclass.
The Game of RepubliGOPoly! *

Get on Top and Stay There

Compassion-Free Zone. Monopoly for Oligarchy: the Top Twopers

Keep Opportunity Out of Reach for Others

The Republic Becomes an Empire, By Wealthy Design

1. Tactical tips. Block others from creating and keeping wealth, from building savings. Make them spend all they have, just to survive.

2. Lean how to bar others from the benefits of Capitalism (opportunity to accumulate), while preserving your own.

Cool.

RepubliGOPoly. Half a human.**

1. Object

The object of the RepubliGOPoly Game is to become the richest player, and once there, to entrench oneself in such status by any means -- as against all of other ethnicities seeking similar Opportunity. Prevent others from setting aside assets, accumulating wealth so their heirs can have a nest egg.

You get there by doing these things as to property:

a. buying

b. selling

c. renting

And these things as to others' incomes:

a. slash incomes

b. keep sustenance (including healthcare) costs high

c. obstruct mobility, education, access to opportunity
.

2. Equipment

a. Geographic limits: none. The globe, especially the nation,

b. Financial investment: unlimited derivatives, inexhaustible buy-out shares,

c. Destabilizing communities. 1,075,000 homes foreclosed upon already, and

d. Send money abroad. 9,085,622 controlling interests in foreign resorts as to which deductions are offered upon check-in for business convention regardless of attendance at programs, including as to family members or fun others defined as the conventioneer determines to be fun,

e. Gamble other people's money. 8,880,000,000 CHANCE cards, in denominations of 10,000,000 per card,available only to those earning over $250,000 per year,

f. Compassion-free zones. COMMUNITY CHEST CARDS (these are disfavored by the game controllers, as the public interest 1) values sustenance and basic health care for all, and therefore 2) increases opportunity for alien, varietally skinned and varietally ethnic Others to be productive, thus increasing economic and status competition for the already entrenched, that is, those earning over $250,000 per year, roughly,

g. Control. 200 Title Deed cards, and no more: dividing the globe into 200 equal parts geographically, but only as to acreage, not productivity or above marsh or other value-type considerations, thus introducing a further amuse bouche element of chance to an otherwise sure thing as long as your bets go right. Players may combine to swap and trade these title deed cards, but all transactions must be fully transparent as to funding, and opportunity of 24 hours given for objection based on such rules as may later be enacted.

Note that these Chance, Community Chest and Title Deed cards offer free services of big bucks consultants in neuro-sales, so that ads can run in an unlimited way without disclosure of the funders or their interests, against all the mom and pops in the Teas.

h. Bust organizations not benefiting owners, like unions (they succeed too well in getting benefits for the undeserving)

i. Create play money. This source is unlimited as to those In-Track, those undisclosed donors to Roviastic Endeavors. Tea Birds have funded this endeavor extensively, but may well reap no benefit if not among the High Owners.

RepubliGOPopoly in the woods. Trusting Little Tea Birds, Unaware. Fly, Tea Birdies! Fly!

j. Plants. Botany in RepubliGOPoly as to media:

Advance committees prepare, research and plant articles, fake-blogs, and news interviews with critics of the aspiring Underclass, armed with talking points, and scoring money over merit so the people have no idea what is being done to them. But see journalistic heroine, Susan Campbell, Hartford Courant (Fox pulp journalism took the place of this venerable reporting institution, The Hartford Courant,but Susan still lives) at ://www.courant.com/news/opinion/hc-campbell-propaganda-0313-20110313,0,2494893.column/ as an example.

Underclass: Spot them yourself. Look for slanted words, like "handout" for social security, where people paid in wages as insurance, and then are begrudged the benefit.O medicaid -- the least able to take advantage of opportunity, to be prevented from a dignified life? Misplaced supremacism.

k. STAR. Spin The American Republic. Let us all Give thanks for being better than others.

3. Preparation.

Set up the board and CHANCE cards and COMMUNITY CHEST CARDS face down. Each player gets 7,000,000 in cash, in denominations of 2,500,000 per player as the player desires. If the player cannot get change for a transaction the player loses to loud jeers.

4. The Bank

The Bank. There is one Banker: Banker Ron Schmeits. The Bank is headed by the current Banker powerbacker of the NRA, Mr. Ron Schmeits or his effigy, Mr. Schmeits being perhaps one of the most powerful Banksters on the Globe (well done, Mr. Schmeits). Just ask Nate Rudy Asclater (do a search -- Nate believes!). See also Identification of Resume Activities Act.

The Bank holds the title deeds, the cash, houses in states of foreclosure or not, and resort hotels as well as hotels classified as resorts but including regular people's hotels, the better to charge them with, my dear.

5. The Play.

The concepts of Go, and Buying Property, Paying Rent, Chance and the (now dying) Community Chest, Income tax, Jail, Free Parking, Further Houses and Hotels, Building Shortages, Selling Property and (gasp!) MORTGAGES! and Bankruptcy, and Miscellaneous (pass the wine at the reception at the gated community); are all tilted as set forth herein hereafter, such that the top two percent shall be on top at all times.

Note that there is the option of a Short Game herein whereby everyone not in the top 2% are handily anesthetized by the ads produced by neury ads paid for by unknown moguls hiding behind Mr. Rove. See Democracy's Pitfall. PsyOps in Media Thank you, Chief Justice Roberts for wrecking all of us by equating legally obnoxious self-serving corporations with real people who might otherwise see a community in the global relationship. Hello, Japan. We care, but the corporations that control us do not.

It shall be thus forever amen in the interest of the established herein Permanent Underclass to serve those earning over $250,000 per year, or such other level as any person who is in or who has been in a union in his or her lifetime shall determine by special plebescite, ever after, again amen.

RepubliGOPoly Creates a Permanent Underclass

SALES PITCH

Why have democracy when you can have all of the benefits of Oligarchy as to the top 2% -- the Top Twopers -- just by hiring PR propaganda consultants and providing unlimited untraceable money! The American Way! Is this the reason: Government as Fiduciary for Taxpayer.

Guaranteed success. See our winners in The Michael Moore 400. Michael Moore Madison Speech. There are 400 Americans with more wealth than the next 150,000,000? Who are the 400? Identify please! See ://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/forbes-400-or-sicko-12

Michael? Michael?

Are you there, Michael?

(heard offstage) Don't give up!

..........................................................................

* Romania. Mircea the Old, we think. Found in northwest area.

A different game, Republicopoly, is being or was by cub scouts or boy scouts, and purported to educate about the system of government that dances like a sugarplum in our heads. However, once the parents of the scouts lost their jobs and houses, and some were undocumented and deported despite talent and family here for years by invitation of the open door, the effort apparently slowed.

Psy Ops for Everyman. PsyOps. Sabotage A Government. Nate Rudy Gets a Handbook. CIA Guerrilla Warfare

2011-01-19T18:26:00.010-05:00

Psy Ops for Everyman. PsyOps.

Enjoy A CIA Guerrilla Warfare Handbook

How-To Manual for Sabotaging a Government
Guerrilla Warfare Goes Mainstream

Everyman Nate Rudy Asclater has joined the NRA and now finds a manual in his mail, from what looks like a gaming site, but he is concerned if it really just is for fun because it is intended for gun owners. The booklet is a reprint of the CIA manual that it used in training of its operatives to sabotage the Sandinista government back in Nicaragua. How to be a guerrilla, how to succeed at being a guerrilla. Nate Rudy is confused. He wants to feel that he is part of an important inner circle, and is proud that he is on this list. But the concept of undermining governments and its echoes in the news, are scary for him. So he calls his son, Nate Rudy, Jr. who is not a gun owner.

Join Nate Rudy and his son, Nate Rudy, Jr., as they discuss what Dad the Gun Owner can choose to do.

Nate Rudy Gets a Handbook

Nate Rudy Asclater is holding his cell phone, trying to reach his son, Nate Rudy Jr.

Ring! Ring! (time passes) (click)
(message on answering device)

His daughter in law, Nellie Joy, is there, he things, but does not answer.

Nellie Joy, I know you are there. Pick up. And don't you hang up that phone after you do. I just want to talk to Nate Rudy, Jr. about something all us Asclaters need to know. I got this letter because I am a gun owner, and I know Nate Rudy isn't one, but I also got a big packet of paper that asks me to "get very familiar" with what is in it, and "discuss it" with family and friends. You're family and I am getting very confused here. Nellie Joy? You hear? (silence) Guess I'll have to send him a note. Maybe one of the emails he taught me to use .... (tappety tap)

................................................

Email from Nate Rudy Sr. to Nathaniel Rudy Asclater, Jr. Little Nate Rudy. From Nathaniel Rudy Asclater, guess that makes me Sr. I'm no Senior citizen! Have to ask about that.

Ok, Nate Big to Nate Little.

This is important, Junior. Gotta talk.

Go to this place on your computer, (copy, paste) ://www.scribd.com/doc/121871/CIA-Guerilla-Handbook/ It's from somebody called Combat Arms. Yes, I got that right. And I did what you said, to check who they are, and up comes a video game thing; but I'm calling you anyway. And in a little box at the top, it says who this is going to, and a message. Here it is, a small piece of that whole package, I swear to God that this is what it says. You can see that manual itself and it's easier to read in other places, like (copy, paste) ://everything2.com/title/CIA+Manual%253A+Psychological+Operations+in+Guerrilla+Warfare

"Combat Arms urges gun owners in the United States to become very familiar with the contents of this manual and to discuss it among your family and friends. Liberty knows no peace."

