"even makes the weather perfect every day"
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Dear House of Representatives,
I want to remind you of your proper place in this nation. I recommend you read the Federalist Papers, specifically #57. For your convenience I'm including a very important excerpt from that paper:
In my own "vigilant and manly spirit" I am stating that unfortunately the "genius of the system" has been undermined by itself and its members doing all of the things that Hamilton/Madison said it shouldn't do, and also by the people tolerating everything but liberty. (a problem that may soon be remedied by sufficient "populist outrage")
As some are fretting about the sanctity of the "rule of law" I am just saying that the law has fallen by its own excess. The rule of law is only as strong, trustworthy, and incorruptible as its makers. I am standing in a separate place from many of the people with whom I normally agree about the fundamental principles of government... some who want to believe that the rule of law should be respected unconditionally. However, be it by the virtue of my rebellious heredity or some other influence, I cannot agree that the rule of law is always untouchable and inviolate.
As for the whole AIG issue, I do believe that all of you Representatives (and Senators) should apply the same punishments upon yourselves as you wish to apply to the employees who received unjust bonuses, etc. You are just as guilty as any of them, if not moreso.
The "populist outrage" is not restricted to, or even primarily directed at, some unfortunate and incompetent financial services employees of AIG, and you would be wise to recognize your own corruption and incompetence and to rectify yourselves immediately.
With much vigilant and manly ;-) spirit,
Vicious Momma
PS Another reminder for you, Article 1, Section 9 or the US Constitution: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
I will add, as a fifth circumstance in the situation of the House of Representatives, restraining them from oppressive measures, that they can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society. This has always been deemed one of the strongest bonds by which human policy can connect the rulers and the people together. It creates between them that communion of interests and sympathy of sentiments, of which few governments have furnished examples; but without which every government degenerates into tyranny. If it be asked, what is to restrain the House of Representatives from making legal discriminations in favor of themselves and a particular class of the society? I answer: the genius of the whole system; the nature of just and constitutional laws; and above all, the vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America, a spirit which nourishes freedom, and in return is nourished by it. If this spirit shall ever be so far debased as to tolerate a law not obligatory on the legislature, as well as on the people, the people will be prepared to tolerate any thing but liberty. Such will be the relation between the House of Representatives and their constituents. Duty, gratitude, interest, ambition itself, are the chords by which they will be bound to fidelity and sympathy with the great mass of the people.
In my own "vigilant and manly spirit" I am stating that unfortunately the "genius of the system" has been undermined by itself and its members doing all of the things that Hamilton/Madison said it shouldn't do, and also by the people tolerating everything but liberty. (a problem that may soon be remedied by sufficient "populist outrage")
As some are fretting about the sanctity of the "rule of law" I am just saying that the law has fallen by its own excess. The rule of law is only as strong, trustworthy, and incorruptible as its makers. I am standing in a separate place from many of the people with whom I normally agree about the fundamental principles of government... some who want to believe that the rule of law should be respected unconditionally. However, be it by the virtue of my rebellious heredity or some other influence, I cannot agree that the rule of law is always untouchable and inviolate.
As for the whole AIG issue, I do believe that all of you Representatives (and Senators) should apply the same punishments upon yourselves as you wish to apply to the employees who received unjust bonuses, etc. You are just as guilty as any of them, if not moreso.
The "populist outrage" is not restricted to, or even primarily directed at, some unfortunate and incompetent financial services employees of AIG, and you would be wise to recognize your own corruption and incompetence and to rectify yourselves immediately.
With much vigilant and manly ;-) spirit,
Vicious Momma
PS Another reminder for you, Article 1, Section 9 or the US Constitution: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Depression Era Art
This 1934 painting amuses me somehow:
Courtesy of Smithsonian American Art Museum which is opening a new exhibit of Depression Era Art in order to capitalize on the "Great Recession" as they call our current economic conditions. Kind of clever, I guess.
So you have this state-sponsored artwork that shows the messy consequences of "progress" and productivity and growth. Well, you have to use energy to actually make things happen so it seems a natural thing for Tofel to paint and "honor" the factories as an important part of the scene. I'm pretty sure that a state-sponsored "Great Recession" artist would not be allowed to promote such politically incorrect things as smoke stacks. ;-)
Courtesy of Smithsonian American Art Museum which is opening a new exhibit of Depression Era Art in order to capitalize on the "Great Recession" as they call our current economic conditions. Kind of clever, I guess.
So you have this state-sponsored artwork that shows the messy consequences of "progress" and productivity and growth. Well, you have to use energy to actually make things happen so it seems a natural thing for Tofel to paint and "honor" the factories as an important part of the scene. I'm pretty sure that a state-sponsored "Great Recession" artist would not be allowed to promote such politically incorrect things as smoke stacks. ;-)
Saturday, February 07, 2009
Free Bird
"Cause I'm as free as a bird now
And this bird you never change"
(when I was little I used to think "change" was "chain" which still makes sense)
Change I Can Believe In
America used to be the Land of the Free, but more and more of our individual freedoms are being eroded and surrendered in these current times. I'm certain that our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves to see how easily the "people" are allowing the government to violate our basic, guaranteed freedoms that they devoted their lives to securing...
So many people have become so lazy that they think it is easier to let the government take care of them and make all of their decisions for them. Well, fine if they want that, but I DON'T. Here is a change I can believe in:
We should follow the example of Czechoslovakia's Velvet Divorce and allow our country to split into two. We could have one that wants to be socialist and the other that doesn't. Let's call them the USSA (United Socialist States of America) and the FSA (Free States of America). It would be pretty easy to find the geographical boundaries with the "left coast" joining with the upper midwest and northeastern regions to be the USSA, and the remainder becoming the FSA. If some are in a border area and don't agree with which side their state is becoming, then they can relocate.
There is enough unhappiness in the populace that many are grumbling and wishing for such a change. But we feel powerless. We feel betrayed, and we are in disbelief at our fellow citizens who are so willing to hand over so much power to the corrupt and bloated government that is exactly what our Founding Fathers rebelled against. It's shameful.
I'm ashamed of the "people" who are ruining our country and our Freedom, in the name of what? Economic security? Financial gain? Comfort? Power? All of the above. Sure, it might look and feel "easier" for the government to pay for all your healthcare, education, housing, food, air you breathe... But just remember who is the government and what those people are really after. They don't really care about your health and well-being. They only care about staying in their positions of power, influence, and control. They don't really care about fairness and equality.
It's not really possible or realistic to enforce some artificially created "fairness" in life. Life and Nature just aren't fair. The probabilistic nature of life is the reason that people vary so much in their life circumstances, such as wealth/poverty, health/illness, etc. In all its glory and accomplishment, science has yet to devise a way to control fate and the probabilities that determine how our lives turn out. Try as they might to tell us that they and we can control the climate and other forces of Nature, they are only engaging in wishful thinking and delusion.
Likewise, communism and socialism are creations of man that try to enforce some kind of artificial fairness and control over life and its circumstances. Sorry, but that will always fail. No matter how hard someone tries to make life "fair" for everyone, Nature will topple them. A personal example - it's terribly unfair that I've already lost my parents to illness while many others my age still have their hearty parents and can't even get along with them. No amount of government funding or other human intervention would have reversed these outcomes. I'm not asking for pity. I'm just giving a solid real-life example of the unfairness and uncontrollability of life.
Well, what do I know anyway? I'm just really sick and tired of all the sourpusses out there trying to tell us what we can and can't do, should and shouldn't think, what to buy or sell, how much money we are allowed to have, what we should and shouldn't eat, drink, smoke, or otherwise consume, and every other little aspect of our lives that we are supposed to be able to decide for ourselves. I'm over it and I'm ready for the Second Revolution.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Bill of Rights and Congressional Violations of the Constitution
If I had my way, people couldn't vote or even graduate from high school unless they could recite these words...
