Non-Political Politics

Magical Resources

2011-05-18T10:06:00.000-07:00

In a "60 Minutes" interview with Katie Couric, Secretary Robert Gates sees us turning the corner in Afghanistan and bringing more troops home "by the end of this year." While Couric asserted that the majority of Americans think that "Now, we've got Bin Laden, now it's time for the troops to come home," Gates was unsure as to what we might expect regarding troop withdrawal acceleration before the end of the year ... "I think it's premature ... I think we just don't know. It's only been a week."

Concluded Gates, "I would say that we are getting the upper hand. We have over the last 18 months put in place, for the first time, the resources necessary to ensure that this threat does not rebuild, does not reemerge once we're gone. I think we could be in a position by the end of this year, where we have turned the corner in Afghanistan ... and more troops could come home".

Of what magical resources was the Secretary speaking?

The reason given by President Obama that we have any troops in Afghanistan is that he believes "the security of the United States and the safety of the American people are at stake in Afghanistan," as I think do most of us ... but Eric Holder has recently indicated that the decision to begin troop withdrawal this July remains firm. I don't know if the asserted public opinion translates into political pressure but hopefully, we will not adopt through passion what reason would reject.

Secretary Gates believes further that "If we keep the military pressure on and continue to hold what we seized over the last year and expand the security envelope, a change in the relationship between Al Qaeda and the Taliban could, in fact, this fall or winter, create the circumstances where a reconciliation process could go forward" ... the rationalizations and bedfellows of politics never ceases to amaze.

Because of the events of 11 September, many came to believe the Taliban regime but a wicked, repressive oppressor of its people ... indeed I believe they were that, but their enduring resurgence can only be explained by significant, if not broad based support ... can there be any other rational explanation? If indeed they hold the interest of a significant faction within Afghanistan, as it appears they must, then any long term solution to that country's problems must include them at the table, or so one would think.

As both President Washington and Robert Gates have posited, countries and regimes, including the Taliban, will deal with us because it is in their greater interest ... that's what countries and regimes do. That's fine relative to working with us, as far as it goes, but what specifically is being done to make it in the long term best interest of the Taliban and those supporting them to work together with the other factions in Afghanistan to rebuild the country and live in harmony?

The Secretary has said ... "We have, for the first time, the resources necessary to ensure that this threat does not rebuild, does not reemerge once we're gone ... not sure what that means, but it's clear that if the country continues to be driven by faction and local interest, enduring peace will not come to the region.

I know that Robert Gates is no diplomat ... but it seems like an especially bad time for him to retire!

Comments Please

Obama on Easter Sunday

2011-04-30T09:53:00.000-07:00

While I try to keep abreast, it's not my current practice to closely follow what's going on under Washington's big top. Rare is the on-line "news" article on which you can safely bet the ranch ... the rule rather than the exception is that if you read three different reports, you'll get three vastly different impressions as to what happened ... they're commentaries rather news reports, each with its own tone and slant, making it hard to get at the truth.

However, the 15 April interview of the President that prompted the "Washington, Jefferson and Obama ... Party Politics and Public Credit" post had piqued my interest ... so I "clicked" on a few of the Yahoo headline links catching my eye when I connected to the Internet ...

Given that the majority of Americans claim Christianity as their religion, it is surprising that our sitting President, having declared "I'm the person who is best prepared for us to finish the job so that we're on track to succeed in the 21st century" ... chose not to release any statement recognizing the observance of either Good Friday or Easter Sunday.

At least that is what was reported on the Internet ... interestingly, White House press secretary Jay Carney knows that the President is a devoted Christian but is uncertain as to whether the White House put out a statement regarding Easter.

Assuming it to be true, the decision may reflect White House dissatisfaction over their 2010 statement not being universally well received. Critics, noting that the observance of Easter Sunday is uniquely Christian, point to the 2010 statement's secular tone and the President's "while we worship in different ways, we also remember the shared spirit of humanity that inhabits us all - Jews and Christians, Muslims and Hindus, believers and nonbelievers alike" ... while the 2010 White House released statements on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha, made no mention of Christianity or a spirit of inclusivity.

Certainly it is remindful of his Inaugural which included the phrases ... "it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all" and "we are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers," which might give some justifiable pause. I must admit that his "spirit of humanity" statement was somewhat troubling to me ... it starts with "while we worship in different ways" and ends with "believers and nonbelievers alike" ... begging, in my mind's eye, the question "how do nonbelievers worship?"

I'm not a student of religion but if Obama's "nonbelievers" equates to those who do not believe that the world was purposefully created, then Houston, we have a problem! Personally, I believe those who truly so "believe" to be at most very close to a null set ... for it is inconceivable that any sober thinker would so conclude. Identifying them as a group, embracing and inviting them under our umbrella would seem to serve no worthwhile purpose.

I think rather, he must have been speaking instead of those who reject the various religious dogmas of man as being as being fatally flawed ... of those there seem to be many. However, rather than nonbelievers, I think they would be better described as believing differently than we ... that is, those of us who believe in the tenets of a recognized religious doctrine.

The notion of God, who existed in the beginning ... a beginning, before which there was nothing ... the creation of something from nothing ... eternity ... is all beyond man's comprehension. Well, mine anyway! However, that, coupled with the complexity of it all, is proof positive for me of the existence of God and a purposeful creation ... as well as man having divine purpose.

While I think the White House's failure to release any statement recognizing the observance of Christ's Resurrection and the President's inconsistency of treatment toward the different religious observances to be a serious political faux pas, we must each decide for ourselves the integrity of his intent ... you know, whether or not it was another example of his doing something political rather than something important for the country.

Hopefully, he was well intending.

I didn't see the program but, from the same news source, it seems that Dr. Billy's boy, Franklin Graham, has again come under fire from the White House for saying Sunday on ABC’s "This Week with Christiane Amanpour" that the President "has some issues to deal with" when it comes to proving his nationality ... he can solve this whole birth certificate issue pretty quickly ... I don't know why he can't produce that"

It seemed a fair question ... that, or if it could, why it hasn't. It was my understanding that though a birth certificate had not been produced, the nationality issue had been resolved before Obama's nomination since it speaks to his eligibility to run for the office. As a result, I haven't followed this soap opera ... but it seems that an adequate explanation as to why the birth certificate hasn't been produced has not been forthcoming.

Of course, Donald Trump has been pushing the point, perhaps for the sake of pushing the point ... not sure.

In his Inaugural, the President said "those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government" ... and indeed we must hold those holding public office duly accountable, and they must conduct their affairs in the light of day ... because, as he said, "only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government."

While the law provides protection against self incrimination, those who seek such protection are generally those who need it ... certainly we so conclude, even when there are other are other motives. So too is it with those who seek to avoid issues. Failing to address an issue that is begging attention is somewhat like an admission of guilt ... it makes no sense, unless there is some compelling reason.

Thus, the clamor was to be expected ... producing the document, assuming it is genuine, isn't of relevance ... the question is, as it has always been ... why all the intrigue? His political adversaries would now seem to have the tiger by the toe and hopefully aren't about to let go ... and rightfully so! The truth, whatever it is, needs to be told and the issue put to bed!

In no way have I suspected that Obama was ineligible to run for the office ... the probability was less than nil that opposing political parties would have gone silently into the night in 2008 had they not been totally satisfied. However, it has been unfair to the American people to allow the nationality issue to continue to be a political football. Has it not been incumbent upon the President to publicly address the issue ... that is, to explain why his birth certificate wasn't produced, and why he chose not to publicly address the issue so that we could be spared the imposition?

Of course it has ... also in the extremely unlikely category is that the Democratic Party would not have allowed such a shroud of doubt to plague his campaign unless they felt it to their distinct advantage.

Mine may be a prejudiced view but I honestly believe it it be just another instance of ... you know, his doing something political rather than something important for the country.

No, we don't know the reason ... perhaps we never will ... but you can bet the ranch that there was one, or more likely, a collection.

Another hope is that he will!

Like Dr. Franklin, "the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others" ... Comments and Discussion please

Washington, Obama on Party Politics and Public Credit ...

2011-04-22T05:12:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

Which is the greater sin ... doing something you believe should not be done, or failing to do something you believe you should?
For many if not most, sin is tied to commission and so failing to do something isn't sin ... "I didn't do it so I'm not guilty" ... so in a country subject to majority rule, it would seem the answer is the former rather than the latter.
I'm not so sure ... but if we look at all of the bad that has occurred throughout history, my guess it that failure to do what should be done has been the more responsible. In the 20th century, there is no question but that the evil wielded by the Nazi regime had no equal ... but, many had the opportunity to stop Herr Hitler before he became der Führer.
As it relates to "nonpolitical politics" ... good government depends upon adherence to sound principles by those who govern and the people holding their elected officials strictly accountable. Failure to do what should be done is responsible for the corruption of our system, more than any other ... responsible for our being beset with the problems we find ourselves now being confronted.
I oppose political parties, all of them! Good government demands of our representatives that they work together in good faith, in a spirit of cooperation; using their independent judgment in reasoning the common good of the nation ... and that their governing be guided by it. Political Parties are incompatible with good government as they represent competing forces ... each having its own version of the common good, with it's members expected to be advocates.
Both George Washington and John Adams warned against Political Parties ... said John, "There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution"
Washington warned that "the alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension" was a frightful despotism. Counseled he, "The spirit of party serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption ... thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another"
Additionally, we've seen that party spirit and influence undermine the system of checks and balances established by our constitutional framework ... indeed, when both houses of the Congress and the Office of the President under the control of the same party, there are no effective checks and balances.
That is not to suggest that there are not those guided by principle within each party who understand and support this tenet of good government, for certainly there are. However, until we can divest our governing bodies and electoral process of the spirit and influence of party, our government will be permeated by the weak, incompetent and corrupt minions of party.
Public Credit ... it all started out right enough ... "no pecuniary consideration is more urgent than the regular redemption and discharge of the public debt; on none can delay be more injurious, or an economy of the time more valuable" ... that from the President who could have been King had he so wanted to Congress in 1793.
What did you expect ... “Failure by Congress to raise the US debt limit could plunge the world economy back into recession" ... “I'm the person who is best prepared for us to finish the job so that we're on track to succeed in the 21st century" as declared last Friday by our sitting President.