That sounds a little off to me. So I look at what's in the manual. I got manuals at work, and they tell me how to do things. This here manual is from the CIA and appears, yes, it does, to be a how-to for how the CIA people can sabotage another government. You, and I'm at the beginning, at a part called "Armed Propaganda" -- sounds weird -- by sidling up to the peasant.

Peasant? Sounds middle ages here. They can't mean ordinary working people like me and call them pearants. But they do that with their weapons hanging out there; and they make nice (but they've got those guns out there) and get the people to trust them because they're helping them with this and that around the house and the field, and there goes the ball game. Mess up their meetings, figure out who really understands what is up, help the ones who Know what They Know,, and phffft with the rest.

You gotta read it. Why did I get this stuff? I joined the NRA, yes, I did because I am a patriotic American and there is this Second Amendment that the radicals and extremists want to change. No way. No change. I want my liberty and having a gun to do with what I want where I want is my liberty. But we've been through that. This is different.

Call me. No Starbucks this time. I want my Bud. At Happy's.

...........................................................

Reply email from Junior to his Dad, Nate Rudy Asclater Sr.

Dad, this is me. You got problems. That is a manual that tells people, thanks to the CIA researching it and doing it somewhere in South America against a government and its supporters there called the Sandanistas (don't bother remembering). They wanted to sabotage that government and they figured out how you do it. It is something called public domain, so I can quote all I like from it, and I want you to stay away from any people like that. Stay away. You might make a list of what you have seen happening that looks like this, and send it to me, but you keep out of it other than that. You hear me?

So, here are the steps to sabotaging a government, bringing it down, how you do it. This letter you got was addressed to all gun owners.

They probably didn't have an address list for gun owners, though, because there isn't any registering place for gun owners, but these things get out. If that NRA lets any of these objectives out in their zillions of education programs, and talk while doing police and other training, and they do police training; and kids' adventure camps; then they have a problem, but we can't get at that. I got Nellie Joy and little Nate Rudy II to think of.

So: I'll go over it and pull out some quotes for you from it, doing the cut and paste thing I showed you. I;ll send it as an attachment.

You have to go back to the place on the site to see the whole thing, but this is a kind of highlight.

Pull up ://everything2.com/title/CIA+Manual%253A+Psychological+Operations+in+Guerrilla+Warfare/ and you can see where each quote comes from, to see what went before and after. That can make a difference. You decide.

I'll send it by regular mail also because it got kind of big.

PS. Fiddled around with some oils and a mirror a few months ago. Thought you'd like my self-portrait ha.

Nate Rudy Asclater, Jr. Self-portrait. Joke, Dad. This was from our trip to Ystaad.

................................................................

Subsequent email Nate Rudy Jr. to his Dad, with Attachment of quotes put here in a big block quote with some comments; and the quotes are from the CIA manual, sent as well as Regular Mail.

HI, Dad, here it is. Some nuggets on psy ops, that's psychological operations, in guerrilla warfare, as the CIA used it to train their people to do that against the Government there at the time. We are the peasants, Dad. We are the peasants. Just because you got the letter as a gun owner, you are still a peasant. Its the higher ups pulling the strings. You and me, and Nellie Joy, and Mom, and little Nate Rudy II, we are the peasants. Don't think we're not. This guns business is getting like a religion to you. That worries me. You don't question it.

Cuts and pastes from public domain document,

CIA Manual, Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare

at ://everything2.com/title/CIA+Manual%253A+Psychological+Operations+in+Guerrilla+Warfare/

Yes, I know there are lots of computer games on combat, like Combat Arms, and they share lots of tactics with each other just for the game. But using this book for that? With that message to gun owners?

Still could be a hoax. But I'm worried about you getting on lists that you may not want. Talk to me. Start looking up these people and the guns people get a little scary. I get weird websites that want information about me before I can get in.

Or am I making too much of this.Probably weird. I'm not worried about the public side of the NRA because they're pretty stodgy, and would never teach skills for overturning a government -- but who knows who gets their training through them, then go on their own, real militia, guerrilla groups. Nice arrangement. Get the training in the American Apple Pie site, and then there you go.

We do get edgy these days, on the outside, because there is so much money in that NRA they can do what they want. Life.

Ok. Follow along on your computer. These are little bites. I won't even use quotes for each separate one, because that takes too long, and I'll leave in the links to other places that they put in. And I put in some comments there, too. This is pretty rough, just to get you going.

From the CIA Manual

Guerrilla warfare is essentially a political war.

The target, then, is the minds of the population, all the population: our troops, the enemy troops and the civilian population.

The purpose of this book is to introduce the guerrilla student to the psychological operations techniques that will be of immediate and practical value to him in guerrilla warfare.

Group discussions raise the spirit and improve the unity of thought of the guerrilla squads and exercise social pressure on the weak members to carry out a better role in future training or in combative action.

This means that every guerrilla will be persuasive in his face-to-face communication - propagandist - combatant - in his contact with the people; he should be able to give 5 or 10 logical reasons why, for example, a peasant should give him cloth, needle and thread to mend his clothes. When the guerrilla behaves in this manner, enemy propaganda will never succeed in making him an enemy in the eyes of the people.

This means that a guerrilla armed unit in a rural town will not give the impression that arms are their strength over the peasants, but rather that they are the strength of the peasants against the Sandinista government of repression. This is achieved through a close identification with the people, as follows: hanging up weapons and working together with them on their crops, in construction, in the harvesting of grains, in fishing, etc.; explanations to young men about basic weapons, e.g. giving them an unloaded weapon and letting them touch it, see it, etc.; describing in a rudimentary manner its operation; describing with simple slogans how weapons will serve the people to win their freedom; demanding the requests by the people for hospitals and education, reducing taxes, etc.

Control of Meetings and Mass Assemblies

Disrupt, disrupt.

All these acts have as their goal the creation of an identification of the people with the weapons and the guerrillas who carry them, so that the population feels that the weapons are, indirectly, their weapon to protect them and help them in the struggle against a regime of oppression.

Support of Contacts with Their Roots in Reality
(their bold)
(This means, Dad, that only a few people can be expected to see the Deep Reality that they see, that think like they do - their reality is the only one. Watch out for the idea of Deep Reality - people who believe that only they have the Deep Reality are more trouble than you would believe because they just won't ever ever see anything different no matter what and who they get out of the way)

ARMED PROPAGANDA
Implicit and Explicit Terror
(their bold)

(Zinger here, Dad -- this is about open carry, I think)(the bold places in the headers are theirs)

Implicit terror always accompanies weapons, since the people are internally "aware" that they can be used against them, but as long as explicit coercion is avoided, positive attitudes can be achieved with respect to the presence of armed guerrillas within the population.

Armed Propaganda Teams

Armed Propaganda Teams (EPA) are formed through a careful selection of persuasive and highly motivated guerrillas who move about within the population, encouraging the people to support the guerrillas and put up resistance against the enemy. It combines a high degree of political awareness and the "armed" propaganda ability of the guerrillas toward a planned, programmed, and controlled effort.

Development and Control of the 'Front' Organizations

The development and control of "front" (or facade) organizations is carried out through subjective internal control at group meetings of "inside cadres," and the calculations of the time for the fusion of these combined efforts to be applied to the masses. Ha- the NRA itself? Don't go there.

Established citizens -- doctors, lawyers, businessmen, teachers, etc., -- will be recruited initially as "Social Crusaders" in typically "innocuous" movements in the area of operations. When their "involvement" with the clandestine organization is revealed to them, this supplies the psychological pressure to use them as "inside cadres" in groups to which they already belong or of which they can be members.

Then they will receive instruction in techniques of persuasion over control of target groups to support our democratic revolution, through a gradual and skillful process. A cell control system isolates individuals from one another, and at the appropriate moment, their influence is used for the fusion of groups in a united national front.

The control of mass meetings in support of guerrilla warfare is carried out internally through a covert commando element, bodyguards, messengers, shock forces (initiators of incidents), placard carriers (also used for making signals), shouters of slogans, everything under the control of the outside commando element.

When the cadres are placed or recruited in organizations such as labor unions, youth groups, agrarian organizations or professional associations, they will begin to manipulate the objectives of the groups. The psychological apparatus of our movement through inside cadres prepares a mental attitude which at the crucial moment can be turned into a fury of justified violence.

Through a small group of guerrillas infiltrated within the masses this can be carried out; they will have the mission of agitating by giving the impression that there are many of them and that they have a large popular backing. Using the tactics of a force of 200-300 agitators, a demonstration can be created in which 10,000-20,000 persons take part.

The combatant-propagandist guerrilla is the result of a continuous program of indoctrination and motivation. They will have the mission of showing the people how great and fair our movement is in the eyes of all Nicaraguans and the world. Identifying themselves with our people, they will increase the sympathy towards our movement, which will result in greater support of the population for the freedom commandos, taking away support for the regime in power.

The tactical effort in guerrilla warfare is directed at the weaknesses of the enemy and at destroying their military resistance capacity, and should be parallel to a psychological effort to weaken and destroy their socio-political capacity at the same time. In guerrilla warfare, more than in any other type of military effort, the psychological activities should be simultaneous with the military ones, in order to achieve the objectives desired.

A guerrilla armed force always involves implicit terror because the population, without saying it aloud, feels terror that the weapons may be used against them. However, if the terror does not become explicit, positive results can be expected.