The first ten amendments to the US Constitution which were designed to protect our individual rights as citizens but which are at this very moment under very serious threat by the government that they are supposed to be limiting:
Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof*; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble*, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
*Following is an excerpt of the actual text of the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" which specifies that any institution of higher learning that receives funding from this "stimulus" program CANNOT use the money for improvement of any facilities that are used for religious study, worship, or other religious "missions". This is obviously a violation of the First Amendment which states "Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise thereof [of religion]."
The first ten amendments to the US Constitution which were designed to protect our individual rights as citizens but which are at this very moment under very serious threat by the government that they are supposed to be limiting:
Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof*; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble*, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
*Following is an excerpt of the actual text of the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" which specifies that any institution of higher learning that receives funding from this "stimulus" program CANNOT use the money for improvement of any facilities that are used for religious study, worship, or other religious "missions". This is obviously a violation of the First Amendment which states "Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise thereof [of religion]."
GREEN SCHOOL REQUIREMENT.—An institution of higher education receiving a subgrant under this section shall use not less than 25 percent of such subgrant to carry out projects for modernization, renovation, or repair that are certified, verified, or consistent with the applicable provisions of—
(A) the LEED Green Building Rating System;
(B) Energy Star;
(C) the CHPS Criteria;
(D) Green Globes; or
(E) an equivalent program adopted by the State or the State higher education agency.
(3) PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS.—No funds awarded under this section may be used for—
(A) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities, including maintenance associated with any permissible uses of funds described in paragraph (1);
(B) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public;
(C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities
(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or
(ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission; or
(D) construction of new facilities.
Monday, November 24, 2008
First Grade Report Card
(click to enlarge)
I like the little stick figure drawings that show the "deportment" progress. It's funny that I did not do so well at working quietly and finishing my work because those are the exact same problems that my sons have had in their beginning grades. My daughter has not had those same problems. And the reading grades are the lowest, probably because I had some unidentified "learning disability" or other condition that is nowadays labeled and widely accepted as a reason for slower reading progress.
It's funny that the height and weight are included. Such things are now considered politically incorrect and damaging to children's self esteem. ;-)
Also on the front and back are some interesting notes about development and the purpose of school.
"A child should be encouraged to face reality."
"A sense of humor is necessary for a good personality."
"We believe that schools should prepare a child to live in a democracy."
I certainly don't see these things spelled out on my kids' modern report cards, and it is unfortunate that such practical and common sense has been abandoned by the educators, who are too worried about hurting self-esteem and other sociopolitical correctnesses, to really understand about healthy development and to instruct children how to grow into good citizens.
I like the little stick figure drawings that show the "deportment" progress. It's funny that I did not do so well at working quietly and finishing my work because those are the exact same problems that my sons have had in their beginning grades. My daughter has not had those same problems. And the reading grades are the lowest, probably because I had some unidentified "learning disability" or other condition that is nowadays labeled and widely accepted as a reason for slower reading progress.
It's funny that the height and weight are included. Such things are now considered politically incorrect and damaging to children's self esteem. ;-)
Also on the front and back are some interesting notes about development and the purpose of school.
"A child should be encouraged to face reality."
"A sense of humor is necessary for a good personality."
"We believe that schools should prepare a child to live in a democracy."
I certainly don't see these things spelled out on my kids' modern report cards, and it is unfortunate that such practical and common sense has been abandoned by the educators, who are too worried about hurting self-esteem and other sociopolitical correctnesses, to really understand about healthy development and to instruct children how to grow into good citizens.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Teenage Wasteland
"Baba O'Riley" by The Who
Of course, this song was written by a Brit, but music is universal and everyone is allowed, at least still at this moment, to interpret music and art as it makes sense to them. While some might read these lyrics as some kind of communist manifesto, I prefer to read them as a declaration of Freedom from the oppression of communistic "groupthink" and loss of individuality. After all, it is usually younger and more immature people who have never actually put their backs into their work to build a life and security of their own. They generally prefer that everything is given to them without having to actually earn it and be responsible for themselves. (If you know any teenagers you know what I mean.)
Well, America is in its Teenage Wasteland. They're all wasted! The People are wasting all the hard work and sacrifice of the Founding Fathers and others who have fought so hard for our unique Independence and Freedom and the Responsibilities that go with them. It breaks my heart and hurts my soul and stomach to witness the "Change" led by someone who believes and preaches that his people are "owed" something and that the very foundations of our Nation are "flawed."
May God or the Laws of Nature intervene to save us from our own destruction.
I don't need to fight
To prove I'm right
I don't need to be forgiven
Bonus:
Out here in the fields
I fight for my meals
I get my back into my living
I don't need to fight
To prove I'm right
I don't need to be forgiven
Don't cry
Don't raise your eye
It's only teenage wasteland
Sally, take my hand
We'll travel south cross-land
Put out the fire
And don't look past my shoulder
The exodus is here
The happy ones are near
Let's get together
Before we get much older
Teenage wasteland
Teenage wasteland
Teenage wasteland
It's only teenage wasteland
Teenage wasteland
It's only teenage wasteland
Teenage wasteland
It's only teenage wasteland
They're all wasted!
Of course, this song was written by a Brit, but music is universal and everyone is allowed, at least still at this moment, to interpret music and art as it makes sense to them. While some might read these lyrics as some kind of communist manifesto, I prefer to read them as a declaration of Freedom from the oppression of communistic "groupthink" and loss of individuality. After all, it is usually younger and more immature people who have never actually put their backs into their work to build a life and security of their own. They generally prefer that everything is given to them without having to actually earn it and be responsible for themselves. (If you know any teenagers you know what I mean.)
Well, America is in its Teenage Wasteland. They're all wasted! The People are wasting all the hard work and sacrifice of the Founding Fathers and others who have fought so hard for our unique Independence and Freedom and the Responsibilities that go with them. It breaks my heart and hurts my soul and stomach to witness the "Change" led by someone who believes and preaches that his people are "owed" something and that the very foundations of our Nation are "flawed."
May God or the Laws of Nature intervene to save us from our own destruction.
I don't need to fight
To prove I'm right
I don't need to be forgiven
Bonus:
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Friday, August 01, 2008
Civil War Diary, Part 1
We haven't been making great progress in cleaning out my dad's house. I keep getting caught up in looking at all the cool old stuff like photo albums, childhood artwork and schoolwork, and other family mementos. My dad collected lots of interesting old stuff and it's like going through a time capsule. The following is my great, great grandfather's (Lewis Samuel Clovis Howard, 1835-1897) diary (to be posted in parts due to its length) he kept while serving for the Union in the Civil War. I've linked relevant maps and other additional information and retained the original spellings, grammar, and punctuation.
I don't know why he served for the Union instead of joining the Rebels since Tennessee did secede from the Union. Maybe the Union paid better? ;-)
Daily Diary of L.S.C. Howard's Army Record
Sworn in 1861
Discharged 1864
August 10, 1861
Left Morgan County and marched by T. Staples and nine miles to the left of Huntsville and on by Montcella [sic] in Ky. Thence across the Cumberland River at the Horseshoe bend and through Jamestown. And on By Middleburg and by Danville, then to Camp Robinson, 210 miles
Arrived here 19 of Aug.
Volunteered 19th
Sworn in the 20th of August, 1861
October 20, 1861
Remained here until the 20 Oct. 1861, then we received orders to march to Camp Wildcat, 44 miles, which we made in two days and a night. Remained here till
October 28, 1861
Then we received orders to march to London, then according to orders marched to Camp Pittman.
October 29, 1861
Marched to London and remained there some time
December 7, 1861
Ordered to Somerset. Therefore as we marched on the 8th, we passed by Sublinity Spring on the Rockcastle River and on the 9th camped at Somerset.