Washington had something to say about credit in his goodbye speech too. That man had a genius for putting a whole bunch of wisdom in one paragraph!

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit.
One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible
Avoid occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remember also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it.
Avoid the accumulation of debt by
- shunning occasions of expense, and
- vigorous exertion to discharge the debts in a timely fashion
Do not ungenerously leave for posterity, the burden which we ourselves ought to bear!

Jefferson was of the same mind and sang from the same hymnal "It is a wise rule and should be fundamental in a government disposed to cherish its credit and at the same time to restrain the use of it within the limits of its faculties, never to borrow a dollar without laying a tax in the same instant for paying the interest annually and the principal within a given term; and to consider that tax as pledged to the creditors on the public faith."
He was outspoken in his opposition to incurring public debt ... “there does not exist an engine so corruptive of the government and so demoralizing of the nation as a public debt” ... forewarning, “It will bring us more ruin at home than all the enemies from abroad.” It can't be much clearer than that!
Daddy stated it differently, "If you don't have the cash to buy it, wait until you do!"
Inherent in those maxims is the same virtue as instilled by my parents ... most parents methinks, that your word is your bond and that credit will only be extended to those with a strong moral, religious sense of obligation to repay debt in a timely fashion, without regard to circumstance or convenience ... credit is good, debt is bad!
Both Jefferson and Washington were explicit in their beliefs that no generation has the right to burden future generations ... that every generation should pay off the entirety of its own debt. Said Jefferson, "is it the less dishonest to do what is wrong because not expressly prohibited by written law? Let us hope our moral principles are not yet in that stage of degeneracy, and that in instituting the system of finance to be hereafter pursued we shall adopt the only safe, the only lawful and honest one, of borrowing on such short terms of reimbursement of interest and principal as will fall within the accomplishment of our own lives."
Obama urged swift action, saying he was confident Congress ultimately would raise the limit. "We always have. We will do it again" said Obama, who voted against raising the debt limit as a freshman senator in 2006.
To suggest that "we always have" shows a flagrant disregard for our history though no doubt it's true that "we will do it again" Warned Jefferson, in 1816, "a departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on, till the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery, and to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering. ... And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression."
And so too is it with men ... a departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on ... until they are consumed with corruption with but one remaining principle ... self-serving expedience.
In defense of his 2006 vote, in his second year as senator and two years before being elected president, Obama said "I think that it’s important to understand the vantage point of a Senator versus the vantage point of a ... President. When you’re a Senator, traditionally what’s happened is this is always a lousy vote. Nobody likes to be tagged as having increased the debt limit for the United States by a trillion dollars.
As President, you start realizing, You know what? We ... we can't play around with this stuff. This is the full faith in credit of the United States And so that was just a example of a new Senator, you know, making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country. And I'm the first one to acknowledge it"

I rather doubt that he's the first ever to have acknowledged voting the party line but perhaps it's true ... "nobody likes to be tagged as having as having increased the debt limit by a trillion dollars, especially if they are planning to run for President"

That's the 2011 explanation ... how would the Senator have explained his vote back in 2006, had he been so asked? It seems that on 20 March, he eloquently answered that in no uncertain terms, not in an interview but from the floor of the Senate: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies.
Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better!” ...
Admittedly, that's strong rhetoric, but it seems consistent with the principles of Washington and Jefferson, and spoke well for someone interested in good government, regardless of party and regardless of tenure ... as one believing in those principles, I would like to believe that he spoke from the heart ... certainly it was much more than a simple "political vote" so as to not to leave a bad impression!
The President's dilemma isn't to be envied but it's of his own doing ... the problem is that his own eloquence speaks strongly against the possibility of his failing to properly appreciate the importance of his vote. To some of those who accept his explanation and believe his 2006 eloquence and vote were "political" and made against what he thought was in the country's best interest, there isn't a problem as they consider it expected behavior ... but for the rest, he's shown himself as unprincipled and unworthy of his office ... falsely presenting himself, his feelings and his values to the people as he served in the senate and sought the presidency.
That seems to be what he would now have us believe ...but true or false, it certainly appears to serve his current purpose of justifying his having now reversed his position.
For those believing his 2006 eloquence was sincere, the felony must be compounded 10 fold for it makes the President's Friday explanation seem a politically expedient sham.
The people are dependent upon the soberness, honor, integrity, wisdom and general virtue of those who would govern ... no ifs no ands no buts!! "Nobody likes to be tagged as ... " as a reason for one's voting posture and record bespeaks something other! Like the senator said, "Americans deserve better! Perhaps we're seeing for the first time, the cloth of the Emperor's new clothes ...

I truly believe violation of principle to be at the heart of all of our problems ... is, and has always been. Noah Webster, had this to say ... "If the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made not for the public good so much as for the selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded" ... Noah always did have a way with words.
"Making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what is important for the country" is behavior unbefitting those holding the public trust ... and exclusively reserved for the unworthy minions of party; most often the ambitious, seasoned and corrupt professional politician. Newcomers are expected to vote according to conviction, as idealistic champions of cause, before becoming corrupted by avarice, greed and thirst for power. But, no member of the Senate, House, or any governmental body ... from the day they're first sworn through the last day they serve can rightfully justify such behavior or avoid our rightful condemnation.
When Obama joined the US Senate in 2005, it was not as a political novice ... he brought both experience and political ambition with him. He served in the Illinois State Senate from 1997 to 2004, attempting to unseat the Democratic incumbent for the US House in 2000 and delivering the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in July, 2004. His presidential campaign began in February 2007.
To say the least, it is inexplicable that anyone worthy of holding public office would even consider seeking any such office without having first secured an understanding and appreciation of the gravity attending the position to which they might be seeking election. A virtuous man would consider it unthinkable, if not dishonorable.
Infallibility is not expected of our governors, and especially the new ones, but a sober appreciation of the gravity attending their duties and responsibilities is ... and indeed, such appreciation is expected and demanded of all levels of public service, elected and appointed. Thus, if we are to believe the President's assertion that he didn't appreciate the importance of the 2006 issue because he was but a senator, then he must be held accountable and in contempt!
Contrary to our president's protestations, it is not reserved for the presidency. "As President, you start realizing ... You know what? We ... we can't play around with this stuff” ... his folksy style may be just as innocent and sincere as it is disarming, but surely any sober thinker and supporter of good government must conclude that the appropriate time for him to have started so realizing was before seeking public office, not after becoming President of the Fifty!
Neither is "You know what? We ... we can't play around with this stuff" reserved for public debt ... it applies to virtually every issue with which our representatives and leaders can be expected to be confronted ... it's all serious "stuff" of the highest possible order! You know that, I know that ... one would think that a senator and teacher of Constitutional Law would too!
Neither our sitting President nor the current Congress can rightfully be singled out and taken to task for our long and established adherence to flawed policies and practices that violate sound basic principles and engender such oxymoronic conclusions ... it is a responsibility in which we all must share.
Now that he's come to those realizations, Obama posits "I'm the person who is best prepared for us to finish the job so that we're on track to succeed in the 21st century”
With all due respect, "I have a better opinion of our country. I think we shall never be without a sufficient number of wise and good men to undertake and execute well and faithfully the office in question" ... I believe that, as did Dr. Franklin back when he said it at the 1787 Convention. One thing's for sure ... it's obvious that his range of realization doesn't yet include the fact that such self-aggrandizement is not presidential.
The President acknowledged on Friday that HE must "compromise on spending so as to get the public debt ceiling raised" and avoid a financial crisis. It's truly frightening how sinister that sounds to me. Maybe it's because I can make no sense of it ... were we to raise the public debt ceiling, would that not tell the world that our government anticipated needing even more money to stabilize our economy? One would think that sending such a signal might well cause, rather than prevent a crisis. And maybe it's because the Legislative Power controls spending and it's the Executive Power that should serve a check against their excesses, rather than the reverse.
Not being an expert on Keynesian economics, I have trouble understanding how increasing the public debt ceiling so as to empower a government to increase its country's burden of debt to levels beyond the capacity of its people to reasonably assimilate ... can be important to its best interest, but I suspect it's flagrant abuse of Keynes' theory.
It makes no sense to me, except as ... you know, someone making what is a political statement rather than something important to the country. Again, though my reaction is negative and one of most serious concern, my motivation is not political ... it is not intended to suggest that Obama's qualifications, performance or behavior as a public official are better or worse than those of his colleagues who are ambitious and driven by the spirit of party.

