Gobo's Light

New Yorker: Hagel asending Mccain :Beware what falling tide leaves behind

2008-10-28T15:26:00.006-04:00

. As many republicans certainly know -in spite of whether they've admitted so- Juan McCain treads slightly en route through his campaign for presidency. Such has been obvious since [R-House of Representatives] Dr. Paul raised 10,000 peaceful supporters in Minnesota. Across the river from the RNConvention, Juan McCain's nomination boondoggle, a coalition of organized protesters rallied to hear from their messenger in Congress.

. This sort were drawn from across the nation, Canadians present, who pitched tent &/or carpooling simply to have "been there". Where?, the initiation of the 2008 Neoconservative demise. Their agenda, touted by Juan of Panama, is most certainly a blunder waiting to unfold. Odds are stacked against McCain as leading party sycophants to jump ship en masse, resulting from core conservatives yet to be convince; in all, Juan's weak strategy through the primaries [utilizing friends to snowball support] isn't reverberating nationwide -nor far beyond the drone base who voted for him during the primaries.

. Juan's constant evasion of debate & discussion brought about underdeveloped policies & proposals. Regardless of the nomination, had Juan talked with all GOP contestants -Dr. Paul included- his foreign policy & economic oversight might not be as pathetic & lame. This is no colloquialism, it's literal! GOP operations have fallen out in Michigan [who knows where else]; Mccain/Palin rallies consist of little substance beyond fear mongering; keystone crimson states of old tradition are prepped to vote for the competition, Ohio/Montana/the Carolina's; examples pour out at every mainstream outlet.

. With little more than a week remaining, Juan treads on by inciting isolationist rhetoric directed to a narrow demographic, white-bred crowds in a rabble over socialism & patriotism, slight words used to replace age old racist quips. Centering on Obama's "otherness", weak associations of deviant behaviour, selecting a VP who condescends intellect above 5th grade stamina & a drowning attachment to mercantile enterprise clumsily drive the "Straight talk" campaign. All these will certainly bring about Juan's fall, as it should.

. Yet, for it all talking heads are already propping up the next politicos. It seems, for every attempt failed, contemporary thought through media only gains legitimacy by supporting junk -so long popular consumers bite. By such a measure, the pop princess Gov. Sarah Palin might continue running weeks after the election. Still, in spite of the repudiation of phony conservatives to come, it's been said, no republican seat is safe this coming election [Nov.4/2k8], I know of one congressional district which no DNC campaign will bait, Texas' 14th. Apparently, DNC chairman Gov. Howard Dean knows better than to compete in Paul's district, whose popularity runs a strong 70%+ majority, as indicated in the recent primaries.

. Approaching the coveted Mar. 4 primaries, McCain wanting to seal his nomination & gain access to the RNC treasury, conspired to distract Dr. Paul with a congressional campaign during his presidential bid -despite arrangements for automatic seating- forcing a competition within a waning party. Little more than self-destructive to sinister means, the RNC suggests neoconservatives are prepared to destroy their own in pursuit of self fulfillment; warning all that failing to tow the party line would result in sabotaged careers.

. So, who does the establishment have ready to roll out for the next election catwalk, post-Nov.4? Chuck Hagel has been presented strongly by the influential New Yorker, as has been Palin, by Cheney's gang no less. Obviously Romney/Giuliani/Huckabee still dream -in spite of being discredited by supporting race/sex-baiting Juan Mccain; but more importantly, the R3voLution needs philosophic leaders to rally around. Senatorial & Congressional campaigns haven't been maneuvered successfully yet, though insider talk indicates stronger campaigns two years from now. Other influential party seats have been gained, certainly a solid base to start for a dream. Come 2010, our R3voLution could strike a few seats in Washington, under either establishment party. Remember, they're only teams in a game they've rigged. Independents are important, but change must ultimately come from within. As for Hagel, he is significant because of his reported stance:

On the Senate floor, he declared, “Actions in Iraq must come in the context of an American-led, multilateral approach to disarmament, not as the first case for a new American doctrine involving the preemptive use of force.” He also expressed fear about what he calls “the uncontrollables”[Dr. Paul's blowback!]—the unpredictable consequences of military action—and about America’s limited knowledge of the Middle East. “How many of us really know and understand Iraq, the country, the history, the people, and the role in the Arab world?” he asked. “The American people must be told of this long-term commitment, risk, and cost of this undertaking. We should not be seduced by the expectations of dancing in the streets.” In September, 2004, he called the situation in Iraq “beyond pitiful.”

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_bruck

. Doesn't this sound a little like someone we know? Hagel voted for the war, so his rheological proclamations are weak... but sounded through the right tubes, citizen-voters may be duped into supporting this establishment politician. If nothing else, this ought to spur us to remain vigilant and constantly growing, otherwise, the RNC tide which falls out may leave behind unsavory company.

Egalitarian economics Examined

2008-10-12T13:36:00.001-04:00

Suppose an individual was equal to another as such, in that their worth was undiminished by social preconceptions, establishing their rights at birth. By this standard, we might achieve social standing by personal actions weighted through the public sphere. For such a reality to take effect, condemnation & appreciation of individual action [positive or negative] ought to be fixed on a varying scaled, measured by their relative cost-benefit -equally, across the board with draconian enforcement.

Sadly, extreme application of the theory above would, under current conditions, prove draining and unmanageable throughout society. Heavy handed conditioning begins early, during a child's rearing, so unless early development models aren't trained to improved towards critical-thought, true egalitarianism escaped us by another generation, again.

However, against my better nature, economic fundamentals diminish the ideals of the eqali, with stronger theory, namely the free market. Of course, totally laissez-faire services aren't common -although many exist off the grid. On a gradual scale, a market becomes freed when entrepreneurial individuals place risk before gain, to achieve success. Conversely, closed markets become more prevalent when gain is placed before risk, so that central planning dictates what is necessary and what is valuable.