December 15, 1861
Paid by the Government $40.95
January 19, 1862
A fight is commenced.
January 20, 1862
Victory Completed at Millsprings
January 22, 1862
Marched back to Somerset
January 26, 1862
Left Somerset 5 or 6 miles
February 2, 1862
Left London and marched in the direction of Cumberland Gap
February 4, 1862
Marched to Barbourville
February 12, 1862
Marched to Flatlick
February 15, 1862
Marched to the Cumberland foard
May 22, 1862
Paid $26 by the Government
June 7, 1862
Left the foard and camped at the Moss house.
June 11, 1862
Left the Moss house and marched through the big Creek Gap, then up Powells Valley to the Cumberland Gap the 18th of June
June 20, 1862
Marched to Tazwell 10 or 12 miles. Stayed near a day there then returned back to camps
June 28, 1862
Left Camps and marched to Capt. Mires 1 Regt. E.T. (1st Regiment East Tennessee Volunteers) then toward Knoxville to Kingkades an aid [sic] Rebels near the Clinch River then back to Camps. And crossed Powells R. at or near the Ledmind bend and here at the river we was fired on by the Rebels but we whipped them soon. then marched on to Camps
July 1, 1862
Arrived at Camps.
August 4, 1862
Appointed Corp. and sent to the Provost M.
August 14, 1862
Drummed out of the service one private from Co. "A", E. Tenn. Vols.
August 16, 1862
All moved up in the Gap.
September 16, 1862
Left the Pro. M.
September 17, 1862
17 day about midnight our Regiment left the Gap.
September 18, 1862
18th night camped at Flatlick.
September 20, 1862
Marched down Goose Creek below the saltworks near Manchester.
September 21, 1862
Rested in place until 9 in the evening then marched all that night and in the evening of the 22 we passed by what is called the Goss Spring. It is in Ousley County.
September 22, 1862
Camped on Indian Creek at Morises about 5 miles from where it empties into the south fork of the Ky. River.
September 23, 1862
Marched to Booneville, Ousley Co. by 1 o'clock in the evening then marched to Proctor, 10 miles by a little after day.
September 24, 1862
Rested till evening again then marched across the Ky. river below the fork then marched up the north fork. Taken the Hazlegreen Road at the McGuires Gap.
September 25 + 26, 1862
Marched and reached Hazlegreen 20 miles from McGuires Gap. Marched through Wolf Co.
September 27, 1862
Marched all day and near all night then took up at West liberty 15 miles
September 28, 1862
Rested in place all that day
September 29, 1862
Marched 21 miles adn late in the evening teh bush whackers fired on our skirmishers.
September 30, 1862
Marched in 12 miles of Grayson, Carter County on the head of little Sandy where the cliffs begin to set in and where the bush whackers fired on us again.
I don't know why he served for the Union instead of joining the Rebels since Tennessee did secede from the Union. Maybe the Union paid better? ;-)
Daily Diary of L.S.C. Howard's Army Record
Sworn in 1861
Discharged 1864
August 10, 1861
Left Morgan County and marched by T. Staples and nine miles to the left of Huntsville and on by Montcella [sic] in Ky. Thence across the Cumberland River at the Horseshoe bend and through Jamestown. And on By Middleburg and by Danville, then to Camp Robinson, 210 miles
Arrived here 19 of Aug.
Volunteered 19th
Sworn in the 20th of August, 1861
October 20, 1861
Remained here until the 20 Oct. 1861, then we received orders to march to Camp Wildcat, 44 miles, which we made in two days and a night. Remained here till
October 28, 1861
Then we received orders to march to London, then according to orders marched to Camp Pittman.
October 29, 1861
Marched to London and remained there some time
December 7, 1861
Ordered to Somerset. Therefore as we marched on the 8th, we passed by Sublinity Spring on the Rockcastle River and on the 9th camped at Somerset.
December 15, 1861
Paid by the Government $40.95
January 19, 1862
A fight is commenced.
January 20, 1862
Victory Completed at Millsprings
January 22, 1862
Marched back to Somerset
January 26, 1862
Left Somerset 5 or 6 miles
February 2, 1862
Left London and marched in the direction of Cumberland Gap
February 4, 1862
Marched to Barbourville
February 12, 1862
Marched to Flatlick
February 15, 1862
Marched to the Cumberland foard
May 22, 1862
Paid $26 by the Government
June 7, 1862
Left the foard and camped at the Moss house.
June 11, 1862
Left the Moss house and marched through the big Creek Gap, then up Powells Valley to the Cumberland Gap the 18th of June
June 20, 1862
Marched to Tazwell 10 or 12 miles. Stayed near a day there then returned back to camps
June 28, 1862
Left Camps and marched to Capt. Mires 1 Regt. E.T. (1st Regiment East Tennessee Volunteers) then toward Knoxville to Kingkades an aid [sic] Rebels near the Clinch River then back to Camps. And crossed Powells R. at or near the Ledmind bend and here at the river we was fired on by the Rebels but we whipped them soon. then marched on to Camps
July 1, 1862
Arrived at Camps.
August 4, 1862
Appointed Corp. and sent to the Provost M.
August 14, 1862
Drummed out of the service one private from Co. "A", E. Tenn. Vols.
August 16, 1862
All moved up in the Gap.
September 16, 1862
Left the Pro. M.
September 17, 1862
17 day about midnight our Regiment left the Gap.
September 18, 1862
18th night camped at Flatlick.
September 20, 1862
Marched down Goose Creek below the saltworks near Manchester.
September 21, 1862
Rested in place until 9 in the evening then marched all that night and in the evening of the 22 we passed by what is called the Goss Spring. It is in Ousley County.
September 22, 1862
Camped on Indian Creek at Morises about 5 miles from where it empties into the south fork of the Ky. River.
September 23, 1862
Marched to Booneville, Ousley Co. by 1 o'clock in the evening then marched to Proctor, 10 miles by a little after day.
September 24, 1862
Rested till evening again then marched across the Ky. river below the fork then marched up the north fork. Taken the Hazlegreen Road at the McGuires Gap.
September 25 + 26, 1862
Marched and reached Hazlegreen 20 miles from McGuires Gap. Marched through Wolf Co.
September 27, 1862
Marched all day and near all night then took up at West liberty 15 miles
September 28, 1862
Rested in place all that day
September 29, 1862
Marched 21 miles adn late in the evening teh bush whackers fired on our skirmishers.
September 30, 1862
Marched in 12 miles of Grayson, Carter County on the head of little Sandy where the cliffs begin to set in and where the bush whackers fired on us again.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Today In History
December 11
1844 Nitrous oxide was used for the first time in dentistry.
1936 King Edward VIII abdicated the throne of Britain for the woman he loved, Mrs. Wallis Simpson.
1844 Nitrous oxide was used for the first time in dentistry.
1936 King Edward VIII abdicated the throne of Britain for the woman he loved, Mrs. Wallis Simpson.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Thrilling Physics
This summer we got the family season passes to Dollywood, the current incarnation of a theme park that has been around for longer than I have. When I was a young child it was called Goldrush Junction, and then in 1977 it was changed again to Silver Dollar City. In 1986 it became Dollywood and has since grown in size and significance as a theme park. (click link above for more detailed history)
In 1978 Silver Dollar City opened a roller coaster called The Blazing Fury. I was one of the very first riders and received a badge proclaiming "I survived the Blazing Fury." My dad knew the promotions director for the park and got us season passes so we got to go on opening day and ride the new ride when it opened.
I knew I would be glad I saved this thing after all these years. ;-) You can sort of see where I scratched in my then initials, RAH.