I truly respect the Office of the President, regardless of who resides in the Oval Office and support their efforts to govern ... theirs is a burden not to be envied. However, given the evidence as it now stands, it would be a disservice to myself and those who depend on my exercising my best judgment were I to continue to place confidence in the integrity, trustworthiness or creditability of the President.
However, you know what? Like Obama said, we ... we can't play around with this stuff ... for the moment, we must now play the hand that's been dealt. If it can, let's attend to it without our usual party politics. If we can, let's take advantage of the opportunity to return to the principles of Washington and Jefferson rather than depending on governmental control and artificial manipulation ... that is, kill the snake rather than scotch it!
Who among us can relate to 14 trillion dollars of public debt? ... and yet, we treat it almost as casually as pocket change. It's simply another example of Jefferson's wisdom that departures from principle become precedents. Like the President said when he was but a misguided freshman senator ... America deserves better! $14,000,000,000,000 of Public Credit is Good ... $1 of Public Debt is bad!
The virtue of those who govern is far more important to good government and our well being than their positions on specific issues! Each of us must most carefully evaluate the candor, qualifications and worthiness of those seeking or holding public office for ourselves. Indeed we should as it's our duty and obligation to our neighbors who depend upon it ... and our failure to do that is why we find ourselves where we are.
In an environment controlled by powerful Media and Party interests, it is especially difficult for those of us on the outside looking in to know what evil lurks in the hearts of men. "Who Do You Trust?" may well be the "nom de plume" of choice for describing our plight, but we were better served when it was appropriate but as the name of a TV game show hosted by Edgar Bergen.
Hard to improve on Noah ... but why not try?
In a word, "good government is what we get when the citizens perform their duty and do what they should ... place principled men in office. Bad government is what we get when they do not" ... Mama would have been proud and Mrs. Gillespie would have awarded me a gold star, that's for sure!

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Like Dr. Franklin, "the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others" ... when you've read all the pages, Comments and Discussion please

To Vote or Not To Vote ... that is the question

2011-03-24T22:15:00.000-07:00

Who Votes?
As is to be expected, a higher percentage of older people vote than do the younger ... specifically, voter turnout is lowest among young adults, rapidly accelerating up through middle age, and then continues to increase at a slower rate, declining only slightly after age seventy, as the impact of advancing age becomes increasingly significant.
Who Doesn't?
It's estimated that close to 60% of us do not vote in Mid Term" elections! In a system based on majority rule, that's a big number ...

That's based on Census Registration/Voter Surveys covering the 1994 National Elections ... 52% of those eligible to register and vote reported having NOT voted!

1994 NOT Voting Precentages Analysis
Age Group	Weight	Citizens NOT		Registered
Age Group	Weight	Registered	Voting	NOT Voting
18-20	5.3	60%	82%	55%
21-24	7.5	49%	75%	51%
25-34	21.0	43%	64%	38%
35-44	22.9	31%	50%	27%
45-54	16.1	25%	42%	22%
55-64	11.1	23%	38%	19%
65-74	10.0	20%	34%	17%
75+	7.1	23%	42%	24%
All Ages	100.0	33%	52%	28%

We must keep in mind that people tend to over report their participation in the electoral process. Election Data Services estimates indicate that 75 million voted in the 1994 elections while in the Census Surveys, 86 million reported having voted. Thus it appears that 48% reported having voted while only about 42% actually did.
That is to say, it is estimated that 58% rather than the reported 52% did not vote! Indeed they were the significant majority in our system of majority rule!
The misreporting dynamics are driven by competing forces and are thus complex, but that would suggest a crude adjustment of 10% when interpreting the numbers would, in most cases, be conservative.

Why all the interest in 15 year old survey data? Simply put, it was handy! However, the picture has been surprisingly stable over the last forty years since our eighteen year olds first became eligible to participate; at least in mid-term election years 1974 through 2006, where the dynamics of the presidential campaign are removed from the equation.
Who's not voting? That's the animal in which we're most interested. We're interested because they're not!
The distributions by age yielded few surprises. Perhaps they simply reflect an increased awareness of the relevance of government that comes with age. The young adult numbers may bespeak an obvious target and need for our involvement with the educational system, but 58% is a big number, no matter how you cut it. Even among the retired, indications are that the opportunity for good government would attract significant support from the currently inactive crowd.
What about Race, Education, Family Income, and Type of Employment?
The Census Survey showed reported as "NOT Voting" rates by race as 50% for Whites ... 61% for Blacks, and 66% for those of Hispanic Origin.
With regard to education ... again, no real surprises ... the percentage reporting as having NOT voted decreases as the educational level increases, from those with less than a 10 grade education to those holding advanced degrees.

Less than 10th Grade education ... 73%
10th - 12th grades, non-graduated ... 71%
High School Graduates ... 60%
Some college, including Associate Degreed ... 51%
Bachelor Degreed ... 39%
Advanced Degreed ... 30%

As expected, voting levels increase as Family Income levels increased, consistently over the entire range from lowest to highest. For those in the bottom 7.5 percentile ... the reported level of having not voted was 74% while the rate for the highest rung, the top 15% in reported family income ... was 34%. For the 7.5% not reporting Family Income, the reported NOT Voting rate was 56%.
The Survey also provided data by Type of Employment within the civilian labor force. The composite of those having reported NOT Voting was 52% ... 51% for those employed, 68% for the unemployed.
The composite reported NOT Voting rate for those employed in Agriculture was 49% ... 37% of the Self Employed, 63% for the wage and salaried workers.
For Non-Agricultural workers, the Reported NOT Voting rate slightly higher at 51% ... 35% for governmental workers, ... 44% for the self employed, and 55% for wage and salaried workers in the private sector.
For those not in the civilian labor force, the composite Reported NOT Voting rate was 51%.
No, there were few surprises ... but confirmation is good for the soul ... and restoring one's confidence ... the self employed have a stake in what happens and so they vote, especially the farmers. Governmental workers vote too ... what's new?!
Scratching the surface doesn't tell us what's really beneath it but indications are that it's fertile ground. The reasons for not voting are many but most bespeak inadequate interest or dissatisfaction with the system. It does suggest some audiences for our efforts ... including both educators and students ... and, of course, this significant nonpolitical majority in our system of majority rule.

Comments and DiscussionsNon-Political Politics

In God We Trust .... it's on our money!

2011-03-20T22:50:00.000-07:00

... and though our money is no longer as good as gold ... our trust in God is better! Those who don't, and those who would have us remove "In God We Trust" from our currency ... are urged to use what money they have to buy a ticket and move somewhere else!
If for no other reason, the order of things throughout the universe demands we conclude that the world of which we're a part was purposefully created. The "how" ... the "why" and the "what" may be beyond my comprehension, as are both the notion of a beginning and the one of things having always been ... but that doesn't change the fact that it was.
Show me a man who claims to understand it, and I'll show you a fool ... and/or a charlatan. If you believe him, I'll show you two.
No, I'm not talking about Charles Darwin. Though he's on the list of usual suspects, I think him neither fool nor charlatan. Best I can tell, he believed in a purposeful creation and was just trying to connect some dots regarding what's since transpired, based on his observations ... seems to have done a rather remarkable job too, when taken in proper context.
I choose to define the "what" as God ... seemingly, and I believe, with unlimited powers.
It seems everything has its purpose and its place ... I marvel at the fact that there are aver 40,000 identified species of spiders, from tiny ones smaller than the head of a pin to giant ones having legs of up to a foot long. Some experts believe there may as many as 100,000 or more.
There's nothing here really intended to be of a religious bent ... but with me increasing age, when I massage my little gray cells, I find myself more and more inclined to believe that God is inside each of us.
Perhaps proof positive that it's all beyond my comprehension ... that I'm crazy, or both. Certainly I can't imagine our having unlimited powers, nor do I so suspect ... but a bit of God inside of us would help explain the many wondrous thoughts we think, our unbelievable accomplishments ... and how our prayers are heard(whether we whisper or shout, sound doesn't travel very far)
It would also seem to support my belief that we come ready equipped with a core set of values and emotions ... an awareness of right and wrong, a conscience ... compassion. Those are of the acorn ... though how the oak grows still depends on how the twig is nurtured and bent.
Perhaps George Lucas' notion of "The Force" wasn't so far from the truth ... may it always be with us!
Since it's all beyond my comprehension, it would be illogical and unseemly for me to attempt judgment of other beliefs ... and for the same reasons, I respect those with honest and sincere beliefs different from mine, including those who reject all existing religious dogmas. However, I take strong exception to those who don't believe in a purposeful creation, that is to say, those I call the "atheists"
Inanity or insanity ... for me to attempt applying reason to something beyond my comprehension, take your choice ... but, were I to accept the notion that our universe was not purposefully created, then would it not follow that nothing has purpose, including me ... that, I cannot accept!!
Certainly there's nothing wrong with carefully considering such a possibility ... is it not our duty and obligation unto ourselves to keep an open mind and pursue truth? But having so done and found it to be wanting, I must conclude that those who disavow our purposefulness are, like the man who claims to understand "the beginning" ... fools, charlatans or both. I can't conceive of it being in our best interest that fools and charlatans be allowed to influence us or have a voice in those things that do.
Pragmatically, we can't effectively exclude folks from the citizenry or governing process just because of what they say they believe or don't, even if the law permitted ... truth is, most would just change the lyrics and sound of their tune.
But regardless of what songs some may sing, I don't believe that there are any of sober thought who really believe in something other than a purposeful creation ... indeed, I believe it's a null set.
Maybe we really didn't need to put "In God We Trust" on our currency back in 1864 when it was first done ... the whole world knew where we stood on that issue from our declaration and constitution! However, were we now to remove it, that would tell the whole world and future generations, in no uncertain terms, that we had abandoned that belief ... not a good idea. The fools and charlatans who would have us believe that it's a violation of the church and state provisions of the Constitution are indeed a special class; deserving of free, one-way, first class passage to the destination of their choice!
In bad times, man turns to God ... when times are good, not so much.
Many years ago, a very wealthy, highly successful, influential and well respected man ... reluctantly took a rare but much needed vacation. A fear of flying greater than that of John Madden found him in the back of his Rolls for two full days as he was driven to a retreat just south of Miami.
Upon arrival came an urgent message ... an unexpected emergency of gigantic proportions had arisen, threatening to destroy his vast empire. Everyone was in a panic; only he could save the day. He must return at once ... time was of the essence, the only option was to fly!!
An hour later found him and his police escort at the airport ... special arrangements were made; he was driven unto the runway and allowed to board a departing plane ... non-stop to his New York destination.
Well, as luck, fate or Providence would have it, thirty minutes into the flight ... they encountered a massive thunderstorm, the plane was being tossed about ... and indeed, the stewardesses were all seated as a precaution. The man was distraught, beside himself ... forget his massive empire, his life was coming to an abrupt end!
He wasn't a religious man but perilous times demanded drastic measures ... he had but one option ... pray!! "Oh Lord, I'm not a religious man and I don't know how to pray ... but, I need your help and if you will get us safely to New York, I will give you half of all I own!"
Well, almost immediately, ... this storm, like the one on the Sea of Galilee ... was gone, as though it had never been. The remainder of the flight, smooth and uneventful.
All believe in God, though some may disavow ... in bad times, man turns to God
As he was departing the plane, a preacher accosted him with outstretched hand ... "Hallelujah Brother, ... I heard what you said about giving half of everything you own to the Lord, and know you want to start right now!"
Smiling, with his feet once again on solid ground, our wealthy man replied, "No, I made a better deal ... told him if I ever got on another one of these danged things, he could have it all!!"
... when times are good, not so much.
Speaking of bad times, none worse than the earthquakes and tsunami that have recently ravaged Japan ... the resulting destruction defies verbal description. In a word, it's bad ... real bad!
Ye Olde Barbershop, the Southern Jackass, and I know that you will keep them, the people of Japan, and all those affected by this horrible disaster ... in your thoughts and in your prayers. They need our help, yours and mine.
In God We Trust!
God Bless