[eqali - n. those who exists as equals amongst their peers]

In free markets, an individual might risk their savings, investing in an idea or product so that they may approach the market, exchange within it, and profit while benefiting both parties. The challenges of engaging the market are elastic, variable and fickle, to say the least. However, succeeding in this environment provides the greatest reward; financially, often the pursuit also allows for greater investment upon social development.

Ultimately, entering the market requires acknowledging four factors, defined as: price, the negotiated value of a given product by buyer & seller; product, development and production of said item which is marketed with purpose; distribution, providing the means by which to facilitate an exchange between manufacture and end-user; finally sales, the manifest process of transaction.

With these challenges, it becomes apparent to anyone attempting to enter free-market enterprise that the fewer invasive obstacles placed before the entrepreneur, the less strenuous maintaining a venture becomes. Strains upon a business venture are those which inhibit competition, growth and productivity.

These may take form in unfair legislation, such as mandating all hotels use identical sprinkler systems, regardless of size or structural capacity. Not only would this close the local market on sprinkler systems in the clutch of few businesses, but it would also overburden unprepared unnecessarily, where another safety measure might prove more cost effective.

Taxation leeches from growth when it become apparent to management that greater revenue means a greater loss to government demand. That is, if it means profiting more equals a larger percentage of revenue being, individual ambition to achieve greater is diminished. Underachieving is promoted by burdening success.

Again, intrusion upon the market, by outside sources [e.g. government, but not consumer watchdogs] often -if not as a rule- leads to concentrated management of production and distribution, so that here must function like there, regardless of capabilities and demand. When in fact, local market expectations and availability ought to decide how business gets done.

So, while there is hazardous cost to forcing the market into anything but what is possible & necessary, there are those who seek to level the playing field, per se, by facilitating regulations that claim to manage the market's factors [preventing this natural advantage of location or that benefit of cheap labour] actually dilutes the strength of commerce.

It is often thought, minimum wages, public works or subsidized prices benefit the neediest in society; however, it is my belief that these very policies perpetuate poverty and struggle. While establishing a claim upon the market is difficult, made none easier by precocious regulations, the incentives wrought easily make up for any mental challenges required to succeed.

In my next discussion I will attempt to repudiate socialist tokens of common-sense, defend social class against egalitarians & tell you why the centralized management breeds despair.

Till then, tread conservatively & live liberally

Gobo

Brown Bear Fur...

2008-02-21T19:57:00.007-05:00

...as hair crest upon a skull
of flesh, blood, circuitry and sweat.
From regions near we pulsate our
existence; sensation liquidating luminescence
emitting reality as response; imagination
covering the corners of despair, seeking exits
from an inescapable hive. Disperse appeal
upon ambition, towards disdain embrace stone
eyes. Without efface, we collect exemption,
from solitude shaded upon sanctity. Alone we
last, within seclusion; no luxuries of
simplicity. Such that to eat, to bathe, to
sleep, to wake, to work, to read and write
of our own ambition is stolen away by
procedures and timetables, dictum of a system
out of touch with its sinners. Thus, 'hope' of potential
decays by day, lasting till the lady waves her staked
gravel of justice, gory grins behind gray vise letting
up only when the bar is passed and the pages are
stained with ink.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [01]

2008-02-15T20:46:00.010-05:00

A Constitution to call our Own, Canada's Charter, Preamble - Article 6

Calling out a signal to loyalists of sovereignty everywhere, especially those of Canadian soil. I would like to produce an often under looked -lesser understood- document that matters to all. Writing not in protest nor objection, rather to brief & refresh those who seek an alternative prospective on liberty. While this document seeks to retain complete accuracy, errors are likely to occur; if not by my hand, perhaps subject to document sources. Regardless, enjoy.

In body, the Canadian Constitution, as enacted in 1982, consists of thirteen major bodies and/or 34 sections/articles + 1, which I'll come to explain in due time. Known to be the standard bill of rights to Canadian groups, it succeeds the Canadian Bill of Rights [J. Diefenbaker, 1960] which was more a federal statute -rather than a constitutional letter- held highly ineffective by many. This fine document was brought together by the late P.E. Trudeau, who sought to lessen dependence from the British parliament.

In body, the Charter details fundamental Rights ranging from equality to mobility. While each body may be taken at face value, an amalgamated understanding of the entire document is necessary when considering the judicial processes granted to Canadians, and aboriginals, nationwide. In contracts to the U.S. Constitution, the Charter applies specifically to government action and law [federal, provincial, municipal, etc] not private activity. However, it does bind all those who are physically present in Canada, with rights civil and political. Most can be exercised by any legal person, save corporations; while, Sections 3 and 6 regard citizens only.

Forthwith, I will attempt to decipher and illustrate the range of Canada's law of the land.

Preamble
"Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:"

Interpretation
Describes Canada's foundation as one upon God's supremacy and rule of law. Though not constitutionally effective, as it undermines the removal of religion from law as dictated in Section 2], it does provide a template from which one could interpret the later body of the letter. Whereas, the ambiguous "rule of law" must be placed within context of "God", whether that be the Judeo-Christian god of the Canadian founders or the divinity of humanity is left to the interpreter to decide.

Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms
"1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

Interpretation
1. In which the document in question cites its own authority, protecting the people it binds inasmuch as it does not supersede reasonable free/democratic society limits of law. This I hold protects individuals given they do not infringe on the rights of another, within legal reason. Example, my practice of faith is protected as long as my worship does not hinder the liberties of my neighbour.

Fundamental Freedoms
"2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
a) freedom of conscience and religion;
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
d) freedom of association."