In recent years Dollywood has added some very high quality roller coasters. I hadn't been to Dollywood in many years due to having babies and children too young to really enjoy the experience. But this year we decided to get season passes since our youngest is now big enough to ride all the rides there. His favorite is Thunderhead, an impossible-looking (click for series of photos showing the odd angles and turns) wooden coaster that is a few years old.
Most wooden coasters don't look like this one. It's kind of insane that people have been able to manipulate the laws of physics to create this coaster that looks like it shouldn't even remain standing let alone hold a train full of people traveling at 55 mph.
click for more photos from site this one is from
I like the Thunderhead, but my very most favorite ride is Dollywood's newest, opened this year, called Mystery Mine.
It is absolutely maniacal! There are two totally vertical lifts, the second and tallest plummeting 85 feet at a 95 degree angle. That's practically straight down. Insane! And totally thrilling.
construction photo of the vertical drop
Click here to listen to the queue line music that is perfectly creepy to set the mood. This ride is so good that I could ride it all day long. Well, almost, anyway. ;-)
I may not be able to understand the physics (and engineering) that make these rides possible, but I sure do feel and very much appreciate the thrilling results. ;-)
In 1978 Silver Dollar City opened a roller coaster called The Blazing Fury. I was one of the very first riders and received a badge proclaiming "I survived the Blazing Fury." My dad knew the promotions director for the park and got us season passes so we got to go on opening day and ride the new ride when it opened.
I knew I would be glad I saved this thing after all these years. ;-) You can sort of see where I scratched in my then initials, RAH.
In recent years Dollywood has added some very high quality roller coasters. I hadn't been to Dollywood in many years due to having babies and children too young to really enjoy the experience. But this year we decided to get season passes since our youngest is now big enough to ride all the rides there. His favorite is Thunderhead, an impossible-looking (click for series of photos showing the odd angles and turns) wooden coaster that is a few years old.
Most wooden coasters don't look like this one. It's kind of insane that people have been able to manipulate the laws of physics to create this coaster that looks like it shouldn't even remain standing let alone hold a train full of people traveling at 55 mph.
click for more photos from site this one is from
I like the Thunderhead, but my very most favorite ride is Dollywood's newest, opened this year, called Mystery Mine.
It is absolutely maniacal! There are two totally vertical lifts, the second and tallest plummeting 85 feet at a 95 degree angle. That's practically straight down. Insane! And totally thrilling.
construction photo of the vertical drop
Click here to listen to the queue line music that is perfectly creepy to set the mood. This ride is so good that I could ride it all day long. Well, almost, anyway. ;-)
I may not be able to understand the physics (and engineering) that make these rides possible, but I sure do feel and very much appreciate the thrilling results. ;-)
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Feminist Indulgence
I'm feeling a little spunky, so I'm gonna share a comment I made over at CIP's a little while ago. The liberal boys were arguing that States should be allowed to secede from the United States. Apparently, some people in Vermont are wanting to secede. You might like to read all of the other comments to get the context.
You people didn't read the Constitution did you? Bad boys, not doing your homework!
It's rather ironic that I, as a "pure-bred" American Southerner, am the one who's defending the strength of the Union. But actually, my roots are split, technically. But of course, there are parts of the Constitution that are intended to deal with the States' Rights and the Federal Rights so that there shouldn't be a need or desire for a state to secede. But if you'd done your homework you'd have learned that already. :-)
And no, it's not correct to think of the States as "little countries." This is a common error in perception, but the correct view is a much more *liberal* approach to things. Irony, again. ;-)
How is it liberal, you ask because you're too narrow-minded to be able to know without help and/or didn't do your homework. Well, the Union of the States was agreed upon for many reasons. One was strength in numbers. Another was that the States had economies that depended upon each other and they wanted to "keep it simple" instead of having the complications of "international" relations. And yet another (and this is the "liberal" part) was because it was philosophically (and morally) correct to gather resources and have easy exchanges among the States so that the less prosperous States could benefit from some of the wealthier States.
"United we stand, divided we fall." Wow, didn't that Unionist propaganda sink in deep into those roots?
And call me dumb or stupid or a purple fairy, I don't care because I know that I'm correct. And the only reason you call me stupid is because you're too intimidated to admit that I make you uncomfortable because I can rattle your foundation. :-) I can emasculate you and that's pretty scary isn't it?
So how's that for a feminist indulgence? How you liking feminism now? ;-) (Hey! More irony!)
You people didn't read the Constitution did you? Bad boys, not doing your homework!
It's rather ironic that I, as a "pure-bred" American Southerner, am the one who's defending the strength of the Union. But actually, my roots are split, technically. But of course, there are parts of the Constitution that are intended to deal with the States' Rights and the Federal Rights so that there shouldn't be a need or desire for a state to secede. But if you'd done your homework you'd have learned that already. :-)
And no, it's not correct to think of the States as "little countries." This is a common error in perception, but the correct view is a much more *liberal* approach to things. Irony, again. ;-)
How is it liberal, you ask because you're too narrow-minded to be able to know without help and/or didn't do your homework. Well, the Union of the States was agreed upon for many reasons. One was strength in numbers. Another was that the States had economies that depended upon each other and they wanted to "keep it simple" instead of having the complications of "international" relations. And yet another (and this is the "liberal" part) was because it was philosophically (and morally) correct to gather resources and have easy exchanges among the States so that the less prosperous States could benefit from some of the wealthier States.
"United we stand, divided we fall." Wow, didn't that Unionist propaganda sink in deep into those roots?
And call me dumb or stupid or a purple fairy, I don't care because I know that I'm correct. And the only reason you call me stupid is because you're too intimidated to admit that I make you uncomfortable because I can rattle your foundation. :-) I can emasculate you and that's pretty scary isn't it?
So how's that for a feminist indulgence? How you liking feminism now? ;-) (Hey! More irony!)
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Freedom of Religion and Thought
Article I (First Amendment)
We have to remember that our founding fathers were reacting to England's struggles with the establishment of an 'official' religion. There was tremendous persecution done on behalf of religious differences. This was one of the main reasons that the colonists came here. This is why this issue is put first in the First Amendment. It was that important. It still is.
Let's look at what it says exactly. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." What that means is that there will be no law that establishes a National Religion of any kind. What it does not mean is that there can't be laws that respect religious establishments. But to hear some people talk you'd think that's what they think it means. They are totally misreading it. They want to think it means that the government can't have any religious expressions. But that's NOT what it says. People who object to "In God We Trust" on our money and "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and any other phrase that mentions God or any other religious concept are actually VIOLATING the First Amendment. They want to conveniently forget that "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" part. Hello? Free exercise thereof. That means that I have every right to say Christmas, and so does my kids' school and the courthouse and any other person or place that wants to. Calling a decorated tree in a government building a 'Christmas tree' is NOT establishing a religion. It is only the free exercise thereof.
I know some people will say, "Oh, but what about other religions? Why can't they have whatever to celebrate their holidays? If you have a Christmas tree then you should have a Hanukkah tree or whatever too." Well, no one is stopping someone from doing that if they really want it. If you have a town that is mostly Jewish then they would probably focus on their own traditions. If a Christian minority there felt left out then they could do something of their own. Big deal. With freedom comes the responsibility to respect other views. That's what the whole First Amendment is about anyway. And that applies equally to atheists, fundamentalists, and everyone else. If someone is offended by a Christmas tree then they need to reread their history and the Constitution.
Our founding fathers were very spiritual people. They believed in God, and they believed that Divine Providence guided them in creating our nation. People need to go back and reread the Declaration of Independence. For your convenience here are the first two and the last paragraphs:
The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
...
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
There is a lot of mention of God in there. In today's political environment if we were trying to establish our Independence from Britain it would never happen because of all the dumbasses who can't understand plain English and who refuse to try. That really scares me and bothers me.
The previous was copied from a December 2005 posting.