Comments and Discussion

NPP Hall Of Fame - Edmund Burke

2011-03-12T22:59:00.000-08:00

The Shop's "Non-Political Politics" Special Feature is predicated on the assumption that the vast majority of us share a common set of core values and beliefs ... here's something upon which to chew.
My Miss Carol introduced me to Edmund Burke ... he was a bit older than we, being an English contemporary of our Founding Fathers. Our view, that of Miss Carol and me, was much the same as his, ... that ours "is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests ... where each must promote those interests as an agent and advocate, against other agents and advocates. Ours is a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole ... where the general good, not local purposes, not local prejudices, resulting from the general reason of the whole, ought to guide."
They talked a bit different back then ... but Burke's idea that our representatives should work together for the general good of everyone rather than promoting the interests of their own local communities ... is hard to beat, no matter how you say it.
He of course was speaking of the English Parliment back before the declaration but I think that George Washington, John Adams, Dr. Franklin, James Madison and most of our Founding Fathers held similar views ... and it indeed expresses what I believe to be their intent. Some might argue with justification that the "States" represented different and hostile interests; each with its agents and advocates ... but, "the best interest of the whole" is what guided the Constitutional Convention of 1787.
Time has changed many things, including our governing and the attitude of our governors ... but I believe that "Burke's Law" continues to be the guiding light for proper republican government.
It follows that when folks are selected at the local level to serve as our representatives at a higher level ... the state or national level, their primary focus necessarily shifts from the local to the higher, as does their duty and obligation ... that is, with the general good of the whole. Well, if it don't, it should.
That sits well with some folks, not so well with others. Does today, as it did in 1774 when Burke made his famous speech to the Electors of Bristol.
That is not to say that those who represent us should not take into full account the needs, concerns and desires of those they represent. Our representatives should remain in close contact and association with their constituents. Make no mistake ... like Burke said, our wishes should carry great weight, our opinions respected, our needs and concerns given unremitted attention.
He considered it to be the representative's duty to "sacrifice his repose, pleasures and satisfactions" to those of his constituents ... and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own.
Well, if you support and vote for a fellow, it's only fair that he listens to you and does what you want ... common sense, right? No, not exactly ... not even good in horseshoes.
It may seem somewhat convoluted, if not more contradictory than profound ... but be patient, ... here's what got Edmund Burke into the Hall Of Fame ... "But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living.

These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."

Bite down hard on that, he was talkin' plain ... them's more than just a bunch of good sounding fancy words strung together ... Burke made it clear that should local interests emerge that are perceived to be in opposition to the real good of the whole, the member for that place ought to oppose such interests the same as all the other representatives.
I suggest that Edmund Burke's name should be added to the list of those opposed to political parties before they existed! Modifying Burke a bit, "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it in any way ... no ifs, no ands, no buts!" How can your representative best serve the good of the whole while being under obligation to any faction? In a word, He cannot!
Burke's view was that to deliver an opinion, is the right of all men ... those of constituents are to be considered weighty and respectable for which a representative ought always be appreciative and which he ought always most seriously consider.
"But," He argued, "government and legislation are matters of reason and judgment, and not of inclination; and what sort of reason is that, in which the determination precedes the discussion; in which one set of men deliberate, and another decide; and where those who form the conclusion are different from those who hear the arguments?"
Clarified Burke, "authoritative instructions; mandates issued, which the representative is bound blindly and implicitly to obey, to vote, and to argue for, though contrary to the clearest conviction of his judgment and conscience, ... these are things utterly unknown to the laws of this land, and which arise from a fundamental mistake of the whole order and tenor of our constitution."
While it may seem to some that the thrust is directed toward the proper demands and expectations of the electors ... it is at least a two way street. Ignoring corruption, is not the more common failing that of the representative honestly believing that his duty and obligation is to bow to the will of his constituents ... rather than to exercise his judgment for the general good of the whole?
Who among our current congressmen and senators best fills the role of Representative as prescribed by Edmund Burke? What say ye?
Non-Political Politics - Hall Of Fame ... Charter Member Edmund Burke

Comments and Discussion

Good Government ... Good Grief!!

2011-02-11T23:32:00.000-08:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

Who among us would disagree with the notion that good constitutional government demands the active involvement of a virtuous electorate ... well informed, interested and accountable; having a genuine and vested interest in the long term well being of their community, state, and country?
You would think that would be something upon we would have almost universal agreement ... libersl, conservatives ... everybody ... but, were that the case, would we be where we are?
The question becomes, "why"' ... actually two questions ... that is ... (1) why do we not have such universal agreement? and (2) why do we not have the active involvement of a virtuous, well informed, interested and accountable electorate?
Not sure on either ... maybe there actually is universal agreement but it's that second question that gives folks trouble. Maybe some just don't think that having good government is important, at least not enough to commit to all those things ... "I'd like to, honest I would, but Mister Bob, where's a body to find the time? Being actively involved and staying well informed is demanding ... hard work!"
With over half a million residing in our least populous state and 300 million folks now living in the fifty, it's easy to conclude that one person is of no consequence or can't make a difference. So, while it's a limited and flawed perspective, my guess that many see no compelling reason to be interested in government, what's being done or how ... good or bad.
More to the point, government has a Brobdingnagian amount of competition for our interest ... sports and entertainment, sex, school, church, work, money, travel ... fishing, the weather, computers and blogging.
Ask the more than 30 million of us if we have a genuine and vested interest in the long term well being of our community, state, and country and my guess is you'll get and almost universal "Yes!" ... "Of Course," or words to that effect. Well, there are more than 30 million of us ... something like 308 million, just checking to see who's paying attention. Unfortunately, the long, expanded answer for too many of us includes "so long as it doesn't interfere with my making money and having fun!"
I don't know the answer but that's the way it seems to me ... we each have our own impression and no doubt those who share mine can express it better. Views range from "Everything's fine!" to "Things are so bad I just don't want to think about it."
Well, what about being virtuous and accountable? I didn't forget those, but danged if I want to upset anybody ... we'll get back to them just as soon as I find my 20 foot pole!!
Well, actually ... the way I see it, good government requires good folks running things ... folks what are virtuous and accountable ... and that requires good folks deciding who those folks are, that is, the electorate. Garbage in ... garbage out ... if undesirables are doing the electing, undesirables will be the ones elected! Tell me it ain't so ...
I'm like Dr. Ben ... just not as smart ... that is to say, "the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others" ... what do you think?
Before joining Elvis and leaving the building, one thought that keeps begging for attention concerns what just one person can do if they're interested, and get actively involved.
All of us have read or heard about some great or personal tragedy prompting someone to passionately champion a cause ... it's more common than it is rare, methinks. They make such a clatter, folks spring from their beds to see what's the matter ... then join in the fight, ... and dramatic positive change often occurs as a result.
It's only natural that we applaud such efforts ... they truly deserve our praise, and besides, such stories make us feel good too! A long time ago, Benjamin Franklin posited that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" ... not sure if he was the first. It's a rotten shame that folks have to wait until tragedy strikes to become interested and get involved ... to make such a clatter ... maybe if they had earlier so done, we'd have fewer tragedies.
That the laws and penalties relating to speeding and drunk driving have been inadequate, and enforcement too lax are matters of long standing record ... as is the public's knowledge of their dangers. Strides have been made in increasing public awareness, strengthening the laws, and reducing incidence rates ... with much of the credit going to such champions who became involved ... only after losing loved ones as a result of accidents involving speed and/or alcohol. . Perhaps more to the point are the champions in the fight against drugs ... illegal and prescribed ... who became involved only after tragedy struck close to home ... how different things might have otherwise been. While not the story of a resulting champion, perhaps saddest of all was the report of a distraught mother who, upon hearing of her eight year old's having shot and killed a schoolmate, said ... "I told him not to take that gun to school ... it wasn't even his."
Don't wait until tragedy strikes ... become interested, get involved!
Rick Monday was one who didn't wait ... you remember him ... he was a Marine ... played baseball too ... for the Athletics, Cubs, and the Dodgers ... and is now a Dodger broadcaster. Well, one Sunday, Monday was playing center field for the Cubs in a game at Dodger Stadium ... between the top and bottom of the fourth, two guys ran out into left center and proceeded to douse an American flag with lighter fluid ... cutting to the chase, Rick ran over, faster than Jesse Owens, scooping it up and away before they could burn it. Tragedy was avoided! That was April 25, 1976, the year of our bicentennial.
Many call it the "Greatest Play in Baseball History" ... his attitude was that "anyone would have done the same thing" ... maybe then, not today! We were taught to honor and respect the flag ... never to let it touch the ground. The very notion of flag desecration should be repugnant to every American and surely our laws should protect us from vermin who would so spit on our country.
Well it did on 25 April, 1976 ... the Flag Protection Act had been passed by Congress eight years earlier in response to flag burning demonstrations protesting the Vietnam War ... almost all of the states followed suit.
However, in 1989, the High Court ruled 5-4 that public expression through flag burning was constitutionally protected. What a message it sends ... "If you don't like what your country is doing ... go buy a flag and burn it in protest. Worry not, you're entitled ... it's your constitutional right!" ... what an outrage!!
Another tragedy demanding our involvement, methinks!
Renewed efforts are currently being made for a constitutional amendment ... Jo Ann Emerson has introduced legislation in the House that would restore to Congress the power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag ... a companion bill will be introduced in the Senate by Orrin Hatch, later this month. The Joint Resolution reads, “The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.”