Interp.
2. Nationwide, any/all residents are entitled to:
[a] freely exist and worship as they choose; enables atheism and abortion, controversial in that conscience is highly intangible and only manifests itself when individuals choose
[b] free thought/belief/opinion/expression including free press & any medium of expression; enables democratic processes to occur without hindrance
[c] free assembly, see section 1 and 2.d
[d] free association, e.g. unions and organizations

Democratic Rights
"3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.
4. (1) No House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for longer than five years from the date fixed for the return of the writs of a general election of its members.
(2) In time of real or apprehended war, invasion or insurrection, a House of Commons may be continued by Parliament and a legislative assembly may be continued by the legislature beyond five years if such continuation is not opposed by the votes of more than one-third of the members of the House of Commons or the legislative assembly, as the case may be.
5. There shall be a sitting of Parliament and of each legislature at least once every twelve months"

Interp.
3. Citizens are enabled to vote for government members, in a open democratic manner in which no third party interest interfere; and become one themselves
4. 1] House elections are required every five years
2] 5yr exceptions in case of war/invasion/insurrection, provided 1/3 House pass motion
5. Parliament must sit at least once in 12 months

Mobility Rights
"6. (1) Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada.
(2) Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right
a) to move to and take up residence in any province; and
b) to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.
(3) The rights specified in subsection (2) are subject to
a) any laws or practices of general application in force in a province other than those that discriminate among persons primarily on the basis of province of present or previous residence; and
b) any laws providing for reasonable residency requirements as a qualification for the receipt of publicly provided social services.
(4) Subsections (2) and (3) do not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration in a province of conditions of individuals in that province who are socially or economically disadvantaged if the rate of employment in that province is below the rate of employment in Canada."

Interp.
6. 1] Citizens have right to leave/stay/return to Canada
2] Canadian citizens and permanent residents have right to:
[a] find residence in any province
[b] obtain employment
3] Rights from above subject to:
[a] laws/practices in force province-wide other than those discriminating persons on the basis of present/previous provincial residence; and
[b] laws providing reasonable residency requirements as a qualification for the receipt of publicly provided social services [e.g. health care, welfare, etc]
4] Subsections [2/3] do not preclude any law/program/activity whose object is the provincial improvement of individual's conditions in said province who are socially/economically disadvantaged if the provincial employment rate is below Canada's employment rate
>Section 6 is one of the less ambiguous articles, really straightforward and comprehensive. While I have little commentary now, the future may provide further discussion.

Here I end this blog entry, not for lack of want, but rather for the reader's benefit. A drawn out entry, pages long, is a greater deterrent to thorough reading than poor literacy. As the Charter is a lengthy letter, I will return to discuss it further in a later post. If nothing else, a return session will ensure a revived mind... both yours and mine.

Till next time, keeping you in suspense, Gobo.

Disseminating Ron Paul

2008-02-13T20:04:00.004-05:00

Acknowledgments

Herein is presented a summary of A Foreign Policy of Freedom 'Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship' authored by Dr. Ronald Earnest Paul, published in 2007.

The purpose behind the dissemination of Dr. Paul's message to humanity, in a quick and simple presentation, is accessibility to a profound message. While Dr. Paul provides an unrelenting inspiration against the temptations of wealth and power, it is often difficult to make sense of his seemingly outrageous philosophies of nonintervention, sound currency and individuality. Thus, I present his message condensed so at to make it accessible to a mass audience -especially to anyone interested in Liberty.

While every attempt has been made to retain the original intent of the author, discrepancies may arise; these I hope will be discussed and debated, slander is undesired. Students and supporters of the good doctor, as well as every member of humanity, are invited to share and comment upon these efforts. Only through discussion and analysis can we extract the substance behind these philippics against inconsistency and immorality.

Regardless of how the current 2008 Presidential Campaign results, the vibrant message of Dr. Paul cannot pass into the shadows, least we hope to proceed further into tyranny and manipulation -today or in the future. For this reason, it is important we all familiarize ourselves with our heroes message, for only truth can set up free.

V. Perez

Chapter 3

2008-02-13T19:58:00.005-05:00

"We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex." -Dwight D. Eisenhower

*****

Stage often set for intervention in "non-binding" resolutions. U.S. making dangerous commitment to Lebanon.

June 17, 1981
Lebanon: Another Commitment?

House Resolution 159 passed unanimously yesterday, rightfully so.

Parts urge peace in Middle East, praise character of Philip Habib. No problem with these.

Towards end of resolution some words require debate, not quick senses-of-Congress under unanimous consent, as previous resolutions have meant trouble.

H.R. 159 states:
Resolved, H.R. strongly supports diplomatic efforts to resolve crisis in Lebanon, encourages president to pursue comprehensive coordinated policy, including development of effective cease-fire, resolution of Syrian missiles issue, promotion of independence, sovereignty, unity, territorial integrity of Lebanon.

Since when is U.S. guarantor of Lebanon? Promises require troops & billions of tax dollars.

Solve Syrian missile issue by force? Use our troops to patrol cease-fire?

Overboard resolution, sponsored by Foreign Affairs Committee, seeds within possible trouble for U.S. Congress should not have considered it, Members hardly had time to read it.

Less meddling in internal affairs of other nations needed, not more. Resolution could be used to justify unknown dollars & lives in future conflict or peacekeeping operations.

H.R. 159 bad resolution, brought up without sufficient time to study implications. Not in country’s interests, should not have passed.

*****

Oct 14, 1981
Untitled

Oppose sale of AWACS airplanes to Saudi Arabia. This sale of the least objectionable, so often we give weapons away, very expensive; in comparison, this sale less objectionable.

Complain and object to, think Americans agree, being supplier of weapons for everybody. AWACS for Saudi today, also providing 1,177 Sidewinder missiles for planes already purchased from us. Very possible missiles will be used against American-built airplanes in another country, just as AWACS will be shot down this decade by American-built planes. For this object, policy should be consistent to provide security for this country & not police the world, providing weapons for everyone.

For instance, last several decades U.S. helped build trucks Russians used to invade Afghanistan; Corps of Engineers built the highway in Afghanistan they marched upon. We give weapons to Greece & Turkey, together they fight. We propose weapons to Pakistan, yet aid India. They’re likely to end in battle, as sworn enemies.