Today I'd like to extend the discussion a bit. In the months since that posting it seems this issue has only gotten bigger and more serious. It not only affects holiday expressions but everyday issues.
Recently I've gone 'round and 'round with some angry atheists. They insist that Religion is the source of all evil in the world. Is that not the stupidest thing you've ever heard? Of course, no one denies that wars have been fought with Religion closely related to the conflicts. But to say that Religion is evil and has done no good for humanity is just plain dumb. Many wars have been fought over other basic needs, so should we also condemn those needs as well?
Like it or not, Religion is one of the pillars of civilization. It is one of those things that truly separated/separates us from the lower primates. To call for Religion to be abolished is about as silly as calling for architecture to be abolished.
Architecture is another pillar of civilization that has separated us from lower primates. It varies by culture and location, but it is always necessary for humans to survive. Physical shelter is one of our most basic needs, and the architecture that humans have developed and evolved over our history is evidence of our creativity in fulfilling our basic needs.
Religion is a kind of shelter too. It is a shelter for humanity to help it survive the social, emotional, and spiritual hardships that life entails. Religion is involved with fulfilling the basic need for social security (not at all the same as the government program called "Social Security"). Religion has given order and purpose to our lives. It has also varied according to culture and location, and it is evolving as our human society continues to grow. Without Religion humans would still be acting like wild animals with no "higher" attributes. To deny this fact is the same as a child thinking that because a ball is out of his sight, then it must not exist anymore.
Of course, anyone is free to disagree with me, but he would be wrong. ;-) I know my history and my psychology and my sociology and all those other "inferior" aspects of existence. But without them there would be no universities for those high falutin atheists to occupy and exercise their own freedoms. It is so very disturbing to me that these same atheists who claim that Religion is evil are the first ones to turn hateful and vengeful when they are questioned or confronted. Do they really "believe" in Freedom or anything else? I think not. Or at least, I see no evidence of it.
Hey, if someone wants to be an atheist I don't give two shits about it as long as they leave me and my religion alone. Freedom of Speech does not guarantee that atheists have to right to relentlessly criticize, belittle, or otherwise verbally abuse others with whom they disagree. But even I am susceptible to returning fire when attacked. I realize that some religious people are just as guilty of condemning people with whom they disagree, and that is unfortunate and this message is intended for them too.
While Religion is an essential pillar of civilization and will continue to be even though some will always try to destroy it, we all must learn to accept differences in thought and belief if our civilization is to continue evolving in a positive direction. Destroying any of the pillars of our shelters (of whatever kind) will only weaken the entire construction of our human civilization.*
And that is this week's sermonette.
* A note about Science: I love science and generally take a 'scientific' view of the world, but I am also aware that Science cannot yet answer ALL questions and fulfill ALL needs. It could be argued that the atheists who place all of their faith and belief in Science are basically worshipping it, just like the religious people who place all of their faith and belief in God to provide the ultimate and final answers. On a certain level there is no distinction between these approaches. Science is as much a human creation as religion. Oh, I know that's really going to prickle the sensitivities of some, but if they could only remove their emotional attachments to certain thoughts then they would be able to see it that way too.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
We have to remember that our founding fathers were reacting to England's struggles with the establishment of an 'official' religion. There was tremendous persecution done on behalf of religious differences. This was one of the main reasons that the colonists came here. This is why this issue is put first in the First Amendment. It was that important. It still is.
Let's look at what it says exactly. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." What that means is that there will be no law that establishes a National Religion of any kind. What it does not mean is that there can't be laws that respect religious establishments. But to hear some people talk you'd think that's what they think it means. They are totally misreading it. They want to think it means that the government can't have any religious expressions. But that's NOT what it says. People who object to "In God We Trust" on our money and "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and any other phrase that mentions God or any other religious concept are actually VIOLATING the First Amendment. They want to conveniently forget that "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" part. Hello? Free exercise thereof. That means that I have every right to say Christmas, and so does my kids' school and the courthouse and any other person or place that wants to. Calling a decorated tree in a government building a 'Christmas tree' is NOT establishing a religion. It is only the free exercise thereof.
I know some people will say, "Oh, but what about other religions? Why can't they have whatever to celebrate their holidays? If you have a Christmas tree then you should have a Hanukkah tree or whatever too." Well, no one is stopping someone from doing that if they really want it. If you have a town that is mostly Jewish then they would probably focus on their own traditions. If a Christian minority there felt left out then they could do something of their own. Big deal. With freedom comes the responsibility to respect other views. That's what the whole First Amendment is about anyway. And that applies equally to atheists, fundamentalists, and everyone else. If someone is offended by a Christmas tree then they need to reread their history and the Constitution.
Our founding fathers were very spiritual people. They believed in God, and they believed that Divine Providence guided them in creating our nation. People need to go back and reread the Declaration of Independence. For your convenience here are the first two and the last paragraphs:
The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
...
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
There is a lot of mention of God in there. In today's political environment if we were trying to establish our Independence from Britain it would never happen because of all the dumbasses who can't understand plain English and who refuse to try. That really scares me and bothers me.
The previous was copied from a December 2005 posting.
Today I'd like to extend the discussion a bit. In the months since that posting it seems this issue has only gotten bigger and more serious. It not only affects holiday expressions but everyday issues.
Recently I've gone 'round and 'round with some angry atheists. They insist that Religion is the source of all evil in the world. Is that not the stupidest thing you've ever heard? Of course, no one denies that wars have been fought with Religion closely related to the conflicts. But to say that Religion is evil and has done no good for humanity is just plain dumb. Many wars have been fought over other basic needs, so should we also condemn those needs as well?
Like it or not, Religion is one of the pillars of civilization. It is one of those things that truly separated/separates us from the lower primates. To call for Religion to be abolished is about as silly as calling for architecture to be abolished.
Architecture is another pillar of civilization that has separated us from lower primates. It varies by culture and location, but it is always necessary for humans to survive. Physical shelter is one of our most basic needs, and the architecture that humans have developed and evolved over our history is evidence of our creativity in fulfilling our basic needs.
Religion is a kind of shelter too. It is a shelter for humanity to help it survive the social, emotional, and spiritual hardships that life entails. Religion is involved with fulfilling the basic need for social security (not at all the same as the government program called "Social Security"). Religion has given order and purpose to our lives. It has also varied according to culture and location, and it is evolving as our human society continues to grow. Without Religion humans would still be acting like wild animals with no "higher" attributes. To deny this fact is the same as a child thinking that because a ball is out of his sight, then it must not exist anymore.
Of course, anyone is free to disagree with me, but he would be wrong. ;-) I know my history and my psychology and my sociology and all those other "inferior" aspects of existence. But without them there would be no universities for those high falutin atheists to occupy and exercise their own freedoms. It is so very disturbing to me that these same atheists who claim that Religion is evil are the first ones to turn hateful and vengeful when they are questioned or confronted. Do they really "believe" in Freedom or anything else? I think not. Or at least, I see no evidence of it.
Hey, if someone wants to be an atheist I don't give two shits about it as long as they leave me and my religion alone. Freedom of Speech does not guarantee that atheists have to right to relentlessly criticize, belittle, or otherwise verbally abuse others with whom they disagree. But even I am susceptible to returning fire when attacked. I realize that some religious people are just as guilty of condemning people with whom they disagree, and that is unfortunate and this message is intended for them too.
While Religion is an essential pillar of civilization and will continue to be even though some will always try to destroy it, we all must learn to accept differences in thought and belief if our civilization is to continue evolving in a positive direction. Destroying any of the pillars of our shelters (of whatever kind) will only weaken the entire construction of our human civilization.*
And that is this week's sermonette.