We can make a difference ... please contact your senators and representative urging them to actively support this legislation so that it can be approved and submitted to the states for ratification.

Some of the enlightened have called me the "2,000 Year Old Man" ... being that old wouldn't be too bad if they could guarantee that I would look and feel like I was 100, like I do now! Back when I was a boy, we wouldn't dare let the flag touch the ground ... a tradition going back to before our independence, methinks.
The National Association of Secretaries of State's 1999 New Millennium Report found that our youth believe government and elections are irrelevant to things about which they care. Scary ... if that don't grab your britches, nothing will!! That, and more, on page two ...

Contrary to popular belief, I wasn't always old ... as kids, we always looked forward to being age 21 ... that magical age when we were deemed adults and could do we wanted without asking permission.I became interested in war when I was three ... heard the President's "a date which will live in infamy" speech ... wanted to be a soldier and kill Japs ... had to wait until 1962 to serve my country, but by then I didn't want to kill nobody, 'cept maybe the Drill Instructor. I was in bed with the measles when he died ... heard a report on a local station ... nobody would believe me until it was confirmed several hours later.
I was born during FDR's second of four terms and became interested in politics when I was four ... listening to Eugene Talmadge on the radio and at picnics; him and his bright red galluses(my first big word) ... wanted to vote for him, like Mama and Daddy ... had to wait until 1960 to vote, and by then it was too late ... Mister Gene died in 1946.
In our infinite wisdom, we extended the right of franchise to 18 year old kids in 1971 ... I suppose it was in recognition of their being well informed, interested, and accountable young adults and that it would improve our government.
I'm sure most of the under 21 crowd thought as much .and said so too ... albeit few had yet to read Houseman's poem. After we reached the magical age, most of us stopped thinking about such things ... but until then, it seemed so unfair and preoccupied the thinking of many. No, not voting ... drinking and doing things that you weren't allowed, at least not without permission.
My first intended and I were to be married in the First Presbyterian Church on Easter Sunday ... a big wedding was planned, church reserved, and all that ... but, a funny thing happened on the way to the Forum and things didn't quite work out as planned.
It's a long story that's done been told but the short of it is that we eloped so that she could join me in Europe during the last six months of my enlistment ... upsetting 'bout everybody, methinks, especially her father. We ran into one minor problem ... she was twenty and couldn't marry without her parents permission!
Well, so much for eloping, that was that ... or it would have been were it not for the nice lady handling the Marriage Licenses over at the Court House saying "I will issue the license if you will swear that you're pregnant" ... I told her I was willing to swear to that, but she wasn't talking to me! And so she did, this virgin love of mine, though her name was not Mary. It didn't matter to the lady ... we told her the truth ... she said "don't worry about it, now I can issue the license ... you complied with the law."
Surely, the popular notion and argument that if you're old enough to serve and put put your life on the line for your country, then you're old enough to drink holds water, or alcohol, as the case may be. I did neither until I was 21.
Voting, methinks, is a horse of a different breed, demanding skill sets and judgments most don't yet possess and would have been rejected by a virtuous and responsible electorate as pure insanity. There is no magic age; 18, 21, or 65 ... but if we are to use a minimum to determine eligibility, let it be one where the vast majority can be expected to be reasonably well qualified for the task at hand.
What's did is did ... good government continues to demand the active involvement of a virtuous electorate ... well informed, interested and accountable, regardless of changes in its demographics. Best I can tell, voting habits haven't changed that much since 1972 ... there have been fluctuations but the percentage of the voting aged population actually voting in presidential elections has remained in the lower fifties ... with highs of 55.2% in 1972 and 55.3% in 2004 ... falling below 50% only once ... 49.1% in 1996.
As expected, the media attention given National Campaigns has a dramatic impact ... in non-presidential years, voting percentages are relatively constant, ranging from 36.4% to 39.8% ... perhaps a reasonable first estimate of the core population that is active and interested in the exercising of their franchise

Presidential Elections
Voting Age Population				Elected
YEAR	Population		Registered
YEAR	Registered	Voted	Voted
2004	79.0	55.3	70.0	Bush
2000	76.0	51.3	67.5	Bush
1996	74.4	49.1	66.0	Clinton
1992	70.6	55.1	78.0	Clinton
1988	69.1	50.1	72.5	Bush
1984	71.2	53.1	74.6	Reagan
1980	68.7	52.6	76.5	Reagan
1976	69.0	53.6	77.6	Carter
1972	69.1	55.2	79.9	Nixon

Non-Presidential Elections
Voting Age Population
YEAR	Population		Registered
YEAR	Registered	Voted	Voted
2006	61.6	37.1	59.3
2002	70.1	37.0	52.9
1998	70.6	36.4	51.5
1994	67.3	38.8	57.6
1990	65.2	36.5	56.0
1986	66.3	36.4	54.9
1982	65.1	39.8	61.1
1978	65.2	37.2	57.0
1974	65.7	38.2	58.2

The young adults responded with 50% percent of those aged 18 to 24 voting in the 1972 election ... but all that glitters ain't no tinsel on a Christmas tree ... the percentage generally declined thereafter with only 32% percent of that age group voted in 1996 ... same again in 2000, rebounding to 42% in 2004 and 44% in 2008.
The newness and hype surrounding the change in the minimum voting age most probably had a positive impact on participation in 1972 which would explain at least some of the subsequent decline ... candidates especially appealing to young adults (Gore and Obama) would seem to explain the later surge as but 20% voted in the 2006 non-presidential election.

The New Millennium Report, issued in 1999 by the National Association of Secretaries of State, found that our youth believe government and elections are not relevant to things about which they care. Other studies indicate that many feel uninformed about politics and the electoral process. ... a NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) study found only that one-third of high school seniors lack a "basic" understanding of how the American government operates ... however, the percentage of students who performed at or above the "proficient" level was only 13% ... up from 11% in the 2006 study.
Admittedly, things were different back in the day ... in my school, our government was comprehensively covered in eighth grade Civics as a required course with all but the very worst of students having a basic understanding and the vast majority becoming proficient or better. Demanding that students be proficient in a subject may no longer the standard but surely those lacking a basic understanding are not being graduated ... tell me, what were we thinking, giving them the right to vote?
No, not the young adults ... just those not proficient, especially the ones lacking a basic understanding!!!
Interestingly, immigrants wishing to become enfranchised citizens have to pass a test. Thankfully, entitlement doesn't yet extend to driving an automobile ... you have to be responsible, accountable, and to some extent qualified.
Is not our freedom and survival as important?
Do not our parents care enough about their children to insist that teachers fail them unless they have mastered the material?
From any reasonable perspective, the picture painted by the studies and reports is alarming, if not totally unacceptable. No. I'm not being critical of our youth ... there are among them the leaders upon whose shoulders heavy burdens will be placed ... they have the energy, spirit and enthusiasm so vital to good government and the effecting of needed change. It is important to encourage those of our youth who have chosen to participate in the process to be active and diligent in their pursuit of virtue and good government.
Mine is a condemnation of those responsible for assuring that our children are well prepared as they start their journey, equipped with good solid values and a fundamentally sound education; family and educators alike. They may be well intending but from where I sit, the reports bespeak a tragedy of the first order ... one demanding we get involved! What say ye?
Well, Mister Bob, since everybody wants good government, you don't need me ... guess I'll go fishin' ... give me a holler when they git 'er done!
A genuine interest in the long term well being of our society ... do you have it? Talk’s cheap ... get involved!
Remember, one man's opinion is but that ... please share yours, together with your reaction to mine ... or any other comments you might have, in the General Discussion Area ... you just never know what might result from your clatter.

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and DiscussionsNon-Political Politics

Peaches!