(their bold) Guerrilla Weapons are the Strength of the People over an Illegal Government

(so I guess if they show a president wasn't born here, then the government is illegal and people can get out their weapons. Scary, Dad, scary.)

(this from a Philippine guerrilla) "The population is always impressed by weapons, not by the terror that they cause, but rather by a sensation of strength/force. We must appear before the people, giving them support with our weapons; that will give them the message of the struggle."

(lots on methods to use)

(their bold) Selective Use of Violence for Propagandistic Effects

It is possible to neutralize carefully selected and planned targets, such as court judges, mesta judges, police and State Security officials, CDS chiefs, etc. For psychological purposes it is necessary to take extreme precautions, and it is absolutely necessary to gather together the population affected, so that they will be present, take part in the act, and formulate accusations against the oppressor.

The person who will replace the target should be chosen carefully, based on:
Degree of violence necessary to carry out the change.
Degree of violence acceptable to the population affected.
Degree of violence possible without causing damage or danger to other individuals in the area of the target.
Degree of reprisal predictable by the enemy on the population affected or other individuals in the area of the target.
The mission to replace the individual should be followed by:
Extensive explanation within the population affected of the reason why it was necessary for the good of the people.
Explain that Sandinista retaliation is unjust, indiscriminate, and above all, a justification for the execution of this mission.
Carefully test the reaction of the people toward the mission, as well as control this reaction, making sure that the population's reaction is beneficial towards the Freedom Commandos.
...................................................

Ok, Dad. There you go. There are a lot of words here, and lots of big ones; but if you print this out, then when we meet (yes, at Happy's) we can mark it up.

Your son,

Nate Rudy Asclater Jr.

PS. Here's Nellie Joy, ha ha

Nellie Joy Asclater. Not really. More Ystad. We had a great time.

I still wish you hadn't put little Nate on your Christmas card. Just not right. Nellie Joy did say, though, when I got her off the ceiling, here, that he did look kind of cute with those buck antlers and all. That's the problem. Mix the cute and the fun with stuff that has a really bad message, and people just fall in line. Open carry. Sounds so "transparent". Implicit terror in it, says the Manual, and that's how they use it. Use you.

Yours,

Nate Jr.

P.S. Free speech means they can set you up. Don't forget that. Here's something about that. It's serious stuff. We'll talk. Mark up the parts that you want to talk about, if any of it. Or skip it.

Voters at Risk. Free Speech. Its Limits. Democracy's Pitfall -- how to tell efforts at truth from efforts to sell.

Free speech is not an entitlement. Noone is entitled to do it any time, in any way. Free speech depends on context, purpose of a proceeding.

Free speech is misrepresented as an entitlement. Where the purpose of the proceeding is justice, there is no free speech. Truth is the goal, through cross examination, credibility analysis, motivation of the speaker, hearsay, etc. Where the purpose of the proceeding is national policy, free speech should be similarly subject to truth as a standard. Truth does not stand alone, a matter of persuasion. It emerges after full debate, discussion, transparency, credibility analysis, motivation.

Courtrooms: restriction of free speech serves justice in application of basic rules of evidence. when important things are being decided, matter. Media is indeed complicit, on the big scale. They control what is put out there, and how it is said, what is omitted, downplayed, body-language of the rolling eyes.

Commercial speech: requires regulation if consumer interests are to be served. There are limits to "free speech" -- regulations to protect the consumer against abuse by sellers. Ideally -- sellers, including banking, to provide truth in labeling, contents, effects, side-effects, no misrepresentation.

Special interests seek to defeat promotion of "truth" and press persuasion instead, is that so? Now special interest media ownership controls the debate by
a) the topics it chooses to cover, including advertising
b) how it does it, and when, and
c) how much time and noise is given to it. Because individuals and corporations with special interests control the debate in those ways, they can control the voters' verdict. If they can keep information away from the jury, spin it enough, the jury draws conclusions without even realizing what is going on.

Democracy's pitfall: Complicit media. How to recalibrate Big Media controls of time, manner and spin when all can be bought:

Needed: Robust financial support for public interest media, even a resurgent form of fairness doctrine, to better ensure full, objective information as part of political Free Speech:

Ensure reliability in the debate function of free speech

Examine the Role of Evidence in a court setting; and its Protections in the interest of a well-informed jury coming to a verdict on life and rights, important matters.

Misguided free speech arguments. That we can hear anything any time. That we can say anything any time. There are times when we do not have free speech, for good reason. Important things are to be decided, and they can't take the risk that people will go off on emotion.
Free speech does not control what the jury hears.
Free speech is tested against reliability, as determined by a judge as arbiter decides each time one side objects to what the other is offering into evidence. Examine the role of "Free Speech" in a non-court, election setting.
There are no Protections in the interest of a well-informed electorate coming to a decision on life and rights, important matters. Free speech allows almost anything to be said regardless of reliability. Needed: consumer protection in political speech.

Duty to Prevent Further Harm: Murder - Inflammatory Speech

2011-01-12T16:27:00.007-05:00

Aggregate Inflammatory Rhetoric.

Who Has A Duty To Prevent Further Harm by Moderating Murder Rhetoric,

Once a Dangerous Pattern of Violence is Reasonably Known:

Does murder rhetoric, over time, in the aggregate, foster a climate of permission, the long-term conditioning of a population to accept the violence as a norm. Remote in time. How far back does causation reach, where the concept is the aggregate of factors create the climate allowing easier acting out, even if a shooter did not specifically hear any specific talk, or see a violent visual. How can that be used by those who seek to shape behavior, see see Tactical Realities at ://world-information.org/trd?trdid=M

Is there a meme process, odd-sounding as it is, where cultural ideas spring memory to memory. How to educate a population about that?

Are the workings of memes, and long-term conditioning techniques, the new "secret knowledge" of politicos and think tanks? Are meme-advisors to politicos culpable? There's an interesting one. Go Rovin'.

.............................................................

I. Is someone culpable for fostering the replication of a known violent cultural meme?

Negligent fostering of climate of permission for violence?

Probably not; but in the aggregate, all who contribute are.
What??

Giffords. Loughner. Who spurred Loughner on. If no individual can be connected, and it appears to be all in his own head, what about memes that people initiate and foster in the culture that make fertile fields for terrible acting out.

Memes: transmission of ideas across a culture, without necessarily an actual contact. Opportunity for Persuasion Arts 101.

Persuasion science. Use labs and focus groups to learn how to probe the psyche, foster responses wanted. Long used commercially, to sell things; and in religion, the group belief system; now politically, to sell ideology. Is there now a "dark arts" or "secret knowledge" of how to make people and groups do what somebody or some other group wants. Do think tanks, for example, hired or developed by certain groups to fashion strategy for group persuasion, use meme "science" for political persuasion: the indirect, the seed-planting, the spam-waving, talk-show weighting, with an idea, put out questions to all the different media focused on it, get it in the wind, but keep it deniable. And avoid analysis of merit. Opinions on it before the facts get out. See Big Persuasion: Democracy's Pitfall, Media Complicit

This may be a new area for American discussion, but not new to science. In the study of genes, of cultural ideas, there is replication in different individuals, the copy-factor, and it does not require direct contact. This area of a duty to prevent further harm is different from a duty to rescue, which is a duty apparently if the watcher had a hand in putting or keeping the one in bad shape, and now watching it play out; or if the watcher is in a position to prevent the further harm,even if not negligently or intentionally causing it to begin with. See Natural Pragmatism: Duties to Rescue and/or Prevent Further Harm. So individuals can be culpable for allowing further harm; does that apply to cultural matters -- does a government that had a hand in allowing inequities and bad situations, get to stand by and not mitigate just because it is "government" and not "individuals". Go, law students, go.

So, look at two grounds of association available between a shooter and a victim, a direct contact; and no direct contact but a speaker letting loose. Which speaker goes free. The speakers or makers of visuals, where the shooter has not had contact with them, but acts according to the meme fostered? Again, new. But the ground of culpability is old. Or must we always find the speakers of inflammatory rhetoric, murder hyperbole, under the circumstances of our national case, whose talk is proven to have been heard and acted upon by a shooter.

In the usual situation, mere time passing can exculpate one speaker from being blamed for effects so much later. But here the national pattern of violence against public figures or persons with whom one ideologically disagrees (a Dr. Tiller, for example) where violent terms had been long in the discourse; is an ongoing one, not established by one event, but by many over time. Pattern. Violence in the aggregate. That makes the speakers as subject to analysis as any other factor, with remoteness or any actual contact, just another element.

A suggested list of sources for the discussion:

The duty to prevent further harm can pass from the original maker of the vehicle defect, to a driver who later is in the best position to prevent further harm. The concept here is who is in a position to prevent further harm, even if the person did not cause the initial problem. Once a bad thing is known, the duty to prevent further harm can move about. See ://h2odev.law.harvard.edu/cases/129/ Here, we know we have vulnerable people in the audiences and in the populations exposed to ideas of violent acting out, assassination as the Glock way. Knowing that what the words say may well be taken literally, or used to fulfill a fantasy, or get "in the wind" as a meme does (this takes some individual looking up because the idea of viral ideas replicating is not as familiar, just think of genes changing on their own, in similar ways, and not having contact), means be careful. Don't stoke it.