* A note about Science: I love science and generally take a 'scientific' view of the world, but I am also aware that Science cannot yet answer ALL questions and fulfill ALL needs. It could be argued that the atheists who place all of their faith and belief in Science are basically worshipping it, just like the religious people who place all of their faith and belief in God to provide the ultimate and final answers. On a certain level there is no distinction between these approaches. Science is as much a human creation as religion. Oh, I know that's really going to prickle the sensitivities of some, but if they could only remove their emotional attachments to certain thoughts then they would be able to see it that way too.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Pork Roast
Allow me to apologize for the delay in getting this Pork Roast done. It takes an awful long time to roast a whole hog, and this is my first time doing that so, of course, it took even longer than average to get it done. Actually, it was first started way back last September but was left to "cure" for all these months. So sorry, too, if it's a little tough or otherwise unpalatable. ;-)
However, the timing is now even better since we can also take this as an opportunity to celebrate the Chinese Year of the Fire Pig (burn, baby, burn! lol).
And on top of that we could make this a kind of dinner theater in conjunction with CIP's fun story, The Easterner.
Oh, and one last note. Since pork isn't Kosher then consume at your own risk. ;-)
The 7 Commandments are abridged for the last time, simply reading, "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others."
George Orwell, Animal Farm
CapitalistImperialistPig did a post last year "Self Evident Truths" that pretty well sums up his porcine flavor.
His concoction doesn't agree with me so allow me to serve up my own alternative recipe. To start here is the first part of the Declaration of Independence:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
First off, cip skipped that first paragraph. The following is a very important omission in his case:
...to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...
That's a big set-up for the "self evident truths" and "inalienable rights". The Forefathers are establishing that there are indeed "separate and equal" positions that are determined by Nature and God. What that means is that all people are equal no matter who they are, what characteristics they have, or whatever things separate them. The plumber's value is the same as the doctor's value even though they have been endowed with different skills, interests, etc. that put them in different "stations" in life.
Unlike the aristocracy of England they did not accept that being born into a particular family made someone in any way superior or inferior. Also the Forefathers did not believe or assert that they were in some way superior, or even more equal ;-), to the aristocrats. They said they were separate and equal. You can also think of that as meaning 'different and equal'. They meant it as individuals as well as collectively. (and please, let's not get in a tizzy over the slavery issue because it was a sociological error and has been mostly resolved, and this is my feast and that subject isn't welcome, thank you)
CIP goes into something about 'ordinary truths' and 'great truths' and how these "self evident truths" are 'great truths', but I'm not sure I understand the rhetorical difference between them. He said:
Ordinary truths, said Bohr, are statements whose opposites are false, whereas great truths, are distinguished by the circumstance that their opposites are also great truths.
Maybe I'm just dumb or lack some imagination at the moment, but that just doesn't make sense to me. Anyway, I think the "self evident truths" are not determined by myself or himself but by themselves. They are the truths that are determined by "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God." I need a good example of a law of nature that qualifies as one of Bohr's "great truths" that is true and opposite at the same time. Or is that Bohr's odd way of saying that it is very Natural that there are "separate and equal" things?
Okay, I just looked it up found that the basis of Bohr's idea is his "principle of complementarity: that items could be separately analyzed as having several contradictory properties. For example, physicists currently conclude that light is both a wave and a stream of particles — two apparently mutually exclusive properties — on the basis of this principle." (wikipedia) That sounds pretty close to "separate/different and equal" to me. ;-)
But, CIP, I also found that Bohr said that the opposite of a great or profound truth might be another great or profound truth. That "might" and the other differences in wording do make a difference, just as different ingredients can't always be substituted in a recipe. And I'm glad I looked that up for some clarification because it sure didn't sound like something that Bohr would say the way that CIP presented it.
Let's move on to the great truths:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Those "great and self evident truths" are that
1) all men are created equal (by virtue of the Laws of Nature and Nature's God, and 'equal' can be 'different' and 'separate'),
2) they are endowed by their Creator (or Nature) with certain unalienable Rights including Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Unalienable Rights are not only Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness but include those, but I don't think there is any way to interpret that as saying that unalienable rights are negotiable.
If you apply Bohr's idea, as CIP tells it, to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness what happens? You get what CIP did. He degenerated into a rant about some aristocratic elite in control of the country and other mostly indecipherable things. Just like when a recipe goes wrong. Why is it his application of Bohr's idea failed in this case? Because he took a wrong turn in his calculations or he flubbed up his recipe:
Great truths are subject to the "Tinker Bell" effect. Their power can endure only as long as people believe in them.
Actually, that is probably a good summary of the Liberal Outlook on Life (L.O.L., lol). They would like to believe that the Laws of Nature, or the real "great truths" and therefore "self evident truths" can somehow become untruths or opposites or 'separate but not equal' just by refusing to accept them. Well, that's about as satisfying as a Tofurkey on Thanksgiving Day instead of a nice baked ham.
Remember I what I said a little ways up? 'Anyway, I think the "self evident truths" are not determined by myself or himself but by themselves. They are the truths that are determined by "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God."' If they are really "great truths" they will be true and powerful regardless of people's belief or non-belief in them.
Why is it so hard for Liberals to accept these Laws of Nature? 'Equality' does not mean even more equal. 'Separate' does not mean even more equal. 'Different' does not mean even more equal.
(please note the dangerous weapon carried by the pig: a pitchfork, no less!)Well, now back to Animal Farm. Let's recall that the pigs led the Animal Farm after the Great Animal Revolt, and it didn't take long for them to start changing the Seven Commandments to suit their needs. Hmmm, doesn't that sound just like:
... the "Tinker Bell" effect. Their power can endure only as long as people believe in them
So here we are with the piggish thinking. They had no "great truths." They only applied the rules to everyone else and not themselves. Sounds just like a pig sty, doesn't it?
The Pigs became the new elite aristocracy because they didn't truly believe in equality for all. They only believed in themselves. The lived by the "Tinker Bell" philosophy of changeable truths. Not "self evident truths" or "great truths." They didn't respect the differences in the animals that separated them. They saw these differences as reasons to oppress and mistreat the others. They clearly had no understanding of the "separate but equal" aspects of Nature.
And it's quite apparent that CapitalistImperialistPig is not any different from any other Pigs. Except that now he has been roasted! ;-)
By the way, I must assure all that I wasn't the one who put the Big Pig on the spit, a job much too demanding of my stature. I asked some of my scary hillbilly buddies to take care of that for me. ;-) Funny thing, while they were working at it I did hear the tune Duelling Banjos playing. And I think I even heard one of them saying something about making pigs squeal.... Weeeeeee! Weeeeee! ;-)
Warning: Only those with very strong stomachs should click that last link. Trust me.
Side note: Apparently, the smell of roasted pork in the air has some pigs in Washington on the warpath. ;-)
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Constitutional Study: Congressional Powers
Article 1
Section 8
Well, since I am a Constitutional Fundamentalist I must admit that, indeed, Congress does have the final say about War. Whether people agree or not, it is clearly stated in the Constitution what the rules are. I don't really see where there is much controversy or question about it.
In regards to Iraq, my personal feelings about it are that it would be irresponsible and immoral for Congress to hastily withdraw funding for the war. I don't know what the best answer is because I'm not a military or stategic expert. But common sense kind of says that withdrawal isn't really the easy option that some make it out to be.
And I'm pretty much disgusted at all the Congresspeople who are hollering about their "20/20 hindsight" about their previous votes for the war. Of course, we all can name many things in our pasts that we would have changed had we known then what we know now. It's completely meaningless for people like John Edwards to jump up and say that they have changed their minds now. You can't go back and change what you did. Just accept it and move on.
Anyway, regardless of my individual feelings about it I have to accept the final decision of the representatives of my fellow citizens. This is the way it works in America. Sometimes you win and sometimes you don't. And when you don't, it's always best to move on instead of whine and complain about your loss, or to flippantly say you've changed your mind in hindsight.