2010-12-02T01:46:00.000-08:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

Rumor is that James Madison, our Constitution's expectant father was so excited that he leased a private jet and got to the convention site eleven days before it's scheduled start ... had the waiting room all to himself for ten whole days before the President in waiting arrived to keep him company. With time on his hands, he contemplated how to best get the states to pay their fair share of expenses, respect each other's rights and the authority of Congress itself.
W.C. himself is credited with saying "Philadelphia, wonderful town, spent a week there one night" ... but it's more likely to have been their reaction ... the anticipation that night before the Convention was to start must have made it seem as if the clock was standing still.
The day had finally arrived!. Monday, 14 May, 1787 ... a forgotten day in history!!
Forgotten ain't quite the word for it ... bet them two were fit to be tied when nobody showed up. It was supposed to be RSVP but evidently somebody forgot to send out the invitations and it had to be postponed for eleven more days. Eleven days early and eleven days late ... guess that's what folks mean when they say it all evens out!
The Convention finally opened on Friday, the twenty-fifth. Their Mamas didn't raise no dummies ... first thing they did was to establish a Rules Committee to set the rules for the danged convention ...
Other than that, It probably wasn't much different than in more modern times, except for being in Philadelphia instead of Las Vegas ... with folks checking into the hotels, saying howdy to friends, getting their badges, messages and stuff ...took 'em all weekend long and Monday too ...
Bright and early Tuesday, right after coffee and scrapple, they got down to business ... with Edmund Randolph presenting the Virginia Plan and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina presenting an opposing alternative. It took that day and the next to read them over ... and then they started debating. I suspect it was a lot like our modern political debates except that there wasn't more that one TV camera and you couldn't give the moderator an approved list of questions limiting what folks could ask.
Still, they must have liked the idea and enjoyed it 'cause before you could turn around, they were debating most everything, those things relating to Representation and the Executive power. Folks were afraid of having a strong Executive Power, mostly because of their recent experiences with King George, methinks ... and they debated on whether we should have one ... or a Committee holding the Power ... as well as how much to give, in both power and pay.
Dr. Franklin eloquently addressed the Committee, presenting a well reasoned argument for their consideration ... "The Committee will judge of my reasons when they have heard them ... I see inconveniences in the appointment of salaries; I see none in refusing them, but on the contrary, great advantages.
Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power,and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men a post of honor, that shall, at the same time, be a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it. It will not be the wise and moderate; the Iovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your Government and be your rulers. And these too will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation: for their vanquished competitors of the same spirit, and from the aame motives, will perpetually be edeavouring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people."
He argued that those believing that they could never find men to serve in high office without paying them well for their services ... were mistaken ... that "the pleasure of doing good and serving their Country and the respect such conduct entitles them to, are sufficient motives with some minds to give up a great portion of their time to the public, without the mean inducement of pecuniary satisfaction" ... citing examples that included the Office of High County Sheriff in England ... the office of Counselor or Member of their Judiciary Parliaments in France ... and George Washington's little eight year tour of duty as General of our armies.
Concluding with "shall we doubt finding three or four men in all the United States, with public spirit enough to be sitting in peaceful Council for perhaps an equal term, merely to preside over our civil concerns, and see that our laws are duly executed. Sir, I have a better opinion of our country. I think we shall never be without a sufficient number of wise and good men to undertake and execute well and faiithfully the office in question" ... my Miss Carol long ago told me what Dr. Ben had said, and since then, I've voted for him every chance I get, from County Sherrif to Presaident. Not sure it's ever done him any good but any man what thinks like that deserves my vote!
Guess the fact that they all loved and trusted General George helped resolve those questions, especially after having made him wait in that hotel room with James Madison for them eleven days.
However, the much anticipated Grande Bataille was to be over representation ... the debates concerning the issues regarding representation were many and more than intense ... it was those what would determine the relative power of each of the state governments, relative to each other ... and to the national one. The lines were drawn, deep into the sand ... the big states, and them what thought they would soon so become, wanted the political power of each state to be population based ... while the others wanted the power distributed equally among the states.
On Thursday, 28 June, a month into the Convention, the debate on representation in the Senate opened, and on the following Monday, Dr. Franklin addressed the Convention ... for then having an interest, his entire speech is contained in "The Genius Of Genius" Post ... this is the beginning and the end: "Mr. President:
The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance and continual reasonings with each other ... our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many 'noes' as 'ays', is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own wont of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it.
I therefore beg leave to move ... that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that service" ... yes, the beginning and the end, the alpha and the omega ... he said it all, methinks!
Roger Sherman seconded Dr. Ben's motion ... Alexander Hamilton was concerned that adopting such a rule after the Convention started might perceived as having been proposed because of dissensions within the Convention ... the counter argument being that the past omission of a duty could not justify its continued omission ... and, that the rejection of such a proposition would expose the Convention to more unpleasant criticism than its adoption.
It was asserted by Hugh Williamson that the real reason for the omission was that there were no funds ... Edmund Randolph proposed, with Dr. Ben seconding, that a sermon be preached at the request of the Convention on the Fourth of July, ... and subsequently, prayers be read in the Convention every morning. On 2 July, the Convention adjourned until 5 July, without any vote on the motion.
The 4 July, celebration attended by George Washington concluded with the following prayer ... "We fervently recommend to thy fatherly notice . . . our federal convention... favor them, from day to day, with thy inspiring presence; be their wisdom and strength; enable them to devise such measures as may prove happy instruments in healing all divisions and prove the good of the great whole;... that the United States of America may form one example of a free and virtuous government. May we continue, under the influence of republican virtue, to partake of all the blessings of cultivated and Christian society"

In addition to the question of equal representation, there were the questions of how both members of the House and the Senate were to be selected. To say that the debates were heated would be like saying Mama's fried chicken was pretty good ... and things slowed down, almost to a halt. You might think that it was just a case of being overwhelmed by so much stuff being thrown at them, all at once like ... you might think that Al Gore invented the Internet too. No, these questions had been thought about, articulated, and discussed by most everybody ... more times than Pearl Harbor was discussed on December 8, 1941. No, the issues were complex ... and there was strong disagreement ... it was no surprise.
Well our forefathers, which four don't matter much, had the weekend to think about it ... Sunday to pray about it too. When Roger Sherman of Connecticut raised his hand on Monday, folks probably thought he wanted some coffee for permission to go to the men's room but he had something else in mind ... "That the proportion of suffrage in the first. branch should be according to the respective numbers of free inhabitants; and that in the second branch or Senate, each State should have one vote and no more" ... an idea he'd first had back when they were wrestling with another problem ... the question of what to do about King George and the writing of the declaration of what they decided.
William Paterson of New Jersey presented a plan ... he wanted to keep the same form of government as it was under the Articles of Confederation, modified to allow raising revenues, regulating commerce and foreign affairs. His plan had a one house legislature with each state having the same number of votes ... and the legislature electing the President.
Even Alexander Hamilton submitted a plan ... it called for the Legislative power to be vested in a House and a Senate, subject to the veto of the Executive power ... the house subject to three year terms of office; with Senators, Justicies of the Judicial branch, and the Chief Executive all serving during good behavior ... that is to say; lifetime, except for impeachment and conviction.
Noteworthy under his plan, senators were elected by electors chosen for that purpose by the people, rather that by the legislature or general election, with the states divided into senatorial districts, one per senator. The same group electing the nation's chief executive.
The Executive Power was stronger than under the other plans and included ... veto power over legislation being passed into law and over the execution of all laws alread passed; the direction of wars; appointment of the heads or chief officers of the departments of Finance, War and Foreign Affairs; and the pardoning all offenses except Treason; which required the approval of the Senate. Also, with the advice and consent of the Senate, were included the power of making all treaties and the nomination of all other officers and Ambassadors.
When I was a boy, Louis Lefevre had a plan too ... he and his Vegetable Truck came by with fresh produce twice a week during the late spring, summer and fall. His stuff was fresher and cheaper than what you could get from the grocer ... and Mama was always careful to get his very best. Well, almost always ... I remember once, him having the best looking blackberries and strawberries that I'd ever seen, and doggone if she didn't select some scrawny old peaches, what nobody would want. I was too young to know words like flabbergasted, but that's what I was! Questioning Mama's decisions was risky bussiness, but I was young ... "why did you get these dumb peaches when we could have had those blackberries and strawberries?" ... Mama laughed ... "because I'm fixin' peach cobbler, dummy!"
Some folks would call that "asked and answered" ... but around our house, the proof of the cobbler was in the eating, and it was better than good! Mama always bought the best ... and that day, it was scrawny peaches!
Hamilton's plan had some good stuff, methinks ... but lifetime terms of office for elected officials, and the Chief Executive having a negative on the execution of passed laws ... were foreign to most folk's thinking. Maybe that's why they called his the British Plan. However, cobbler was American and Roger Sherman's plan was "peaches" to those of the convention ... it represented a compromise, providing for each state's representatives in the House to be based on population and in the Senate by equal numbers for each state. It saved the day ... folks liked Roger and he could have had most anything he wanted, like Mama's fried chicken, box seats at Yankee Stadium or free insurance premiums for his state ... but, as he was tired of toting it around them 11 years, he gave it to them for free.
The issues still had to be debated and details worked out ... but they had the recipe and on 24 July, established a five man "Committee of Detail" to to create a constitution containing all issues agreed to by the convention.
On Monday, 6 August, the Convention received its first draft for consideration ... extremely important in its own right, as it represented significant accomplishment ... the resultant of over two months of serious discussion, debate, deliberation, reflection and compromise. Lest it be forgotten, it must be again emphasized that these were strong willed men of varied backgrounds, interests, and views. As outsiders looking in, we would be exceptional if we failed to marvel at their virtue ... that they could put aside their own perceived interests and differences and dedicate themselves selflessly to the task of forming the best possible governing mechanism ... one that would endure. Sure, some got mad, took their ball and went home ... some probably held their breath 'til they turned blue, but they were truly a remarkable group ... uniquely defined by their resolve, methinks. I think Dr. Ben was on spot, dead center, when he said that they were actively seeking political wisdom.
It seems so foreign to our accustomed political wranglings ...no, it wasn't their interests and differences ... it was their personal ambitions that were left at home. It was the stove that Ben had invented, not the refrigerator ... and the summer was almost as hot as some of the debates, but that breath of fresh air must have been like cool winter's breeze!