Foreseeability as an element. See ://www.fearnotlaw.com/articles/article3084.html/ What is foreseeable about the volatility of a heterogeneous population, all mental states, all levels of sophistication in analysis, when exposed to murder language over and over again in the public forum. Is it foreseeable that some of those people will act out what they hear. Sure. It has happened many times over. And they will act out even without a specific directive -- lots of lone wolves out there in our assassination-attack patterns. Not members of groups. But the ideas are reinforced by questions, by polls, just focusing on a possibility can make it "real" -- and where were you born? How do you know? Memes. Put the issue out there often enough, even as a question, and people will believe there is something to it. Is that so? Foreseeable.

Foreseeability is complex. Does the harm at risk have to be substantial, a big deal, before we hold someone culpable for failing to mitigate. Does language qualify as a causation; when is it not reasonable to hold a great harm caused by mere words; and could moderating language have mitigated. This will take cataloguing the language and the acts that came afterward, words used in public life like killer to describe legislation, bullet justice, targets, baby-killer to describe someone's ideology, leading or not leading to someone killing the one termed "killer", gun remedies, murder, assassination suggestions; and ongoing with a new term -- "blood libel" -- more murder language -- now being thrown back like a taunt at the public discussing roles of speakers in the violence of the country. Using blood libel as a stage two escalation against those who question stage one, which was the visual and verbal gunshot targeting of specific political candidates in politics. For the variables, see a text on torts, and look up the variables at //www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/clr/outlines/torts-sugarman-97.doc/ No easy answers, so appreciate a judge weighing so many variables.

II. Applying all this to culpability for speech:

Weigh Factors: to Assess Whether a Speaker Knew or Should Have Known the Risk

of the Murder Rhetoric, the Targeting of Specific Individuals

Was there:

1. Awareness of a violent climate in the country; its duration (make a list); any increased instance of acting out violence in communications through visual and aural means -- grisly posters, target posters, guns, speeches, language

2. Awareness of the broad spectrum of abilities, mental stability, stresses on a large population, ethnic and economic clashes of interest, fear of loss of position, status if others succeed economically and rise out of their "place", fear of new and different cultures, etc.

3. Awareness of increased capacity for "instant" communications among different groups, lone wolves tapping in or not. Whether directly (tweet me); or by meme.

4. Did the speaker consult with communications "secret knowledge" people, the admen, the PR ones, the Persuasion Elites, who know by now how to sell anything (Edward Bernays is a good one a century ago to start with, to get familiar with the field of persuasion)

And was the effectiveness of using the Meme discussed, and how to use it? Was the politico or talk show person coached to just ask questions to plant seeds, plant emails, plant articles, letters to editors, all that contribute to a growing meme out there that something has basis, has merit, without having to address "merit" to get it off the ground? Were polls manufactured, "Most Americans think Tuesday is Washday." Put that on the talk shows, and watch the water use go up on Tuesday. The chat starts, the wind blows, the idea flows, head after head pops up with it.

Stay with that meme idea:

Yes, the emerging awareness of "memes" -- ideas that replicate without contact, see Richard Dawkins who coined the idea, at Memes, the New Replicators at ://www.rubinghscience.org/memetics/dawkinsmemes.html (showing a chapter of Dawkins' book). Meet the new science of Memetics, and never hear a catchy tune, have a phrase come to mind that you have never "heard" before, but find it is on the internet lots of places, from lots of unrelated Brains. You thought you were original! Fools, mortals. Apply the concept to genes, as the site says -- to ways of making pots -- similarly cropping up in disparate groups -- to wearing a pink hair streak, the ideas just bound about.

None of this takes away from the guilt or adds to the innocence of the actor. Separate concepts. No actor gets off the hook because of a speaker, absent a clear Directive, etc. We are not talking about that.

III. Where next: How to quantify a Violent Climate Formula

Take a diverse nation under stress from a variety of angles, none easy to resolve (no fast inbox to outbox). Add the following quantities, to assess knowledge of a speaker, or what the speaker should have known if knowledge is denied, as to the following factors out there adding to incendiariness of the broad heterogeneous population that is us:

+ increased fear, especially of "otherness", fear of change that is also feared to mean loss of status as superior, loss of money, loss of job, loss of identity, while, if unstopped, others could improve their positions

+ increased instances of violent acting out in the population (ethnic, political ideology conflicts, for example)

+ increased instances of violence in speech and labeling of legislation by public figures

+ increased instant communications, tweets and memes running about, and including chosen focus of airwaves away from "news" and on to gossip and anger about who is doing and saying what

+ increasingly diverse population including growing ethnic groups, recognition of other sexual and ideological orientations, and those Home on Derange, or border, or just whatever

+ virtually unhindered access to the tools of violence; so the choice to do it is easier

= climate fostering acting out and somebody does.

Culpable speaker. How much, what form, TBD. But culpable to some degree. How else to lower the fahrenheits, except by addressing the stokers. This area of a duty to prevent further harm is distinguished from another duty, that is not a duty -- to rescue. See that at Plain Meaning, Third Party Legal Duty of Rescue

IV. For next time

Next steps. Somebody help the nation. Hire some research assistants, those of you in law firms, and firm up the field of duty to prevent harm. Narrow and distinguish and clarify the culpability, if any, of speakers' roles when their (are they dreams coming true? only in Disney) words are taken literally and the shooters we know are out there shoot; or become memes by which that behavior is reasonably expected, given the population. See Vetting Roots. Killer? Change the Name, Mr. Speaker. Is self-restraint silly?

Find out: What consultants and think tanks foster meme-spreading and not objective discussion of merits, as a way of persuasion, like another propaganda technique. All of them. All. Need: WikiSnoops in the Think Tanks. Techniques of persuasion: hiding in plain view, see Tactical Realities at ://world-information.org/trd?trdid=M

Identify who is advising a prominent former public servant

to "defend" against the assessment that she used murder rhetoric
that contributed in some way to a person (on derange? not known yet) acting it out;
not with information about the shooter (nobody has much)
and not with information about how often she said or did what (somebody make a list, because frequency would be important)
but by deny, deny the effect and
just repeating herself -- hollering back with more murder rhetoric, "Blood libel", she touts (had she ever heard of that before accessing Glenn's think tank and the effective use of Rhetorical Beckisms?) after consulting with Glenn Beck in emails that say she decries violence, see those designed for publishing entities, and then ask what happened in phone calls. "Blood libel!" That is an insult to history. Who on any deity's, or combination of deities', green brown yellow blue and black earth, ever suggested to her that, as PR and a gotcha meme, she use an old Christian faked ground of anti-Semitism in the middle ages, to analogize in any way to herself angry because some people think her murder language and visuals added to a national killer climate, and from a very bully (cowy) pulpit in the north. See://www.aish.com/jl/h/48951151.html. PR, memes, the experts.
I'm not a witch.

Teams in Washington. Team Swaddle, Team Herding Cats. Adult Swaddling Comes of Age.

2011-01-05T03:19:00.007-05:00

WikiDC Quick Looks at the Teams in Washington:
Haiku Playbook for the Super Saucer Games
Televised Everywhere That a Nice Sportsy Pub Hasn't Gone Bankrupt.

I. DC SPORTS TEAMS
The Big Game Approaches.
Who's on the field?

Team Swaddle

Coming in now, Team Swaddle
All wrapped up
Newly on top of the heap, is that right.
They like it in the Concrete Retro Bunker.
Everybody tight in there?
Yessiree, Safety in Old-Think.
Look Backward, Diva. Who said that? *

Loyalty oaths screeds
Ritual rigid fear flail.

Swaddle me. Go sleep.

Mutter topic heard

Redstands. You! Get back

Behind your own Wall.

Team Herding Cats.

And now, here comes Team Herding Cats.
They look a little under water,
There in the Submerged Bunker.
Up, Periscope!
A Little Ancient Wisdom needed.
Aah. Who? Rah!
That was a small cheer from the Zarathustran-curious mini-minority.

Means to bounty? Share.
Open mind facts health choices

Opportunities.

Mutter topic: heard

Bluestands. Hostiles' agenda!.

Burn all the bridges!

II. PURCHASED SPORTSCAST
RATER

And what is your prediction,
O Bought and Paid For SportscastRater on the Animal Channel?

Intones the Wise Won:.
All the people shall be tooled.
Except the Toolers.

Mutter topic: heard

Skybox. Keep that Nader out. **

Media chooses.

By the time we give
By the questions gone unasked
Media decides.
--------------------------------------------

* Curious? Zoroaster. Who? Predates your religion, probably, unless you are Zoroastrian. Sing: It's a dual world after all.

Smack-downs in daily life. Choose. Daeva or Ahura. How to know which is which. Ask an ancient source. Have we progressed? Flip the sides? Whose coin. See http://mb-soft.com/believe/txo/zoroastr.htm/ What does Zarathustra see. Divas both sides?

** Ralph Nader, letter to editor, New York Times Tuesday January 4, 2011.

Ralph Nader knows. Fair game or rigged. Ask not who won an election, ask instead who set up the people's choices, and how. How to fog the glasses: Media manual. See ://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/opinion/l04nader.html?scp=1&sq=Ralph%20Nader%20letter%20to%20editor&st=cse

WikiDC. Wiki Prefix. WikiMeander. Dems Suddenly Wiki

2010-12-10T01:30:00.016-05:00

The Wiki and the Dead
WikiDC -
Quick Look at Washington
Lame Duck December Dems Suddenly Wiki Wiki

Wiki Hawaiian idea Quick
Wiki wiki Very quick As in bus ride Uptown **
Or A quickie Wiki wiki Two quickies

Slow quick quick Slow quick quick.
What word for slow November Dems.
November Dems nonWiki

Dems Wiki Wiki dreams aloud the dance instructor
Gliding, hand lightly at back Of another
Dip

Who's quick
Anybody not dead
Wiki DC Al Repeat

Wiki Wiki Hawaiian. Barack the Obama.
Wiki Wiki Howa'ya Brooklyn Chuck the Schumer.
WikiDC. Quick look at Washington
All the dirt comes out in The Wash
Washington Watch.