---------
* written authority granted to a private person by a government to seize the subjects of a foreign state or their goods ; specifically : a license granted to a private person to fit out an armed ship to plunder the enemy
Hey, how can I get one of those? ;-)
Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal*, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Well, since I am a Constitutional Fundamentalist I must admit that, indeed, Congress does have the final say about War. Whether people agree or not, it is clearly stated in the Constitution what the rules are. I don't really see where there is much controversy or question about it.
In regards to Iraq, my personal feelings about it are that it would be irresponsible and immoral for Congress to hastily withdraw funding for the war. I don't know what the best answer is because I'm not a military or stategic expert. But common sense kind of says that withdrawal isn't really the easy option that some make it out to be.
And I'm pretty much disgusted at all the Congresspeople who are hollering about their "20/20 hindsight" about their previous votes for the war. Of course, we all can name many things in our pasts that we would have changed had we known then what we know now. It's completely meaningless for people like John Edwards to jump up and say that they have changed their minds now. You can't go back and change what you did. Just accept it and move on.
Anyway, regardless of my individual feelings about it I have to accept the final decision of the representatives of my fellow citizens. This is the way it works in America. Sometimes you win and sometimes you don't. And when you don't, it's always best to move on instead of whine and complain about your loss, or to flippantly say you've changed your mind in hindsight.
---------
* written authority granted to a private person by a government to seize the subjects of a foreign state or their goods ; specifically : a license granted to a private person to fit out an armed ship to plunder the enemy
Hey, how can I get one of those? ;-)
Monday, January 29, 2007
Old Stuff: Sticky Notes and a Bible
Did you know that some Post-it notes last for decades and don't lose their stick? Here is proof...
Twenty year old Post-it notes. (inset with clear date) For real. And they still stick just as well as brand new ones. I bought these in 1987 at a paper supply store where I worked for a summer job. I thought they were cute then, but I think they are even cuter now. ;-)
As you can kind of see in the picture my "Pure Bull" notes are used as place markers in a Bible. That's just kind of my own personal ironic joke, but feel free to be amused if you are so moved. ;-)
This is actually my favorite Bible. I received it in 1976 when I was Baptized. It is the "Good News Bible" in Today's English Version and has very groovy 70ish illustrations:
This illustration of Jabob's Dream/Stairway to Heaven had inspired me with a sermonette a few days ago, but the idea has vanished now. So much for Hawking's Information Paradox. ;-)
This has been called a "liberal" translation by some, but it doesn't really matter to me either way. I can read the King James version too. This Bible has a lot of nice extras like maps of the ancient world, a chronology of the Bible, passages from the Septuagint (ancient Greek translation of Old Testament), and various indeces.
Twenty year old Post-it notes. (inset with clear date) For real. And they still stick just as well as brand new ones. I bought these in 1987 at a paper supply store where I worked for a summer job. I thought they were cute then, but I think they are even cuter now. ;-)
As you can kind of see in the picture my "Pure Bull" notes are used as place markers in a Bible. That's just kind of my own personal ironic joke, but feel free to be amused if you are so moved. ;-)
This is actually my favorite Bible. I received it in 1976 when I was Baptized. It is the "Good News Bible" in Today's English Version and has very groovy 70ish illustrations:
This illustration of Jabob's Dream/Stairway to Heaven had inspired me with a sermonette a few days ago, but the idea has vanished now. So much for Hawking's Information Paradox. ;-)
This has been called a "liberal" translation by some, but it doesn't really matter to me either way. I can read the King James version too. This Bible has a lot of nice extras like maps of the ancient world, a chronology of the Bible, passages from the Septuagint (ancient Greek translation of Old Testament), and various indeces.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Vintage: 1968
Usually, when we think of the year 1968 we probably think of assassinations (Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy), the Vietnam War, hippies, anti-war protests, and other social unrest. But just like any other year there were plenty of normal, peaceful, common events such as the birth of a baby. One of those babies was born to a happy couple on January 25 and was named "Rae Ann" a couple of days later.
By the way, why isn't my birthday listed in the Wikipedia article? ;-) I'm kidding, of course. But I am the number one (and two, at the moment) "Rae Ann" on Google even ahead of a Hospital named Rae Ann, which is really weird because I'm just some housewife in Tennessee. LOL But what is really weird is that most people I interact with in "real" life have no idea about this.
If you're curious about other products of 1968 here are a few things. If you like wine, especially pretty old wine, and have a lot of money you could try some of these. Apparently, 1968 wasn't a great year for wine though. Oh well.
It was a great year for music. My mom used to talk about how I'd bounce in my carseat to Marvin Gaye's "Heard It Through the Grapevine" which has been overlooked in the above Wiki article despite its being a #1 hit late in the year. Other favorites from 1968 are "Sunshine Of Your Love" by Cream, "Hello, I Love You" by The Doors, "Born To Be Wild" by Steppenwolf, "Hey Jude" by The Beatles, and "(Sittin' On) The Dock of the Bay" by Otis Redding, among others.
If you like muscle cars then 1968 was a pretty good year. However, the best cars from that year are the Chevrolet Corvettes which aren't listed as "muscle cars" in the Wiki article because I guess they are more considered "sports cars", whatever the difference might be.
Well, it's a good thing that David is particularly fond of 1968 vintages. ;-) Several months ago he bought this:
Yes, it's a 1968 red Corvette.
"His and Hers", sorry that the garage is such a mess but the other detached garage is being finished inside and so a bunch of stuff had to be moved temporarily into the this garage.
When he bought this car it was in good running condition (much like me when he first "got" me, lol) but it is a "project car" and he has dismantled much of its insides so he can truly restore it. The car's insides are now about as bad a mess as my insides. ;-) But unlike me, it will be worth pretty big bucks after it is fully restored. To fully restore me to "mint" condition would probably be impossible, but if you tried you'd have to spend a whole lot more money than to restore this lovely automobile.
Here is a nice shot of the quintessential, iconic, curvacious shape of the Corvette that is probably what most people think of when they hear about Corvettes. This is the C-3 body style that was produced from 1968 to 1982, which is kind of a long time for a car to keep the same body style.
Well, it's tempting to ask myself, "When did I get so old?" But really, the answer to that question is pretty easy. All I have to do is look around at my life and see all the wonderful blessings that can't be any kind of "instant" results, but are truly the products of many years of hard work, struggles, and also good times. I have a really great life and for that I'm eternally grateful to the Universe and the people who have loved me. I'm happy to be beginning my 39th year, and I hope to have at least 39 more happy years ahead of me.
By the way, why isn't my birthday listed in the Wikipedia article? ;-) I'm kidding, of course. But I am the number one (and two, at the moment) "Rae Ann" on Google even ahead of a Hospital named Rae Ann, which is really weird because I'm just some housewife in Tennessee. LOL But what is really weird is that most people I interact with in "real" life have no idea about this.
If you're curious about other products of 1968 here are a few things. If you like wine, especially pretty old wine, and have a lot of money you could try some of these. Apparently, 1968 wasn't a great year for wine though. Oh well.
It was a great year for music. My mom used to talk about how I'd bounce in my carseat to Marvin Gaye's "Heard It Through the Grapevine" which has been overlooked in the above Wiki article despite its being a #1 hit late in the year. Other favorites from 1968 are "Sunshine Of Your Love" by Cream, "Hello, I Love You" by The Doors, "Born To Be Wild" by Steppenwolf, "Hey Jude" by The Beatles, and "(Sittin' On) The Dock of the Bay" by Otis Redding, among others.
If you like muscle cars then 1968 was a pretty good year. However, the best cars from that year are the Chevrolet Corvettes which aren't listed as "muscle cars" in the Wiki article because I guess they are more considered "sports cars", whatever the difference might be.