Look at policy; decide whether or not to be supplier of weapons, protector, policemen of world. Some suggest reason is protection of oil supplies. Yet statistics find 5% total energy needs come through Strait of Hormuz. Japan depends 100% on imports, Europe nearly as much, yet their responsibility in Mid-East negligible. Why must American soldier/taxpayer assume this great risk/burden? Continual policy of intervention will again drag America into unnecessary war.

First, sale more agreeable than outright gift, but important to point, not clean sale. Example, administration reports AWACS will be manned & operated by American servicemen, which means further & permanent involvement in Mid-East. Some sought to reassure Congress saying, AWACS remain under American control –far from reassuring. Rather, likely lead to escalation of American involvement in any altercation within Mid-East. Permanent military makes commitment, explicit or not, we may soon regret.

Second, danger of sophisticated technology falling into enemy hands; Mid-East volatile region, especially following assassination of President Sadat of Egypt. Shah of Iran supplied with our latest weaponry, to shore up government, but fell away. Those sophisticated weapons & radar installations possessed by Khomeini, if reports true, shared with Socialist & Communist Govs. Dare we risk same with AWACS? Soviets have nothing comparable. Fundamental mistake thinking weapons will shore up government. Iran exemplifies, it is not weapons but ideas.

Believe Americans sick & tired of supplying, deliberate or accidental, both conflict sides since WW II. This happened in Vietnam, U.S. shipped wheat and weapons to Soviet Union, who in turn shipped to North Vietnam, while we shipped wheat & weapons to South Vietnam. Seen between India v. Pakistan boarder wars; between Israel v. neighbors; now again in the Mid-East?

Reason for policy, must maintain balance of power. Cannot this happen by not supplying either side with sinews of war, rather than both? Cannot power be balanced–without U.S. involvement–by staying from the situation?

How much commitment in this sale? Building airbases for AWACS? We will maintain & furnish replacement parts, how far does commitment stretch, 90-day or 90-year warranty?

For this, believe best interest to disapprove sale of advanced technology & weapons to Saudi Gov, urge colleagues do same.

Chapter 2

2008-02-13T19:55:00.004-05:00

"I hope our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be." -Thomas Jefferson

*****

Ongoing crackdown in Poland, funding oppressors, yet again our focus.

Aug 22, 1980
Workers of the World, Unite

Striking Factory & dock workers -whose leaders were arrested by Communist regime in Poland- admired for courageously defying dictators controlling country. Certainly American sympathy is with workers protesting injustice & lack of freedom in "workers' paradise" for 35 years.

What of the Federal Gov? While Americans sympathize with Polish people, American government supports Polish government.

Example, from end of WW II until 1978, Federal Government loaned & gave Communist Poland $677 million. 1979, Fed Gov granted Polish regime additional $500 million in loans & loan guarantees. Journal of Social & Political Studies published: “The availability of these Western credits is probably relieving the Soviet Union from the expensive task of propping up the Polish economy.”

Poland is deeply in debt to Western countries, including U.S, for propping the Polish economy. Current debt estimated at $20 billion. Has not yet repaid WW I debts, present Communist Gov has no intention either. Why subsidize Communist Poland? Whose side is U.S. Gov on, Communist or workers?

Believe in consistent foreign policy of nonintervention in others’ affairs. Certainly not subsidizing dictatorial regime not support by own people. Outrageous that American taxes pay to prop up Communist Gov. Legislation, H.R. 3408 would end such foreign subsidies. Irrational policy of subsidizing those who hate freedom must stop.

Polish turmoil dramatizes wasted, worn out slogans of Communism, paradise promised never materialized. Source of discontent expressed by workers, yet neither our Gov nor businessmen have expressed sympathy for protests and support coming from our workers in U.S. Contrasting what predicted–revolt of workers against brutal capitalism–we see opposite; Poles demand liberty and supported by workers throughout the world. “Workers of the world, unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains.”

Chapter 1

2008-02-13T19:50:00.009-05:00

"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home." -James Madison

*****

Upon death of Chinese dictator, statement made, more hawkish that would be today, but moral authority to state position without violating other independence certain.

Sept 15, 1976
The Death of Mao Tse-Tung

Virtual censorship in American press coverage regarding oppression Communist China under Mao; portrays great leader & shrewd politician [he was] yet overlooks monstrous tyranny exercised over Chinese people.

China different today than 1949, but change does not equal progress, Mao must be judged within moral context. Mao cannot be praised for industrial development while ignoring millions executed for opposing communism & millions more living in abject slavery.

True, Chinese values differently from America & West; but foolish to think Chinese don’t yearn for freedom. Fact confirmed, untold thousands risk lives escaping Communist totalitarianism for Hong Kong liberty.

"Realists" asked to overlook unpleasantry, support Communist China to balance military power of Soviet Union. Shortsighted policy repeats error; treat all enemies' enemies as friends. Policy destroys credibility.

American pride comes from breaking Europe’s balance of power-politics, thus establishing a moral foreign policy upholding American interests. Tradition as old as country, survives today, in spite of Henry Kissinger's destructive efforts.

Mismanaged foreign policy has Americans equating moral policy with interventionist policy, not synonymous. Condemnation of Communist tyranny ought not imply threat of U.S. intervention; nor imply support for petty dictatorship paying anticommunism lip service.

America remain forthright, oppose tyranny universally. Recognize Mao as oppressive dictator. Fear not saying so, make it clear; so long as Chinese people remain slaves expect no support from the United States.

Introduction

2008-02-13T18:35:00.005-05:00

Personal Note

Dr. Paul's involvement in politics began in 1960s after reading Friedrich Hayek's, The Road to Serfdom. Studied Austrian economics, especially Ludwig von Mises; explains how central banking & government intervention undermine middleclass & injure poor through inflation & business cycle in market economy. Breakdown of Bretton Woods pseudo-gold in 1974 confirmed Austrian predictions. Ran for Congress in 1974, entertaining little hope of victory, yet felt important to express himself.