Dance. Not Wiki.Economy Wallflower Waits.

Not Wiki ***
Economy wallflower. Not Wiki.

Dems suddenly December. December Dems
Just can't stop WikiWiki Update
Always needed. Change.
..........................................................
* Etymology of Wiki. Meaning. Dictionary people explore the origins of wiki, the prefix in correspondence with Chief Coiner Ward Cunningham, identified as a programmer at the time. See etymology of Wiki ://c2.com/doc/etymology.html

** Not Wiki.
This bus.

VegaTour, Geneva, Switzerland.

Wiki bus for veggies. The bus: Europe Road Ways Lite

*** The once and no longer Wiki deceased: Rests in admirable transparency at Sonderborg Castle, Denmark

The Lame Duck, Wolf Pack, Bestiary Ball is Here. Meet the Guests.

2010-11-19T15:43:00.009-05:00

Washington DC Politics
.
The Lame Duck
Wolf Pack
Bestiary Ball

Concepts
.

Lame Duck. That is the limited time between old elections, and when the newly elected take office down the road. The phrase stems, according to the BBC, from the English idea of one who cannot pay his debts merely waddling off; or Abraham Lincoln who is said to have said (to be vetted) that a lame duck is one that simply has to be provided for. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11739875/

Lame duck. Leeds, England

With the new Congress made up of largely members of the Wolf Pack, see KNGDV. Tainted Founts. Dominion: Worst Concept in the World,

how will they celebrate?

Wolf Pack. This is the Wolf Totem Pack, those who follow the behavior of the chosen Totem. See the belief system (and that includes ours traditionally, see FN 1) that ascribes traits to animals, and sees the animal world as here to instruct us, we learn from them, they are not just to be exploited and a source of profits. See FN 1. What happens, then, when the Wolf becomes the Totem animal or spiritual guide of the political group in power? The Wolf Totem Pack goes to Washington!

Bestiary. No, not bestial. Bestiary. This is the medieval collection of illustrations of animals in their teaching role, setting examples, having messages for us. Some are fanciful, others are represented naturally. See FN 3.

And Have a Ball

The House of Representatives opened its doors to fete the outgoing and incoming members of Congress; and the other members of the Executive and Judicial branches of government. With the Wolf Pack in charge, with its legendary attributes, how will the totem tote?

The House of Representatives looks especially nice these days.

Crazy House, Sopot, Poland *

There were pat-downs at the door. Of course, all the bad stuff was already in the kitchen cupboards, nobody brings bad stuff in as invitees any more, but it takes time to stay current. It took ages just to put this in place, and look at what it cost, and now they say nobody will make it necessary. Go, mailman!

Grand Masters, Malbork PL

Pat-downs are hazardous duty. Note the fellow, foreground center, with one hand, and the line is still long. Men in skirts were encouraged to attend.

Detention centers?

The Failed-the-Pat-Down Holding Pen. Kudowa Zdroj, PL

This is from the last time. Now: the guests --
.

John Boehner never moved. PL roadside.

Mr. Boehner picks a spot and won't budge.
.
Round barns as inspiration.
.

Round Barn as a Press Room: central feeding trough, all present put out the same stuff. VT USA.

The reporters all face in to the same provided chow bin, no further investigation of choices, no choices,eat of it what they like, and then it all comes out the other end in their reported journals and tweets. They eat what they are given. Note, no windows for independent investigation. Nobody bothers anyway. News is just entertainment anyway.

News. Rosy for US. Foreign countries still there.

Business on Hold.
.
What happens to the Country's business during Lame Duck. Thinking people would prefer that any outstanding arms treaties be ratified and signed fast. The recalcitrant resident Bear says no way if credit goes to the other party for acting in the nation's interest.

Lame Duck Interim Opportunity. What? The treaty is still open?? Heh heh. Our back yard bear

And these are from our old stuff. Prints of people.

,The President continued negotiations with foreign nationals, as is his job. And he does it well.

A master of non-plussery, is our President. And we are pleased. Can't change Washington in 2 years. Shall we say, another 100 is more reasonable? Or that it won't change for anybody, anytime, anywhere, because -- oh, think of the cash gone by....

The Minority Whip and Majority Leader fandango.

Nancy is light on her feet, or heavy when she needs to, and knows how to get the job done. Harry is deceptively quiet-spoken, and weights options with care. Both aimed right for each other for this one opening number. The majority Wolf Totem watched. They should be nervous, right? Here are Omegas who aren't going to stay there. Says Nancy, says Harry, we have our Eyes on the Alphas, even the Betas! Nobody gets to be an Omega! See http://www.manataka.org/page291.html ; and http://www.manataka.org/page236.html#WOLF *

.
Now, for fear.

Fear. Wolf Totem Pack plants it in the mind.

"Oh, what is to become of us?" cried the busloads inculcated by Armey. "These people look different! They will take away our toys that we got with our inheritances!" Wake up, said another voice. That is all a figment. Just a figment. Now, get real.

Weck up to thees! said another voice, outside the bus, gone before identified but the computers all went down.... (http://www.epinions.com/review/Gates_of_Fire_by_Steven_Pressfield/content_36435103364)

snuffle snuffle

Say the fearful: Execute anyone who breaks an immigration law!

Is that what I hear? In essence, sure. But what if you let me in, and said it was ok by paying me, and giving me a place to stay while I was picking the crops for you?

Hang 'em high! came the response from Arizona and its minions.

Rove looked pleased.

He likes to let his little light shine. He likes people doing as they are told. He likes to buy: things like ads for what he wants to have happen, and people who buy into them. Then, he buys the people.

It's Fox! It's Fox!

Who let them in? Oh, they own the place? They own the people? They own the people who write about their people?

The Girls on Fox. Rechurners.

Not an original analytical thought among them. Is that so? But ooh, the clothes. Now to the content: http://www.mediamatters.org/research/201006160017

Marriage Defense Organization

But marriage only became a sacrament in the 1200's. And that was only to control the harpies. Update http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/opinion/for-priests-wives-a-word-of-caution.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=priests%20wives%20catholic&st=Search What's the deal? Do we have it right? Look it up. S-a-c-r-a-m-ent... oh, you know. These folks aren't happy looking, are they.

One of the Supremes. Guess.

His wife likes phoning.

Mitch, relaxing

That is a smile? If so, we are grateful for it. Not for much else, say folks who wonder why ideology is more important than sustenance for those who didn't get big inheritances. Why don't we take away that "entitlement" -- people get so dependent on those inheritances. Takes away their drive to produce on their own, is that so? Inheritances breed dependence. Stop inheritances! What, says Mitch? I said that?

Majority Role Model for Wolf Pack Public Relations. Pizzaro, Trujillo, Spain. The one on top.

Beware the bigos there. Get your bigos earlier in the tapas hour.

Tea party, waiting to see if the Right Establishment does as the Right Establishment is told.

Some folks just have to tell other folks what to do.

Others just have to follow.

Armey. Did the people really know where he was leading?

Then, again, they knew they were getting freebies, and how can you look ungrateful, and it does soften the brain for the ideology bit and the placards, also for free.

The Issues: Never an in-between.

And only one way to get there. Ours. Stay in line or else.

Status of immigration reform, Majority view. Not reality as to the attributes of fellow on the right (see fantasy basis, above). But try to tell them that.

.

And, our fave. Among the guests is:

Cheney

Always another opportunity to take advantage of. Money to be made! Nobody will complain if they get some of it.

Take aim, Dick. Good aim.

The private, majority-only playground at the House

This playground area may be an adjunct to The Family, with favorable rents, ask Jeff Sharlett, but the paperwork is too hard to follow. Who makes the playgrounds possible?

Some outsiders want in, but flip their parasols too soon.

Ow-w-w-ooOHHHHOOOoooo. The Wolf Pack howls again.

You asked about unemployment benefits?

Ha. Take that. No jobs is no excuse. Nine million jobs lost in the last decade before the New Regime, and you complain? Do we have it right, or was it 8,000,000? see ://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-jobs-lost-in-the-bush-and-obama-administration-2010-2

Those sent packing ....

And perhaps content. Perhaps not. Watch the talk shows.

Some are waiting for next time. Run, Harry!

No sharin' anything with that one.

No sharin' anything. No change anything even for the better for more people? Never. I got mine, says the Wolf. Stonehenge.

And that's the way the power shifts. Changes, changes. Wolf Pack in Washington. Again.

Another day, more silliness.

Democrats reload. Marsala, Sicily

Who is more pro-life than this? Yup.

...........................................................................

FN 1. The medieval Bestiary and traditional Christianity
.
A bestiary, in the middle ages sense, was a collection of illustrations, of animals displaying their traits, and in roles in secular and religious tales.
.
Christianity -- instruction, models. Animals do that. Job 12:7-10. See The Medieval Bestiary, at ://bestiary.ca/intro.htm (translations vary):

"But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish of the sea inform you. Which of all these does not know that the hand of the Lord has done this? In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind."