The draft of the constitution provided the opportunity to revisit each of the provisions ... individually and as a collection ... improve the clarity, work out details and work on matters of form ... but some, like the provisions concerning voting qualifications, immigration and presidential veto power sparked additional discussion and debate of considerable substance.
The voting qualifications provision is noteworthy in that it provided that "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature" ... that's plain enough, passes the common sense test too ... sends a message of love and trust ... that is, "it's not out intent to meddle ... just be consistent with whatever it is you're doing at the State level."
This governing stuff is far more complex than first meets the eye ...
I know even less about war than I do governing, 'cept it's easier to spell, ...but I imagine they're alike in that battles is one thing, war another ... what good is it for the general to win the battle, if it costs him the war? That is to say, I think the wisdom of the provision extended well beyond the scope of voting requirements ... certainly there were many well founded points of view and approaches considered ... and reconsidered ... and there were those who strongly felt it important to have uniformity among the states. To my way of thinking, its greater wisdom was that it didn't impose a new set of requirements upon the states ... the currently enfranchised of each state were comfortable with what they had.
Can you imagine the reaction to most any other voting qualifications provision, regardless of how well founded, conceived, or intended?
... "I knowed it, I knowed it! First thing out of the box ... them folks is trying to tell us who can and who can't vote!" ... placing ratification on the most endangered list. Rotten peaches, methinks.
Back in Philadelphia, things were progressing .. on 25 August, a second "Committee Of Eleven" was appointed to consider issues related to uniform duties and fees

and on 31 August, yet a third, to address tabled issues and committee reports not yet acted upon

On Tuesday, 4 September, this Committee of Eleven began submitting changes, with the Powers of the President being readdressed and further debated ... and on Friday, the Committee submitted its final changes. Seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, late crops waiting to be harvested, and what with folks getting tired of arguing and living out of suitcases and longing for some home cooking, ... on Saturday, 8 September, a five man committee was appointed to consider and revise the style and arrangement of the Constitution
I doubt they cheated and worked on Sunday but them boys didn't waste no time ... and on Wednesday, they submitted their draft for the Convention's consideration. Blame them if you don't like the way it looks and is put together 'cause on that same day, they also debated whether to include a a "Bill of Entitlements" ... folks was tired and wanted to go home so they agreed, not to include it, but ... to later add it by amendment ... when folks were fresh and would take time to give it its proper due. Like Roger's Plan, that was "peaches" for the cobbler ... and on Saturday, the final draft was ordered to be written.That is to say, it sweetened the cobbler and took some of the bite out of the argument that the Constitution should not be ratified because it failed to protect the fundamental principles of human liberty ...
The question of how slavery was to be addressed was debated throughout the convention ... but both sides of the issue well knew that prematurely bringing the question before the Convention would serve no good purpose, save those what wanted to go home early. The notion of people being considered as property is repugnant to average folks, especially when the property is the work product of privateers, engaged in abducting folks against their will for the purpose of selling or trading them for profit. While not of great relevance to the complex issues facing the Convention, it's less repugnant when the property is part of the spoils of war ... or its object. It would be a mistake to forget that these were virtuous men ...no justification could be given for endorsing slave trading ... common ground, methinks.
It would be a greater mistake to forget that they were men. Regardless of principle, the situation demanded recognition of the complexities .... how slavery was addressed directly impacted the relative power of the states, current and future. That the currently enslaved should be made free men was but the simplistic notion of the zealot, its impact on the balance of power uncertain, and I doubt seriously considered ... the uneducated enslaved, knowing of nothing but enslavement and dependence, are ill equipped to survive in the world of free men without proper acclimation and careful assimilation. True then, truer now.

Slavery runs counter to the republic's definitional building block that "all men, rich and poor, magistrates and subjects, officers and people, masters and servants, the first citizen and the last, are equally subject to the laws" ... at least when you recognize slaves as men. In contrast, "that all men are created equal" is noble, albeit false doctrine, intended to serve good purpose ... for indeed, men are created different ... individually, as well as collectively based on criteria such as the hue of their skin ... the pine, the cedar, the maple, the palm and the oak are all trees ... but certainly they are not the same, nor are they equal, for each is superior to the other, depending upon the situation or use to which it it being put. For them not understanding ... try growing oaks and pines on rocky land ... or putting their sap on your pancakes.
For whatever the reason, God made many kinds of trees and animals ... some similar but all different, and unequal, depending on context ... but, for whatever the reason, there was a reason ... a reason too for having over 40,000 different kinds of spiders ... and a reason why the fruit of the tree of knowledge was forbidden.
When we abandon or abuse the basic principles upon which our nation was founded, for whatever the reason, we corrupt and undermine the system ... as I've said before and will after ... the violation of principle is the worst of all corruptions, regardless of intent! It's interesting that America's most renown champion of principle, Mr. "Liberty or Death" Patrick Henry, refused to go because he "smelt a rat in Philadelphia, tending toward the monarchy" ... interesting but not too surprising ... and probably for the best, though his was an important opposing voice ... as a leader of the anti-federalists and champion of State Rights and the freedoms of individuals.
Our founders knew the issue of slavery, with its attendant problems, was wrapped in highly volatile, explosive material. It borders on the remarkable that the opposing sides successfully avoided triggering the destruction that might have been wrought. Neither side wanted to win the battle at the expense of losing the war ... same strategy as before, leave stuff pretty much as it was ... and compromise on the indefensible slave trading issue ... a twenty year non-interference guarantee that is, "no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article"...
Clause "1" provided that "the Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person" ... while number "4" said "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken" ...
It's very difficult to imagine anyone defending slavery on religious, moral or virtuous grounds, but in truth, the slavery issue had little to do with religion, morality or virtue ... it was fabric woven from threads of power and taxation.
The position of those opposing the abolition of slavery was superior to that of those advocating it, methinks ... that is to say, its immediate abolition. Without question, it would have wrecked the economy of not only the southern states, but that of the nation. The slaves themselves were certainly ill equipped to be free and that burden would have been like cruel and unusual punishment ... the influx of Negros into the northern states would have been a burden too heavy to contemplate.
Among the wisest of the delegates was Rufus King ... perhaps the wisest of all, relative to these issues ... his opposition to the expansion of slavery and the slave trade was one of long standing. It was based on his moral convictions tempered with an understanding of the realities ... he opposed the extension of slavery in the Northwest Territories but willing "to suffer the continuance of slaves until they can be gradually emancipated in states already overrun with them" ... which shows that he recognized the problem. At the Convention he indicated his opposition to the political and economic advantages enjoyed the South and supported compromise for political reasons ... throughout his career, he continued to actively oppose slavery and support gradual emancipation. Rufus King ... lawyer, politician, diplomat ... Senator, Minister to Britain, Federalist candidate for both Vice President and President.
Generally speaking, those opposed to slavery wanted to count only the free inhabitants for purposes of the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the House ... while those supportive of slavery wanted to include slaves, thus increasing their representation and power in the House and Electoral College. While the issues are as delicate and volatile as they are complex, the position of those supporting slavery seems to be the better founded .... that is, "a State's relative political power in the House of Representatives should reflect its total population, regardless of its rules for enfranchisement" ... especially in view of the Convention's position on voting qualifications.
The compromise, proposed by Roger Sherman and James Wilson ... called for counting slaves as only three-fifths of their actual numbers ... “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons" ... slaves being considered "all other persons."
It may well seem to some that compromises and the failure to address certain issues indicates weakness, corruption and/or prostitution of conviction ... but such things can only be properly considered in the context of that with which they were confronted. Principles, like men and trees, are not created equal ... the Boss Principle is that battles what are certain to lose wars are best not fought ... this war's objective was to render a befitting governing instrument and secure the peace (obtain its ratification), avoiding or deferring battles that would bring about a different conclusion. The failure or inability of our Founding Fathers to deliver the goods would have totally demoralized the people and resulted in chaos ... a greater defeat than suffered by Napoleon at Waterloo or Yellow Hair at Little Big Horn. We would not have long survived ... me posit, not me opine!
The compromise, along with several others, allowed for the Convention to do what it came to do ... the fragile infant would soon be stronger and better equipped to deal with issues that would have earlier proved fatal ... it gave both sides time to better prepare for what was to come. Indeed, at the end of the 20 year guarantee, the Constitution was amended and slave trading was effectively abolished. There is no question that the South generally failed to take advantage of the time afforded by the compromise to effectively address the dilemma with which it was faced ... indeed it was incumbent on both sides to join together in finding and effecting a peaceful, honorable and enduring resolution. That they failed to take advantage of the opportunity, doesn't detract from the wisdom of its having been afforded.
Certainly everyone does not agree ... in 1987, the Convention's Bicentennial, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall chose a San Francisco Patent and Trademark Law Association seminar as a platform for publicly interjecting himself, his thoughts and his feelings, into the arena of the political ... rejecting an invitation to participate in the Celebration.
In declining the invitation, he added "Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the Framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government, and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, we hold as fundamental today."
It was certainly his prerogative to decline the invitation for the reason or reasons of his choice ... however, the attendant assertion that the resultant government was defective because it failed to address existing, well entrenched social inequities to his satisfaction, suggests a more limited understanding than one would have hoped or imagined ... that, or a flagrant disregard for the consequences of arbitrary action. That the resolution of such problems ... slavery, women's suffrage, and many others ... took, in his words, "momentous social transformation," is proof positive of its complexity and the wisdom of our founding fathers, methinks.
That he would choose to so denigrate our founders and their efforts was, to me, as inexplicable as it was despicable and misguided ... but certainly he was and is not alone ... perhaps he felt it was his obligation. I think it goes to the point that we are usually better served in the judiciary by those of virtue than by zealots and champions of cause.