Lost race but positioned to win election one year later. 1976-1984, served four years; serving on Banking Committee dealing with monetary issues. Early 1980s, served on Gold Commission -era of stagflation.

Concerned with protection of individual liberty, private property, free markets. Primary focus on economic policy during first Congressional tour, with time learned economic policy [especially deficit financing] & monetary policy interrelated with foreign policy & bad economic policies.

During Reagan years, realized how special interests with bipartisan support drive policy of foreign intervention. Troops in Lebanon & Granada; financial aid to Nicaragua; weapons to Iran & Iraq; military assistance to Osama bin Laden & Saddam Hussein; bomb Libya -for reasons other than national security. Events motivated Dr. Paul to speak out more frequently on foreign affairs and vote [often alone] to make point: follow constitution & advice of founding fathers, stay out of affairs of foreign nations.

Foreign intervention cannot be separated from economic concerns; deficits, inflation, taxes. Current trend towards world government, globalism, managed trade, institutionalized world financial system [fiat based] controlled by industrial-banking-political elite.

Move towards political globalization contrasts free markets, free trade, commodity money; ushered in era challenging national sovereignty & traditional borders.

New World Order permits sanctions, tariffs, privileges for politically connected interests. Trend endangers liberty, sovereignty, prosperity, peace.

Book collection of statements made over 30 years starting in 1976. Wrote & spoke less during 12 year hiatus [1985-1997], still interested in studying case for noninterventionism. Publicly opposed Persian Gulf War, 1991; consider Iraq war continuation of conflict.

On Union by Comfort & Familiarity Resulting in Complacency

2006-10-17T00:22:00.001-04:00

A friend, ERXAvBXMR, made a comment about staying with your companion based on familiarity and complacency within that union, and not necessarily because one is happy or even in love. I replied, yes, to stay with someone solely based on familiarity and complacency was ridiculous, and if one wasn’t happy in their current state they should seek to improve their position -even if it means losing everything they knew.

I told her, in my experience, familiarity's positive provides the comfort of knowing that you stand by stability & that tomorrow will be okay because you made it through today. However, its negative acquits you of the challenge to face the New. If one is to take history as a lesson, which has proven countless times over, to fall behind with change is certain demise. This, I believe applies not only to great civilizations, but also to the self. Run from familiarity, if familiarity is all that binds you. Allow not this common bond to enslave you, ever. For in the end, the familiar is nothing but hollow, and it leaves you alienated from yourself.

How does familiarity alienate the individual? First I will presume change is inherent within nature; for it is change that renews life, reinvigorates dying stars and turns today into tomorrow. Second, it must also be assumed humans are included within the realm of the natural. The second argument, I doubt, requires much support, but it is my third that might take some persuasion. Third being, change provides nature with the ability to undermine its own laws and structures in order that it may remain constant, constantly evolving that is. Ultimately, if it is natural to change, humans' persistence to constancy is unnatural and thus grotesque.

Consider this, familiar is known and comforting, but the New is novel and exciting. There is definitely fear invoked when approaching the New, but that’s half its appeal. Long have humans explored the endless possibilities in regards to suffering, always inventing novel approaches to impeding and torturing the human and their soul. All of which makes for a tremendously regrettable sorrow, bearing in mind Happiness’ potential has barely been revealed. Instead of seeking out novel methods for joy, humanity has been recycling the same old methods over the last recollectable ages of history –namely revelry, discovery, companionship, idling and violence; too few choices for a species which has noted a thousand ways to die.

Ultimately, familiarity breeds complacency, not contempt. If contempt was truly was the case, how is it that humans allow themselves to be bred into classes and chaste; why do they tolerate the oppression of their oppressors, or what causes them to remain suffering in relationships with people they can no long stand? My answer: fear of the New, fear of revolution, fear of not knowing what to do once their free.

Being that it is unnatural to avoid change, not only for its futility and absurdity, who dares to hold onto familiarity as if it were noble or beneficial? There is no fulfillment achieved by refusing to evolve, happiness is only realized when one breaks from the common molds and dares to be free. As previously stated, familiarity is a slave bond, binding the soul to that which we know, not all that is possible.

On the White Man:

2006-01-17T00:38:00.001-05:00

In a pessimistic modern world, where my heart begins to stray
In dreams of selfless entities and hopeless melodies
there exists a fruitless shadow of man leading all others on;
into a cataclysm of self-absorptions and efficient exploits
[which most chose to ignore by way of assimilation]
By him we construct the ladder of social stature
Envy his progress, eye his possessions and die for what is his
Inside you want to watch him bleed,
yet you document and praise his every move

Stationary Motions:

2006-01-17T00:23:00.000-05:00

…and still time goes by
frozen in our steps we stand
distanced from the present
arriving to where we began.

…and still age takes its toll
isolated from the past, aging
arriving to the future
still never leaving our past.

…so still here we are
caught in the ceaseless rhyme
taking time to rethink the days
where we spent time reflecting what would be now
[let the right eye wander]

Random Blurbs

2006-01-17T00:20:00.000-05:00

as privileged as a son, as wonton as a whore
your eyes reveal despair when
the trap door in the sun wont turn

-=-

A woman cannot be depicted in literature, otherwise we lose interest. Rather, she must be experienced so that we may savour ever ounce of her entity. That is the legitimizing reason for man’s existence, our salvation depends on her being.