This puts Job in line with Native American spiritualism and other belief systems that value 1) unity of life forms, mutual benefit and restraint, and see 2) each form of life acceptable in a total ecological-creational systems, as strengthening and proper. See the KNGDV Tainted Founts, Dominion, site below.
.
FN 2. Wolf Pack. The Danger of One in Dominion.
.
What to expect? Look to the totem.Those belief systems also see dominion of one life form over another so as to exploit, as weakening and wrong. Dominion instead means, guide the creation as the god, dominus, domine, domina, would. See KNGDV. Tainted Founts. Dominion: Worst Concept in the World. Instead, reject all that. Do what you want when you want without repercussion or responsibility to others. Run, prey, run. The Wolf Pack is back. Bring on the profits, Job, with a long "o" or no Job, whatever makes a buck, people or animals -- you pick.

Still, there are vestiges of a more perfect world.

Relationship. People and animals. relationship?

.
.....................................................

* The Crazy House, Sopot, Poland. We were there when the leaves were out, hiding its wonders behind foliage and more foliage. No photo for us. Just a laugh. Then this leaves-are-down view came by email viral photo, to us among thousands perhaps, not even identified as to photographer or the subject itself. This is indeed the Sopot Crazy House we saw.

A Study in Certainty. Fox Meets the Sea -- of Color, of Nobodies. Corporate Bottom Lines to the Bunker

2010-10-21T11:47:00.012-04:00

An Illustrated Essay-Play on Certainty.
Political, Religious, Cultural Superiority.

Man Meets the Sea
White concrete, at Esbjerg, Denmark.
Here: One of the Four.
Statue set by Sven Wiig Hansen.

The Topic: Certainty

Certainty.
Certainty Day by Day.
A Mind-set Evolves. And a Demographic.

I. DISCUSSION BEFORE THE PLAY BEGINS:

November Three Update. Considering Certainty the day after a big sweep election to the Manus Dextra side. Certainty carries the day. What does Certainty look like. Tea Party Certainty looks mostly moneyed over-55 white male. See ://www.digitaljournal.com/article/289821/ But the pictures of who gets off the corporate-funded buses look also female.

Manus Dextra. The Right. The right hand. Manus Sinistra. The Left. The left hand.

Meanings:

The Left carries a nasty association not suffered by the Right: the Left Hand as the Manus Diabolo, the Devil's Hand, see ://www.proz.com/kudoz/latin_to_english/art_literary/401487-the_righ_hand_the_left_hand.html/.
The Right carries a merrily blessed association not enjoyed by the Left -- right as a "Moral" idea. The Right Thing. The Right Stuff. Striving for the Right, says the him. Ambiguous concepts both.
When is the right right. That is a matter of Certainty. When is the Left left out. Now. No ambiguity there. But wait: Even that is not certain. Left out -- is not down and out, not all out.

Did Certainty help the Right? Not in the short term. The most Certain of the extreme-sweepers on the Manus Dextra have, by being so certain, prevented a full takeover. At the same time, those of us on Manus Sinistra are indeed Left -- out. Left out more than we were before.

Even that is not a matter of Certainty. Some Rights will right themselves, lending balance to the progress; just as some Sinistras veered Dextra from time to time. So the Left is not all out, not down and out, but with all the Certainty now in charge, the canoe will now paddle itself in a circle the other way.

How easy it must be to be Certain. No choices to make. No responsibility. Not like the Left Outs, always considering and reconsidering, and considering any side that pops into view. With uncertain results.

Certainty. See it at ://plato.stanford.edu/entries/certainty/. Find that the value of certainty is hard to capture, and erodes over time. Certainty worked and works in the short run, and 1) so long as people do not take the time, or develop an interest, in vetting facts independently from the group; 2) where an authority has conditioned people to receive and believe, and 3) the targeted people form like-minded Certainty groups to repeat those ideas and force their members to stay within them; and 4) where the ideology promises to restore status, riches, social and power entitlements now seen unjustly at risk.

So where does Certainty live when it's at home? Try Fox, at subgroups of political parties, at our own homes when some folks come in, in our institutions.

Have some fun with it at ://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/certainty.html/ Fair use little portion of the total entries: From a William Gibson, writer, man of many hands, see ://williamgibsonblog.blogspot.com/

QUOTE And, for an instant, she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human. UNQUOTE

Certainty is a mixed bag. It also bites back It is a tool of propaganda, whether in religion or politics, and a longstanding set of techniques that were of concern in WWII. See ://www.propagandacritic.com/. Repeat, create a bandwagon effect, repeat some more. The techniques are still there, and evolving, effectively and with cash. The difference now is that those who warned us of propaganda in WWII are using it now. People are uneducated as to how to defend. Watch what you eat, the nutritionists say; but no-one warns of the brain-erosion of propaganda. Propaganda? Not today, they say. This is just free speech. Maybe so: but it can and should be highlighted and defenses offered.

What does Certainty do to the rest of us. A foot on a neck is Certain. Is there full recovery from it for that person, or is a person once trod so wary and appalled afterwards, that she can hardly breathe. How do the Certain stay Certain. Is all Certainty a stage? Is Certainty an Entitlement to those with Certainty? What do the Certain say, do. What is the role of the bunker. What catch-phrases emerge, obliquely. Have a little fear with your stroganoff? Examine the figures as Corporate Certainty. Moral certainty. Status certainty.

Voice Ad Dextra:

Beware the tinted ones, my sons; 

The ones that seek, the ones that move.

Beware the nobodies who reach

Who have designs on your bottom line .... 

Voice Ad Sinistra:

Don't listen to that voice behind the curtain. It's safe out there. Extend a hand! Hold a hand! Give everybody a hand! manus dextraHola!

Hola? Hola? What's with the Hola, says the Right, paddling Wrong. Extend a hand nuthin'. You're on your own. We don't mean you. Out! Tilt.

____________________________________________

II. THE PLAY

A Small Play About Certainty

Certainty Meets the Sea of Color, of Nobodies *

Certainty day by day.

Act I

Scene 1.
Certainty In the morning.

Certainty. Morning View.

(silence) (no contrary facts admitted)

_____________________________________

Certainty Day by Day

Scene 2.
Certainty At Lunch.

Certainty. Noon view.

Are we missing one? Did someone dare defect? Who's that over there? We don't care. He doesn't count.

_________________________________________

Certainty Day by Day.

Scene 3.
Certainty In the Evening.

Certainty. Evening view.

Regrouped. Nobody defected after all. In the mornin', the evenin', ain't we ....

__________________________________________

Certainty Day by Day.

Scene 4.

Certainty In the Wee Hours.

Certainty, wee hours view. The Bottom Line.

Stay on message. Just think: They don't even know who we are. But they hear us. They will believe.... and we shall sit unchallenged by the nobodies, on our bottom lines.

________________________________________

Certainty Day by Day.

Act II

Certainty and The Reveal

Certainty. The Reveal. The View to Fear

No, No! Not that! say the big fellows on their bottom lines. Not the View to Fear. Aargh. Look what's coming. Little people! Nobodies! Uncontrolled consumers! Coming ashore. From The Sea. The sea of color. The sea of nobodies.

__________________________________________________

Certainty Day by Day

Act III

Certainty In the Bunker

Certainty in the end times.

Whew. At last we are safe.
In our little bunker
Taking comfort in our collective Fear.
Now for the Bunker Stroganoff:
Did anybody remember to bring it?
Avez-vous du stroganoff?

(Cosmic Echo intones from the Cloud:)

Certainty yields not, neither does it vet.

Certainty repeats itself until it believes what it says. 

Certainty hides its face
Lest its objectives be revealed. 

Certainty takes aim
At those others who seek to mind
Their own moral business.
Or who dare to assert Consumer rights. **
Certainty needs a bunker.
So.

Certainty needs you to stay in the bunker. 

Hola! Heh-heh.

Selah.

............................................................................
* From Esbjerg, Denmark: Man Meets the Sea; white concrete, by Sven Wiig Hansen; and nearby WWII German bunker.

** Purity Creed heard in the background: Certainty After an Election

We are the Titans.

We are entitled;

We are the Titans.

We are entitled; we are the Titans.

We are entitled; we are the Tite....

We ... are ... the ... Tight ....

"I did it. I joined!" Yes, Nate Rudy joins the NRA. PsyOps at Work

2010-08-04T16:33:00.021-04:00

Everyman Nate Rudy Asclater is looking for structure in his life, a focus, a mentor who will care for him. He wants a personal relationship with a leader he can trust to tell him what to do, because times and change are unnerving. He finds the NRA. Better, he finds Ron Schmeits. Let's watch him as he writes in his journal.
.

Nate Rudy Asclater Joins the NRA and Keeps a Journal
.

WEDNESDAY

I did it. I joined the NRA. This is Nate Rudy again and I've decided to keep a journal of my progress. Yes, I joined the NRA - finally. Why? First, it is my own initials - Nathaniel Rudolph Asclater - so joining up seemed natural. I get free monograms, I tell my wife. Now I want their special Education and Training, and the NRA educates and trains just they way they want, and everybody lines right up. Now, that's smart.

My wife here asked to see what I'm doing all this writing for, so I let her - and she asked if she could make a few comments. Come on board, I said. So she did. You know her from before. A few weeks ago, she did A Day in the Life of Nate Rudy Asclater. That was when she was getting a little worried.

She's a little better about my hobbies now, and she also put in some pictures of hers here, to show we can have a sense of humor, and that we can disagree but still have a nice time. You'll like her pictures. Lots of people like her.

