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

. 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

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...

...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]

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

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