-=-

If you were tomorrow & I was today
I’d burn up Time to make you go away

-=-

entrance by silence, we weep with tears
stole of beauty, the sun’s death nears
and last we sigh for better days
though hope is lost when love is gained

-=-

why do you tease? what do you hope to achieve?
I reach out to touch you, yet my fingers only glide through your vanity
Instruct me so that may become better, release me so that I may become clean again
Let’s make a mends, let’s be friends for the evening

[title pending]

2006-01-17T00:16:00.000-05:00

Throughout this life, there is you and me
Everything else was built to deceive
Heaven was built for you and I, a seed of dreams realized
Not a place to go in death, rather the bliss we sense here
And so, we glide through life, unknowingly
In anticipation of our kingdom in the thereafter
These bodies contain the essence of what it means to be free
It’s these eyes that keep us from release
in the meantime we’ll share this eternal nowhere
a time, a place for you and I to share

Morality

2006-01-17T00:10:00.000-05:00

I have a tiny issue to discuss on the difference between morality and justice. After starting into Spartacus I uncovered an aspect of Order, hegemony if you will, which I have failed to recognize thus far. Justice is not a matter of right or wrong, instead it deals with the maintenance of social order. The law makers don’t heed the voice of Morality; otherwise there would be less pollution, less waste, more empowerment towards the equality of all man. The charter of rights is not an equalizer of man; it is merely a declaration by democrats to attain as many votes from as many sources as possible. Morality rides on the coat tails of Justice, weighing down the cumbersome beast sufficiently enough as to keep it from flight. For if justice could soar, it would take off with the bourgeois high upon it. Morality is the light of righteousness, not making its decision based upon class, race, creed or gender. Morality shines within the soul of all, which empowers the force, yet with the corruption of man, it also stains it. In the time of Adam and Eve, morality only knew light. Shadows had yet to cast their fearsome shade upon the soul of man, and it was good. Then, with the dawn of original sin, morality took its present form, a liquid force from which we arise and also the path on which our future will ride forth. To leave on a note of discussion, justice is the decree of the strong over the weak, Hegemony; whereas morality is the soul’s cry for righteousness. The problem lies with the substance of the soul, whose ignorance cannot fully comprehend the depths from which right and wrong arise: Perhaps due to the fluctuation of the universe or rather a simple stain left at the fall of man.

Ode to Lovers Gone

2006-01-17T00:08:00.000-05:00

In clouded skies there are no stars
With wounded wings birds cannot fly
On tangled webs spiders catch no feast
So how can I exist without you?

Throw the planets out of line
Regret nothing but I leave what is mine
Now time abandons us with nothing left but this
Can I wonder whose drink should I sip?

I want to interrogate the stars
Steal their eternal secrets
Make a mockery of their endurance
So that we too could last forever

[The more I crack apart the less I bleed, for you
And so I wait my whole life time no longer, for you
I feel no resent, I feel relieved, of you
So now I have my whole life time, without you]

Historians

2006-01-17T00:07:00.000-05:00

Today will be a quick release of words, whatever thought comes to mind will be let out. I wonder now, was that first statement planned or a mere flow of subconscious intent? Whatever the cause, it was said, it’s been done, and who has the courage to rewrite history? I cannot say I have that strength. I adore history, for all its faults. If it is the victors who scribe for the future, it must be they who designate the proper from the illegitimate. So rather than trying to rewrite history, to under mind the education of a people, would it not pose easier a task to write history itself? Our generation has been lost to misconception. And perhaps the lies of our time will permeate the next era, but only in new interpretation of the Now can tomorrow be altered.

Caught within Non Existant Days

2006-01-17T00:05:00.000-05:00

two tickets to nowhere
returning first-class
existence last a moment
how we long to draw out our lives
do you ever worry
that these are nonexistent days
life frozen between two pages
as a hero’s is, lost within a novel
so dear, I beg you
please take me out of this cruel reality
hold me and recuperate my faith in life

Freedom of Choice

2006-01-17T00:04:00.000-05:00

Nothing gives absolute freedom. Materialism sustains us in the state of desire and choice. It would be ridiculous to deny materialism, for matter supports the whole universe and is the only truth a man may successfully defend. The metaphysical is a delusion of the dreamer; heaven and hell are retreats away from the infinite. Although choice provides us with power, that power is ultimately limited. Choice is not so much a freedom as so much a claim to matter. One can decide to buy in or sell out, conform or rebel, to exist or cease –however, there is no escaping the necessity to matter. I might believe that choice is a drug, a manner in which we can accept the infinite and believe our decisions weigh in on the outcome of the universe. As if the sun cares whether earth spins or burns. To provide an immediate example, one all aerobic life can appreciate; I give you the necessity to breathe. We are dependent on the lucid matter of our atmosphere. To believe we can escape this world and travel away into space is preposterous as we would require an infinite air supply to do so. This innate dependence creates human capabilities, or at least defines our potential. When we have nothing, tied down by nothing we are ultimately free. At this point, we become infinite. So perhaps we cannot attain complete freedom, complete infinity, but who says we cannot try? We can do this by denying those redundant decisions, like buying into a fad or complying with cultural demands that fail to improve society.

Stature of Man defined by Class:

2006-01-16T23:53:00.000-05:00

Society is organized into a triangular prism: the masses supporting the cohort, the cohort supporting the ideals, the ideals supporting the faith. Perhaps I’ve taken this concept too far into the metaphysical, but I do believe in this system so I shall essay my belief. In all civilizations, from the ants to the Aztecs, there are the peasants [Masses], those that defend [Cohort], and finally those that provide the purpose [Head of State]. It has also been a common human device to include an additional chaste, those that philosophize [Ideals]. These men are above the workers, for they elicit the dreams that all common man encompass; yet, they fall short before those that defend for a dream can only exist within a world where it is allowed to develop and grow –it is this world which soldiers defend. The Head of State admires these men, the thinkers and the defenders. It would even be acceptable to state that the most righteous Head of State is one who thinks and defends. Now as I’ve mentioned, this system of society is build with one group supporting the one above it. This being so, the Head of State cannot exist without the masses, though it is feasible that the masses can exist without ruler. If this is so, then what purpose does Head of State serve? -To unite and inspire greatness. Ramses built the pyramids, Caesar constructed the forum and Napoleon inspired the Arc du Triumphe: all these are monuments to greatness. Not only to the Head of States that built them, but also to the masses that supported them.
All in all, a man of esteem and wealth may fault and blame destiny. He may purposely err & claim validation in the name of the human progress –at success a God is born, at failure a tragic hero lived.
On the other hand, a peasant it limited to the success of birthright. He may err, but there is no heaven awaiting him. He may even accomplish great things, but this is no promise to immortality. A great man he may become, yet forever he will remain but a child of God.