Well, it's a good thing that David is particularly fond of 1968 vintages. ;-) Several months ago he bought this:
Yes, it's a 1968 red Corvette.
"His and Hers", sorry that the garage is such a mess but the other detached garage is being finished inside and so a bunch of stuff had to be moved temporarily into the this garage. 
When he bought this car it was in good running condition (much like me when he first "got" me, lol) but it is a "project car" and he has dismantled much of its insides so he can truly restore it. The car's insides are now about as bad a mess as my insides. ;-) But unlike me, it will be worth pretty big bucks after it is fully restored. To fully restore me to "mint" condition would probably be impossible, but if you tried you'd have to spend a whole lot more money than to restore this lovely automobile. 
Here is a nice shot of the quintessential, iconic, curvacious shape of the Corvette that is probably what most people think of when they hear about Corvettes. This is the C-3 body style that was produced from 1968 to 1982, which is kind of a long time for a car to keep the same body style.Well, it's tempting to ask myself, "When did I get so old?" But really, the answer to that question is pretty easy. All I have to do is look around at my life and see all the wonderful blessings that can't be any kind of "instant" results, but are truly the products of many years of hard work, struggles, and also good times. I have a really great life and for that I'm eternally grateful to the Universe and the people who have loved me. I'm happy to be beginning my 39th year, and I hope to have at least 39 more happy years ahead of me.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Vicious Grandma
This is my paternal grandmother in 1951, age 37, so she wasn't a grandma yet. She was an amazing woman who was a big inspiration to me. She was killed by a drunk driver on Jan. 20, 1990, when he plowed his car into the car she was in. It was a devastating loss for the whole family. She would have had many, many more years of good health ahead of her.
Growing up my sister and I would spend a week or two with our grandparents in the summers. Partly, I guess, to give our parents a little break from us, but also to help us get to know our grandparents since they lived a few hours away and we didn't get to see them often throughout the year. We have so many fond memories of those summer visits.
She got her first modern washer and dryer in 1977 or 1978 (I can't remember exactly now). Before that she used one of those wringer washers. I think hers was electric and not hand cranked. The one in the link is a remake, and believe it or not, I would kind of like one, though not to replace my modern one. ;-) I was fascinated by watching her feed the wet clothes through the wringer, but she wouldn't let me help because she was afraid I'd get my fingers or hand caught in it. Maybe she was just like me in that she liked to be in control of the laundry and didn't want little hands messing things up.
In high school for my senior year Spring Break, unlike most of the other kids who went to the beach to party, I spent the week with my grandmother. My grandfather had died in 1979, and Grandma never remarried though she did have a series of boyfriends-usually younger by several years because the men her own age couldn't keep up with her. ;-) This week with her was priceless and very important to me.
She loved to drive all over the rural area to visit with friends and family. I got to meet people and see places that I never otherwise would have seen. Some of these were kind of unbelieveable because of the abject poverty conditions, yet these people were warm, friendly, and wise. I'm talking tar paper shacks here, with crooked linoleum floors and crooked, unfinished walls and no heat other than a wood stove. And in rural Appalachia there are still people living in this way.
We went to several different backwoods Baptist churches that were having Revivals. Every night was a different one. Incidentally, this is the same grandma who had me recite a bible verse in front of her church when I was quite young. I remember being impressed with the passionate delivery of one preacher who was barely literate yet understood his interpretation of the Bible to a degree that many highly educated preachers don't seem to reach. He truly seemed to be channeling the Holy Spirit. At another, I was moved in some other deeper, more vague way. It has been these experiences, among some others, that have kept me from accepting atheism.
During this Spring Break she also taught me to pick "creases" which are a wild green of the cress family that were delicious when she cooked them. I see them growing around here and am always thinking of picking them and eating them, but there is that small part of me that is kind of insecure and worries that I'll do something wrong.
My grandmother was a storehouse of knowledge about family history, nature and plants, and probably many other things that I didn't get a chance to learn. She always seemed fearless and almost brutally practical. I think she'd have gotten a big kick out of being called a "vicious grandma."
Monday, October 09, 2006
Re-Declaration of Independence
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
The rest of the document lists the "long train of abuses and usurpations" of the King of England upon the Colonies. Please click that link and read it for yourself. I'd like for each and every American and especially each U.S. Congressperson to read that list and compare it to the current political environment. Unfortunately, there are striking similarities, but fortunately they are still fairly limited. However, in the foreseeable future it is possible that the trend of Congressional Power over the Will of the People will increase. And in that event, I must say that We the People still have Every Right "to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
"No Representation Without Taxation"
Yes, that's the inverse of the famous slogan from our REVOLUTIONARY WAR,
"NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION."
Does anyone remember our American History? Does anyone remember why we fought for INDEPENDENCE from England? I'm not going to review that here because it should be COMMON KNOWLEDGE.
But I'm so mad about all the ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION bullshit that I'm spitting venom.
They sneak into our country illegally, leaving huge, litter-strewn trails along the borders, trespassing on TAX-PAYING AMERICANS' property. And now just because they 'peacefully' demonstrate on our streets they think they have a RIGHT to citizenship and 'respect.'
SORRY! I have no respect for someone who comes here and expects to have all the same rights as a LEGAL resident without going through the proper processes.
I see them as no different from a MOB OF BULLIES who think that they are above the law. They are just like that selfish person who tries to jump ahead of others when there is a long line at the bank or whatever. We're all in line here, folks. It is NOT the American Way to cave to a mob of criminals.
If our Congress gives in to the demands of the ILLEGALS then we all should
VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT REPRESENTING THEIR TRUE CONSTITUENTS, REAL AMERICAN CITIZENS.
Article Three, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution:
Well, I'm sure many will object to my calling ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS our 'enemies', but they are AN INVADING FOREIGN FORCE, and if that's not an enemy then what is??
I have no qualms about accusing any US CONGRESSMEN of TREASON if they are "adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort," which certainly seems the case if they are putting ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS' demands ABOVE their CONSTITUENTS', American Citizens, needs.
Call me mean-spirited, non-compassionate, whatever. I don't care. MY TAXES pay the salaries of my so-called REPRESENTATIVES, and if they aren't doing their job then they need to at least be fired, if not convicted of aiding criminals.
"NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION."
Does anyone remember our American History? Does anyone remember why we fought for INDEPENDENCE from England? I'm not going to review that here because it should be COMMON KNOWLEDGE.
But I'm so mad about all the ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION bullshit that I'm spitting venom.
They sneak into our country illegally, leaving huge, litter-strewn trails along the borders, trespassing on TAX-PAYING AMERICANS' property. And now just because they 'peacefully' demonstrate on our streets they think they have a RIGHT to citizenship and 'respect.'
SORRY! I have no respect for someone who comes here and expects to have all the same rights as a LEGAL resident without going through the proper processes.
I see them as no different from a MOB OF BULLIES who think that they are above the law. They are just like that selfish person who tries to jump ahead of others when there is a long line at the bank or whatever. We're all in line here, folks. It is NOT the American Way to cave to a mob of criminals.
If our Congress gives in to the demands of the ILLEGALS then we all should
VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT REPRESENTING THEIR TRUE CONSTITUENTS, REAL AMERICAN CITIZENS.
Article Three, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in
levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them
aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open
court."
Well, I'm sure many will object to my calling ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS our 'enemies', but they are AN INVADING FOREIGN FORCE, and if that's not an enemy then what is??
I have no qualms about accusing any US CONGRESSMEN of TREASON if they are "adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort," which certainly seems the case if they are putting ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS' demands ABOVE their CONSTITUENTS', American Citizens, needs.
Call me mean-spirited, non-compassionate, whatever. I don't care. MY TAXES pay the salaries of my so-called REPRESENTATIVES, and if they aren't doing their job then they need to at least be fired, if not convicted of aiding criminals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)