But I have another reason to join the NRA. The NRA president is a banker.

I have gotten real suspicious of bankers from the news, and want to see the other side: Is there a banker I can trust, a real banker working for me.

Washington loves-hates bankers. Mostly loves. You'll see. Good to have one at the top.

This Ron Schmeits is the president of the NRA and he is a banker’s banker who knows how to bank. My money is safe with him. I want to see him up close. He is, as I said, president of the NRA and he is going to look out for me as part of that NRA. Read all about it at American Hunter, at ://www.americanhunter.org/articlepage.aspx?id=2597&cid=57/. To get to that article, just pasting the address won't do it. Go to the main American Hunter (it's part of the NRA family) home page, click on News, and then do a search either for International Bank, or for Ron Schmeits. Up come two articles, one a shorter form, the other a full interview. Go ahead.

My wife did that and tried to find out exactly which ones his banks are, and came up nada, so she signed an online petition to pass the see Identification of Resume Activities Act

So Ron Schmeits is a Banker. Would you believe. At the top of the NRA.

Bankers should serve us, the people. We give them our money, don't we? They are smart, too. They should use that also to help their customers. I just bet the whole NRA banks at Schmeits' International Bank.

THURSDAY

Do I mind that bankers know how to run their business so they make lots of money; and they know how to sell? Not really. I trust this Schmeits. He’s NRA. He may be a banker, but don’t fence him in! He’s there for me.

Get it? Ron Schmeits helps people. Has done that a lot. He helped back on the farm as a kid, and learned his hunting and shooting back there in the all-American midwest. Got into college and started right in on banking as soon as his feet and pockets could carry him. Was a bank teller right out of college and saw his job this way: “I enjoy helping people fulfill their financial dreams.”

Did he travel anywhere, join a Peace Corps or do anything that was hands-on helping? Don’t see it, but that’s ok. Bankers if they want to get real good, have to stay focused on that little ka-ching and counting.

Ka-ching. That means success. Yessiree, that’s the NRA. Lots of money coming in, probably in that bank of Mr. Schmeits’, all that helping people fulfill their shooting dreams.

So this Mr. Schmeits then became a loan officer. Now, you know you can trust a loan officer to tell you what’s in that fine print. Thanks, Ron.

He did a fine job in business, they say. “Self-made.” Would like to know more about what he did after he was a loan officer, though. Can’t find it. Is he first vice president or president now of our NRA? I do get confused with all the positions here. Hard to keep the sites straight, see ://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=5644 / I understand he is president of the International Bank – that’s in Raton. What state is that? Hafta ask my wife. She looks things up.

FRIDAY

Let's get on with why I joined the NRA. I see myself in this Ron Schmeits.

Ron Schmeits helps people.

This is what my friend Ron Schmeits likes to do: he likes to serve. He says so. Maybe he gets nice bonuses, or stock option things, and fancy salary, and expense accounts like any other banker. But he likes to serve customers and communities. So he must like that consumer protection stuff, I bet. Get stuff out in the open so regular folks can't be taken advantage of.

He also likes New Mexico and Colorado. Ever done stuff elsewhere? Maybe I’ll move there.

Sheesh. Look at all this dude has done: past this and past that. Past president, chamber of commerce; past city mayor and past president of New Mexico’s bankers’ association. That’s a big one. New Mexico’s bankers’ association. That doesn’t go to a slouch. He’s a banker’s banker!

Wait. There’s more, as the kids joke about TV.

Governor’s Business Advisory Committee (which state?) and he did that four times so he knows politics, and past director of the University of New Mexico’s Mexico Foundation’s Finance Committee (this gets to be a tongue-twister – not even sure I got it right), and chairman of that Whittington Center (what is that? Kids’ shaping training mindsets or something?) Board of Trustees. And he’s on the NRA President’s Advancement Committee. Committee on Advancement. Whose is that? Advancement of cookie cutters, my wife would say. That's when she's not calling me and my friends numb. I'd like this guy, see ://hunterlandowner.wordpress.com/. Kapow.

You'd like my wife. We disagree on lots of things but we got a sense of humor.

Here’s where my friend Ron and me get even more in common.

This Ron Schmeits is a SHOOTER. Get out of the way! He likes hunting and shooting – great sports just as though we were talking about football – but it's lots of fun gunnin’ -- and he includes the whole family. Everybody! Kids, wife, all at home on the range. And their grands. Six of them, all shooters. Bet they got nice bank trust funds. Boy, I gotta live next door to them.

Time for SHOOTING! Woof.

And he believes in TRAINING AND EDUCATION.

He likes kids. Regular kids. Helps them at that Whittington Center. Preserve those firearm Freedoms, says he. And he got elected to the Board of Directors at our NRA back in 2000. And president in 2009. Watch that Freedom word. We'll get back to that.

So he likes Programming. There you go. President. Gotta educate and train, and boost membership, he says. We'll tell you what to think so you don't have to think about it yourself. Fine, I say, good idea. Then they do as they were educated and trained to do for you. The more the better doing that.

Now, Ron says people just don’t understand hunting, and don’t know their rights. He adds conservation now to the shooting.

Heck, we know hunting all right. You hit or wound something, and it either keeps going so you do it again and again, or it falls down, and thrashes around making those screaming sounds sometimes, and looks at you, and the noise, and the blood of it all. We know. Wait a minute. I never actually been on a hunt. Cheryl says animals you hit don't scream. That'd let on where it is, and the next one can come get at it. So you don't have to hear it. Dunno. Whatever. What we learn at the NRA is that that is just fun to do that to something alive. Stop it from living, make it hurt. But hunting to help conservation? Is he for real on that one?
.

SATURDAY

This is going good. Moving right along. That smart Mr. Schmeits didn't take long to use his Banker's Ed. at the NRA. He went on the NRA Finance Committee itself. Big time.

There you go again. He makes the big decisions. Where to put all that money coming in from those ever-swelling ranks of people. Like me. Think of the ads they have to get out. Fancy websites! Who to buy. Who to send in as lobby person. Who to say to vote for, and who not. The NRA Rules! High fives! He’s got a bank right here -- put your money in clear. All will be secret, so what's to fear, ha ha.

Hey, Ron. Who gets what? Think he’ll answer?

Now, between us, I think this guy’s the one that's scared. Scared of his NRA empire suddenly having no takers, I bet. No enemies to fight. Nobody to make a demon out of. No fear!

So Ron is a MARKET MAKER. So he makes up Enemies he warns us about. What if your neighbor doesn’t want you carrying your gun to his barbecue there in the park where he reserved some tables. Hell with him! You got rights.

Ron there says it’s a cancer, this business of saying that somebody can tell you when, where, and how you can shoot and pack. Let anybody tell you that, and you have a cancer growing. You need education and training to see your enemies. Let us help you.

Let me tell you who your enemies are. I promise to do it well. I have been Trained.

Trust nobody who isn’t NRA, I bet he would say. Let one little thing get a rule put on it, and you’ve lost the ballgame. Freedom! He says we have to tell people what we stand for.

Right. Now, what was it again? Protecting rights. Against whooooom? Boom!

Oh, now I remember. Everybody who is not NRA is a loser and an enemy. And we in the NRA stand for members. More of them. Paying members. Land of the numb, says Cheryl. Number$ and Number$ of them, getting number all the time, having a social good time, doing what the NRA says, and not asking questions about its Bank. And each one numb-er than the number before. I always liked playing with words. Cheryl does, too.

SUNDAY

Now, about Cheryl:

My wife Cheryl gets to be a bit of a pill because she's not keen on this NRA - calls them bullies who never grew out of it. She says, how about her freedom to feel safe when she goes out, and not see all those folks carrying. She says they get swaggery when they do. Let a guy get rude and he’s packing, and she’s not likely to say a word. Even I don’t like that. Like the gun’s a dare.

But that's not the point. Training is the big deal. Educate people. Our buddy Ron has to be with all them out there, seeing it's done right. Get out there and school people. Cheryl says NRA means Not Really Altruistic, and I get what altruistic is, and I think they are. They want to help me. Cheryl goes hmph and leaves the room.
.

NRA can make it work for us. They do care. They can find new people to recruit. Soon they'll have to make a new market: What if they run out of hunters. There goes the equipment business!

Here's the new market: personal protection. Just you watch for it -- you'll see ads and spooky music and all.
Another market awaits, as they say. Find more enemies and sell folks on what to do about it.

Now, that’s an important one. Train people to think there are enemies out there, and sure enough, they'll find some to see, or think they see. That power of suggesting something. Put the idea in there, and it goes off on its own. Like national un-intelligence dee-partments. Get thousands of private groups out there gathering the stuff, and nobody knows who's where or doing what, because it's all secret, you see, and after that you have to come up with Suspects! So they do. I read the papers. What you think is what you get.

Cheryl says, get people afraid. That's the game. Then they pay to learn to protect themselves from other armed people they think are after them. Ron here says we have to be aggressive. Even the gun agrees, see Guns Make a Place in LIfe. And in death. Why do I keep thinking these things up?

NRA is pro life! Theirs!

Now, I like that. Aggression. My wife would say, Proactive - sounds like an acne med. Ha. But Ron wants our NRA into those kids’ service groups, to get them early, like Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, 4-H, Future Farmers of America, any youth group we can get our gun butt into. Teach them gun safety, because we want everybody to have guns.There's another whole market right there.