Of a Man with Place on Earth, a tiny spot in Space:

2006-01-16T23:50:00.000-05:00

Can you ever claim your freedom, ever truly own domain? If I could afford it, I would buy out the heavens and live in between Venus and Mars. I would fence in a range to herd asteroids, allowing them to graze on the Milky Way. My garden would grow in the fringes beyond Neptune. If I could live forever, I’d bottle air and fly a rocket into space. Journey out to the closest nebula and sit to enjoy the show. With enough time on my hands perhaps I’d retrace Magellan’s steps, except on a grander scale throughout the universe instead. Throughout my travels, I would collect souvenirs from every quadrant. Not for scientific study, but rather for whom ever held my heart's desire. However, if she had left before I returned, I’d return them all so that no one could have them. I’d own a little cottage here on earth of course, hidden within the Galapagos. Room with a turtle, and write the greatest oceanic tale ever known. My inspiration would be a ride upon a whale’s behind, journeying to the depths unknown except by sonar. Who never dreamed of silly fantasy? We all do. The real divider between men is realization, who will actually achieve. Now these dreams of mine are too far-fetched, more realistically I long to find a glimpse of truth hidden beneath a crust of imagination. To have a place to call my own; a shanty out in Fiji or a castle in Constantinople both hold a certain charm. It’s not deciding whether to be a peasant or a prince, the question is would I rather be free or enslaved.

A Summary of War

2006-01-16T23:21:00.002-05:00

One nation’s greed seeks to exploit another’s weakness
Resources are stolen and innocence is lost
The strong do what they can
The weak suffer what they must
Drastic actions lead to drastic revolution.
Such is the song written of love

The Ignorant in Bliss

2006-01-16T23:19:00.000-05:00

I might have been a dropout in love with a girl named margarita
Thinking no world existed outside Mexican mountain ranges
Without you ever passing through my sight
Or ever holding you close for a night
I could have been happy then

I might have never found my way to the Great Lakes Lowland
An excursion planned out so finely by Fate
To end up living so close
Allowing our roads to converge

We may have gone through other courses
With our destinies never crossing
I could have been happy then

On the destiny of Man: Part Three

2006-01-16T23:15:00.000-05:00

No god said, “Let there be man”. It was man himself to divide the weeds from the flowers, classified and elevated the homosapiens a rank above all other creation. Yes, it was we, with our over blown ego that decided bacteria were germ and locus a form of pestilence. With that said, would it come to any surprise that God may not have created us in his own image, rather we devised God in our own reflection. There have been human traits attributed to gods, as well as to those beings so inspiring that we, for but a moment, believed they must have been conceived of divine blood. It seems inevitable now that man would become part of that holy pantheon as human creation grew beyond the control of nature: when buildings could stand longer than forests, when a page of text could inspire millennia, when a name could stand face to face with Kronus [sp?]. If the spirit resides in memory, then the afterlife does not exist somewhere transcendent, it only exists in the minds of the future, where no natural force can erode but merely scatter. To achieve immortality would not be to sit amongst the citadel with Christ; it would be to exist forever within the hearts and minds of those who came after. Reincarnation then could occur at any instance, when your spirit influenced a single soul or a nation. How elusive immortality is. Genealogy can become corrupted and foundation forgotten. With such a simple loss of history gods fall as easy as flowers during hail. So maybe we humans aren’t much different than flowers, we both bloom brightly seemingly of godly nature yet we both crumble with the grace of dried sandcastles.
….point being, the only significance of god is to boost our silly egos or simply to justify our measly existence. Very sad.

On the destiny of Man: Part Two

2006-01-16T23:14:00.000-05:00

To return to yesterday’s entry, on the significance of God, I must quickly establish myself. Man has forever been in awe of their surroundings. In reverence of the soaring eagle and the beast we hunt; in reverence to the blistering sun which feeds the crops, the glowing moon which brings the tide and the pouring rain that provides substance to all life; in reverence of creation, in both birth and death; and until time ends Man will always revere the unknown –wherever it may reside. It has been common nature in all humans, regardless of which continent they call home, to deify the powerful unknown. We’ve known beastly Gods and Gods of conquest; Gods to each the sun, the moon and rain; Gods of life and death; and lest we forget, a story to recreate man’s conception. Regardless of continent, every human tribe recognizes some form of deity who rules over the vast expanse past human limitations. In the days of story telling education, during which generations were brought up around campfire instead of classrooms, memory was the only textbook available. Before the rise of the scientific method, the inexplicable was attributed to one deity or another. Then, as the universe began to be explained, man became lost. If there was no supremacy beyond ourselves, then what purpose could we serve? I don’t know right now, but I’ll return to this tomorrow.

On the destiny of Man

2006-01-16T23:13:00.000-05:00

We all run an inevitable course throughout our birth, life, death and thereafter. That’s not to say our life’s fate is sealed within an unfaultable design, error and action are too strong a force to deny us all a unique and unpredictable experience. Rather we are all connected into the immense infinite known as Eternity. Our tangible and delicate bodies consist of the same properties with which all other matter, throughout the universe, is governed. The fundamental elements that construct our bodies occur within the most delicate flower, most vicious beast, even those cosmic entities light years away. This essential detail submits us all into the discourse of life and death, a reality even the Gods must kneel before. Our entrance into existence is the outcome of a process common in all mammals, embryonic conception. On a larger scale, our existence is the outcome of chaos and chance. Gravity brought our planet together, tectonic movement along side atmospheric development designed our environment, evolution introduced us… and then the Greeks civilized us. Thus, if our birth is of no special concern [neither our death nor decomposition], where do we find substance? God.