And somebody’s going to act stupid. Can't educate out stupid.

Cheryl just came in again. Leave me be. I'm writing here. Maybe she has a point. The name of the game is to get people numbed, I guess. How else do you kill things. Back to the numb-ers. Numbing education. The Numbing Reprogramming Approach - the new NRA, ha. Just thought that one up. Didn't think I was that smart, did you? Well, I am. It's numb training, and I'm all for it. Lots of kids don’t want to just go out and hurt and kill things. You have to teach them hunting,I think Mr. Schmeits would say, toughen them up, numb them, because that’s what we do.

And another market is words. Market words. People buy. Schmeits can’t get enough of that Freedom word. And how can you talk against it? You gotta bow down! Freedom! Like that Mel Gibson movie Braveheart. Freedom!

We know what it meant then, though. Nobody now says who’s trying to take whatever it is away, though, or quite what it is, or how other folks figure in.

I do have common sense. Lots of people don't. And between us, I do believe that it is common sense to have some limits on when, where and how you can carry that thing and shoot it. Guess not. Guess I’m not just numbed enough! That’s why I joined. I want people to give me respect, a wide BERTH. I’m NRA! And Ron Schmeits is seeing that my money benefits me.

Marketing is what they do these days. How did they get me on board. I just went out that once to try the range. But they do know how to get you on board. Funny thing. As soon as I got there and as soon as I started to have a good time, it was like magic. People started to hit on me. Join them in demonstrating here, doing that, paying to support this, paying to support that. They made me feel they really want me to come back. They get real personal.

They like me. They like me. They remembered my name and laughed at my joke about free monograms. I know they like me.

But I ask myself. Why does Ron have to kill things? If the NRA was founded for skills, that means skills, not the killing at the same time. I do it in my head all the time, but he actually does it. He says he likes being outside. It’s a challenge to kill something, and he’ll kill anything out there, you bet. And he likes the company of his fellow shooters. Male bonding, or interest bonding, my wife would say with her college talk. Hey – kill something and you feel adventurous.

I can see that. Hoo-eee. Get me out of that yard, fast! Who took that picture anyway? Must be crazy to mess with Wild Life.

Shoot the big ones when they're distracted, can't see you, and you are far, far away. You da man!

But the game is Marketing again. Market by using the right words. Skip realities. People don't want that.

MONDAY

How to sell the NRA and conservation, for gosh sakes.

Schmeits says you do good for conservation by buying licenses and tags and paying taxes on your equipment. Heck, we just wanna shoot! Harvest that game! Make it a game. Put a lot of numbed people out there and cull that herd.

Somehow, I’d prefer not to get that pleasure in pain thing going.

Bunny. Bring out the shotgun! Target practice for Nate Rudy!

Pop that bunny! I bet Ron'd say. Right through that old chair there. Ears down. Trying to be little. I see you! Blam!

My wife says, with her college courses, that it's conditioning people not to feel. She says, just conserve with an official conservation person, not make it fun. Fun isn’t what we need to connect to killing.

That’s why I need the NRA. I need my thinking adjusted. I like guns but I need to learn to hurt if people are going to give me respect.
.

Mr. Schmeits likes ORDER.

No free-thinkers need apply! He likes orderly kids who say politely, yessir, and nosir. He likes rank. Kids need more chores, rules at home. So there are adventure camps and YHEC (what is that?) to train them how to behave. The Schmeits Youth! March march, HUP haha. We’re all for kids learning responsibility, but this does sound a little cooky cutter. I agree with my wife there. Training to believe – in, I forgot already.

What did you say? Oh, yes. Freedom.

Freedom is big in the NRA. My wife says, how about somebody else’s life, liberty. Pursuit of that happiness thing. Skip that, Ron would say. We’re the NRA. We count. All the way to that bank, is that right, Mr. Schmeits? Let’s see where it all goes. No, I forgot. I’m not supposed to ask.
.

Maybe I’ll get my own kids out here. Or a neighbor’s. Show them what fun it is. Hey, kids! Be a shooter! Don’t talk; just learn how to threaten.

I need that attitude myself. I let other people talk too much. I need to shut them up.

What’s that domino theory we used to hear about. Let one fall and they all go. That’s how the NRA gets you afraid and doing what they want. We make our own rules, and that is pretty much no rules so long as you are safe and nobody gets hurt. Threatening, no big deal. Grow up. Be a man. Fear. Get fear. Now. But I've read the history of the NRA , that that other group put out that has the same initials, like I do, and I see how they started, and what they do.

I'm still on board. Nothing happens that I, Nate Rudy, doesn't see and approve of. They look out for me. They protect my freedom.

My Mr. Schmeits talks about FREEDOM all the time.

People hear that and get right in the act.

Freedom! William Wallace with Mel Gibson as model; with friend, Stirling, Scotland

TUESDAY

How many times does this guy talk about freedom.

Seems to me like one guy’s freedom to avoid something is imposing on another guy’s freedom to be free of something else. They don’t see it that way. NRA Freedom, that is gun-related, is all that counts.

Why did I join? I need that kind of direction, somebody who is so sure. When in doubt, shout FREEDOM! It’s code for a rally.

So he shares tips on how to kill, and has a whole deal on Freedom and he is “one of us.” I believe that. He wants “to make a difference for the common good.” That means the NRA good, but that’s ok; he’s sure about it.

“I’m the NRA!” he says, and in his head probably thinks, and don’t you forget it.

And now I'm the NRA, too.

Is America safe yet? That last was my wife. Says it's gun culture. She doesn't understand hunting.

This is the journal of Nate Rudy Asclater.

Signing off.

Nate Rudy. Everyman. Nathaniel Rudolph Asclater. Bio.

2010-07-19T21:31:00.007-04:00

Everyman Nate Rudy Asclater is being interviewed at Equivocating Magazine Channel for a series entitled American BackSplash. The introduction is now in progress. The Interequivocator intones, "And now, as the big faucet swivels and the big pots tip, who ends up there on the nice mosaic behind. Soon to dry out. Please welcome our guest, Nathaniel Rudolph Asclater (polite applause). Mr. Asclater ....}

Nate Rudy Speaks.

Everyman.

My name is Nathaniel Rudolph Asclater. They call me Nate Rudy for short. I am giving this interview to Equivocating Magazine because I want my point of view to count. My wife says she'll talk to Fodder instead, because she doesn't see me equivocating about anything, but that's her choice. If you must, see hers at Day in the Life of Nate Rudy Asclater. She has her views, I have mine.

I was born American, I think American, and even though my family was not American before my grandparents, we identify American.

I graduated high school, got some credits at a local community college, my Dad said to go into the plant and get a job fast, but I decided to wait a while. I wanted to see further than my home town before I settled down. So I did, for a while, then got a job at the same plant as my Dad, married somebody from out of town but she likes it here ok, and we have some kids.

Nate Rudy's house. Nathaniel Rudolph Asclater

My pleasures. I like to hunt. Me and my brothers have done that together for years. I feel good with my gun on. Even if I don't have a plan to use it, I like the feel of it. I don't like the idea of hunting from helicopters, though. That's lazy, showy, and the person cheats. Like shooting those buffalo we read about in school, when the person was on a train, or just riding around shooting because it felt good. My gun feels good, but there's more to it than just killing something.

My displeasures. Changing times. Right now, I worry that different people moving in. People that aren't American. My family has worked hard to get what we have, and I don't think it matters that Jim Crow laws prevented other people from getting property and passing it along for 200 maybe 300 years. They have had time now to catch up. And you can't just come across a border and expect to live here. No excuses.

There's nothing worse than feeling you should be getting something, that you are owed, that you deserve because of what you are, and not getting it. I think about that.

I think about how my gun makes me feel. It's part of who I am and what I stand for. My rights. That I can take a stand. Sometimes I wear it in the house. I got it on me now, and you didn't even know it. (pat pat).

I like my Bible as my preacher says it was written. But I don't think about it much.

Nathaniel Rudolph Asclater's house. Room to visit. Nate Rudy.

What I do think about is how to feel that I am strong, that people will pay attention.

We've got room, as I say, if you want to stay over. We're doing ok, but we're kind of nervous about things changing. Kids don't pay attention, can do things I can't with their phones and computers. I feel shown up and that's not right. They should look up to me. People should look up to me. I feel strong when I'm carrying. You know what I mean. Sometimes I show that I have it, sometimes I don't. The idea is, don't mess.

My name, as I said, is Nathaniel Rudolph Asclater. My friends just call me Nate Rudy. Nate Rudy. No easier thing to say. I like things as they were. Folks could get jobs to support their families, right where they grew up, we know who was who and where they belonged, and we got along. Just stay where you oughtter. Enjoy some time off, get away from the kids and all that, retire, and die. Ok by me. Not much for computers and all that. Just tell me what to think, and if it sounds ok, I'll think it.

Tell you this - I do hear about rights a lot, and wonder about people using those rights to threaten other people, or them thinking it does, so I just think about what I could do if I decided to. I just think it. And talk about it maybe, and act a little. But I would never do it.

My wife rolls her eyes when I say that. Gun culture, she says. But I would never act out what I think.

I liked that movie, Inception. How do people get their ideas. It's important to think about that. I may not be educated as much as some, but I think. Don't think I don't. I have the radio on, and the TV, and I learn what's going on. I even like it when I feel a little-itty bit afraid of something. It gets me going. Cheryl says that is Fear Theory.. She gets nervous about me sometimes.

She liked college. Goes her own way.