Commentary on V.Hugo

2006-01-16T23:11:00.002-05:00

“Fate, it seemed, could be as malignant as the human intelligence, as remorseless as the human heart!” -Les Miserable

To describe human intelligence as malignant seems appropriate as the human being can barely accept a concept unless there is an aspect of suffering involved. The entirely beautiful and pure must be tainted before a man can commit himself and contribute to progress. I speak not as a skeptic, I speak as a human. The rise of a nation occurs not when all citizens contribute to its growth, for then it is merely a colony or state. A nation is born when others fear and respect the presence of the united. It is the belief of the Christians that all humans are born with original sin, so not even the innocence of children was exempt from blemish. The idea of financial progress is so skewed that one can only attain wealth through exploitation, for it is more economic to think than do. A million would be enslaved for the tomb of one. That is the extent of human intelligence.

The human heart is even crueler than the mind, for the mind can only create whereas the heart drives inspiration out of the cavern and into the reality of action. At best we can label this act as desire; at worst we must accept it to be a craving. The mind might create a utopia and then the heart would destroy all those who opposed. Love is hardly different from hate; both are passions that blind and incite violence. What the heart demands the soul must present upon its knees in rags. A man once liberated human from sin and offered them a place within God’s kingdom, in return the hearts of those in charge of his life thought it best to release a murderer in exchange for a bribe of coin. Morality is cast aside by the heart, when ambition takes control, replacing consuming desire in its place.

Looking back to the original quote, V. Hugo was right when he said Fate was malignant and remorseless for it sees no difference between beauty and suffering, only seeing progress; it does not divide the wicked from the righteous, instead allotting time for us all to exist.

Of a sexy girl I know

2006-01-16T23:11:00.001-05:00

She was restless, left me breathless
Had the sweetest laugh I’d ever hear
Did you see those thighs, those crippling eyes?
A model of divine proportions
I’d die for a night, plead for a flight
Between those legs of grace
If I should rest eternally
Let that place be as sweet as the vales between her breasts
But who could die with her in mind
You see, I’ll admit, she had me turning in delight.

Golden Man

2006-01-16T23:02:00.000-05:00

time goes by, yes time ticks by, at speeds approaching the infinite
here we wait, sit, watch and contemplate as space-time marches on
one by one man strides along the edge of existence, believing himself golden
the babble of an ignorant child reverberates at the same pulse of an arrogant man
it seems like days are rarely ever the same, yet there’s no deviation in our nature
so on we stride 2 by 2 off the edge of existence.

Courtship

2006-01-16T22:58:00.000-05:00

approaching tenderness we rarely invite
she comes with good intent, seeking to please with a smile
misconceptions precedes true intention
and so i tried to use another path
goals misplaced, paths retraced
yet there’s still no way around
so who dares to push the boarders of self
when rejection becomes the thickest wall
push through just a little, feel just a little
go on, let it hurt just a little

Offspring Takeover

2006-01-16T22:57:00.000-05:00

we’re going nowhere fast cause we’re living off the land with the animals we caught
yeah, but it’s not our fault.
[taken from our pride, we’re being left behind
left in apathetic mourning, we've lost too much to our own cause]
the memories will fade & eventually we’ll be replaced
by the twisted youth whom we died to produce
now how is that okay?
So where will you go when the earth has grown old and the sun has gone cold?
Now our time is wasting fast, we’re only an instance in the past
Yeah, whether we continue to turn or dry up and burn is of no concern

On the Author:

2006-01-16T22:53:00.001-05:00

in a moment of illusion the scene transforms from blue to white
a stream of mental constipation overcoming the rambling scribe
where once lay fountains of verbal wealth
now remain only ruins of incoherent phrases
to roam and wander amongst the cosmic dust of a dying universe;
to seek out the unaccounted for landscape of our existence
that is the reasoning of those who struggle against time
so we might write against it, in hopes that it may not forget us
communicating to those who have yet to strive for survival
may they revive our loneliness through the tired lines upon
worn pages in a book that was never meant to last

Where was I when the universe began?

2006-01-16T22:52:00.000-05:00

Within a singularity, outside of which “no where” existed
No dimensions ruled outside this pregnant dot
Time did not tick, space did not contain
The infinitesimal surged forth from a blinding light
Creating existence in its explosion

To the Muse: "What purpose do I serve?"

2004-12-11T00:47:00.002-05:00

I have faith that We, as a mass of individual human units, serve a purpose in our lifetime. Whether we interpret that purpose to be incorporated within a master plan, designed before the atom was struck; or instead, on a slightly minor scale, where our actions effect the tide of humanity much like the butterfly effects the storm. Whichever you prefer is entirely decided upon and governed by our own device. The thoughtful mind (in hopeful thinking) will inevitably try to connect all of life's occurrences together, for in one manner or another, we all need a coherently explained existence. Without a history woven to place ourselves within the time-line of civilization, and beyond, what relevance does our existence prove when compared against the infinite? This despair cripples the weak, hindering even the optimistic, so that inaction overcomes action and avarice becomes the safe haven of the fatalist -they hoard in a pathetic attempt to validate their undirected lives.

Since time immemorial, humanity has repetitively made attempts to recorded their existence, their history and hopes for the future, in that they might educate future generations what they thought most valuable. The earliest human-made histories to be found, almost always depict the common themes of: hunting, fornication or historical events. These are the threads by which humans has woven the cloth of our very culture today. We hunt to appease our senses, we fuck to appease our nature, and we teach so that our offspring will learn from our success and folly. While cave paintings have fallen out of fashion when transcribing story, the act itself is as viral today than it ever has been. Sources of output exceed human capacity, which provides an unending plethora to satisfy the wandering mind. In that sense, literature has successfully managed to capture our impact upon the infinite -or so we would have it.