Monday, 17 September 1787, is widely considered the last day of the Constitutional Convention. The final draft of the Constitution presented for signature ... Dr. Franklin once again asked permission to address the Convention ... but wasn't strong enough to deliver his speech, which was read for him by fellow Pennsylvania Delegate, James Wilson ... and once again, this is but the beginning and the end ... and yes, the entire speech can be found in "The Genius Of Genius" ...
Mr. President:
I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them: For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others.
On the whole, Sir, I can not help expressing a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections to it, would with me, on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument.
More peaches ... but not scrawny ones like Mama bought ... the best of the best!
On Wednesday, it was published in the Pennsylvania Packet, America's first daily newspaper ... and on Friday, 28 September, 1787, Congress approved the Constitution and it was sent to the states for ratification.
For them not old enough to remember, it was almost a nine months before New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify and make it official ... 21 June, 1788 to be precise ... a date only slightly better remembered than 14 May, 1787. Virginia quickly followed, and on 2 July, Congress was informed of the Constitution's being ratified. Later that month, not wanting to be left out, New York joined the wagon carrying the band ... becoming the magical eleventh.
It was decided by Congress to start the new government effective 4 March, 1789 ... and so it was ... these 11 United States Of America!
James Madison presented the Bill Of Entitlements to the First United States Congress in 1789 as a series of legislative articles ... and they became Constitutional Amendments on 15 December, 1791. For those unfamiliar with our constitution, they are a series of limitations on the power of the government that specifically guarantees certain freedoms including freedom of speech, a free press, free assembly, and free association ... and reserves for the people, all rights and powers not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
I oppose bills ... especially them I get in the mail ... and would have preferred a more general framework of guidelines with attendant rules and measures of strict accountability to safeguard against abuse, rather than a specific list of "Dos and Don'ts." I believe in the freedoms ... it's what it's all about ... but as privileges with inherent responsibilities, rather than absolute rights ... for it is when we cannot be held accountable for our actions that we cease to be virtuous and become both defiant and irresponsible.
North Carolina, had held a ratification convention in July, 1788, adjourning on 4 August after voting "neither to ratify nor reject the Constitution proposed for the government of the United States." Its ratification would come on 21 November, 1789 ... submitted with its recommended "Declaration of Rights" and list of "Amendments to the Constitution" ... and then we were 12.
It would be another six months before becoming thirteen ... Saturday, 29 May, 1790. Three years and four days from when the Convention officially convened, Rhode Island finally surrendered ... unconfirmed rumor has it that our War Department's having established a regular army on the same day as Congress adjourned, 29 September of '89, had absolutely nothing to do with their decision.
They had refused to participate in the Convention ... perhaps for reasons known only to Mr. Cranston, currently retired to somewhere in Tibet and unavailable for comment, ... but certainly, they preferred the looser form of the Articles Of Confederation to a stronger more centralized form of government ... and, as expected, had rejected the Constitution by formal referendum dated 24 March, 1788. Personally, I think it more likely that Hamilton's proposal for the federal government to assume state debts incurred during the Revolution is what did the trick ... on 26 July, 1790, with them on board, his proposals for funding the debt passed the House in a close vote.
All conventions must have entertainment ... it's written in the Book. It would have been unconstitutional, not to have entertainment ... but I could find no such evidence ... no mention of Kate Smith, Al Jolson or Edgar Bergen ... nobody! No doubt they amused themselves and Philadelphia was not without its taverns ... I'm a bit surprised nobody thought of asking Bob Hope ... but my choice would have been Don Ho!
You come away with the feeling that the 1787 Convention would not have been the destination of choice for folks wanting to stay in the shadows, observe, "enjoy the entertainment" ... go home and tell everybody of their grand adventure ...how they helped found the nation. No, this was not the place for the timid, the bashful, the faint of heart, or the lazy ... them what were there were there to actively participate ... to work ... and that they did! Those who ever had the opportunity and pleasure of meeting or being entertained by the incomparable Don Ho know the feeling, methinks ... suck 'em up!
Don Ho was good people! For them what don't know, he was an Air Force fighter pilot who never forgot those who served ... a patriot. Don was of Hawaiian, Chinese, Portuguese, German and Dutch descent ... an American. Ho No, not a European or Asian American ... an American. He started at his Mama's place "Honey's" ... a bit before my time, but his style was always the same, methinks ... soft, relaxed, sleepy, like the barber Perry Como. Whether it was Duke Kahanamoku's, the Sands, or just a private party... it was uniquely Don at the organ, his scotch, cigarettes and wit ... and most always Tiny Bubbles and Pearly Shells!
The things folks will most remember, methinks, is their own participation ... uniquely dreaded and eagerly anticipated at the same time! It was expected of the audience to join in, which everyone eagerly did ... but each and every performance, men, young and old alike, were selected from the audience by hula dancers to join them on the stage ... sans their belts ... for dancing, hugging, kissing, good natured teasing and embarrassment. There was no refusing ... the spotlight was on you! When you ventured into the world of Don Ho to be entertained, it was at your own risk ... you might well become the entertainment. Yes, I suspect it was much the same in 1787.
Unlike Thurgood Marshall, John Adams and Tom Jefferson and I declined our invitations to participate without ado ... we had previous commitments and could not attend ... but our presence and influence were strongly felt. Upon receiving my letter of declination, I'm told that Dr. Franklin offered it to the Convention as proof positive that God answers prayer.
The bottom line is ... They got 'er did!!
As I look as the paintings of our founding fathers I find myself marveling ... is it possible that Dr. Ben also invented the camera? My brief encounter with John Adams and his friends leads me to believe that our best interests might be well served ... if we would but remove American History from the curricula of our schools, and replace it with the required reading and study of the writings of those who lived it.

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

From Amateurs To Pros ...

2010-11-04T10:04:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

We are where we are, but not so sure where that is ... nor how to get where we want to be, should this not be it. ... may seem familiar as that's how I've started several similar pieces over the years, the first back early in 2006. We interrupt this program ...

2010 Election Results

Based on initial reports, the Republican Party made significant gains across the board, expecting to hold the Executive power in at least 30 states. At the national level, they appear to have won 23 0f the 34 Senate seats being contested ... while obtaining control of the House 239 - 185.
Thus, we applaud the outcome for nonpolitical reasons ... our all powerful political party system totally undermines the intended "Checks and Balances" underpinning our Constitution, so that when both legislative houses and the executive power are under the control of the same party, the intended safeguards against abuse are effectively nonexistent.

Oklahoma Ballot Questions Pass!

It is noteworthy that Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly passed three ballot questions - one makes English the state's "common and unifying language," a second requires voters to have government-issued photo IDs, and a third prohibits state courts from considering international or Islamic law when deciding cases.

I agree the with first, as would Teddy Roosevelt ...problem is, most folks can't speak English ... only American; poorly. The second should be the law of the land! However, I believe that jurisprudence would be best served if circumstances were allowed to dictate evidence admissibility, not the people ... provided they have the right to hold the presiding jurists duly accountable. Them's just my views ... what say ye? For new visitors and them what may have been asleep at the switch or just plain forgot ... we started out as "The Old Barbershop" back in April of 2008 after sja had bought the place and hired me on as helper. A series of snafus forced the change from "The Old" to "Ye Olde" ... but it's still the same barbershop!
Turned out it had first opened back in 410 BC, by the founder of the Democratic Party ... barber named Democritus. Socrates later acquired it, took Plato on as a helper, who later turned it into a Barbering School, known far and wide as Plato's Place.
While cleaning up the Shop, we stumbled upon an old ... ancient sign in Greek that Plato hung up in the shop, back when it first opened, methinks ... translated, the sign reads "Let no unfair or unjust person enter" ... and we've adopted that as our own.
The Shop's current focus is what was first envisioned for our "Nonpolitical Politics" Special Feature ... but limited resources and my Miss Carol's illness caused a detour on the way to the Forum. History and Politics were her passionate loves ... mine too, as result of osmosis. She was truly expert in both areas, her dual undergraduate majors ... unfortunately, osmosis left the building with her, leaving me with but passion and uninformed opinions.
The original foundation piece for "NonPoliticial Politics" too, has left the building ... this is its intended replacement.
The game's afoot ...
Politics challenges prostitution for longevity ... and will always be with us. That's not all bad, for we can't all be of the same mind, and it takes compromise to deal with the many issues which we're continuously facing.
Not long ago, just a little over 200 years, our country was born and with it came a novel idea ... a democratic republican form of government, if you'll pardon the expression.
Perhaps democracies can work well in very small communities where the people have similar, vested interests and the time to be actively involved in deciding the issues confronting them ... but they fail miserably in larger or complex communities.

Nothing really new about that ... but, Delaware having an equal voice with New York ... that's something else again!

I don't know how it happened that we were so fortunate as to have such a fantastic group of folks as what brought our country into existence and formulated our government ... passionate patriots, virtuous ... devout, thoughtful and dedicated in their benevolence. It's a long list, so too is that of those who have built upon their efforts.

No reason to really dot those eyes or cross those tees but if we are to assess where we are, we should give some thought as to from whence we started and how we got here, methinks. I think the foundation upon which everything was built was the notion behind our state legislatures and ultimately our House of Representatives ... having our own representative from back home ... one of us ... one we know and trust ... one we have selected for their integrity and judgment, and upon whom we can rely to do what is in our best interests. Our job is to select them and hold them directly accountable ... we have neither the time nor the resources to keep up with all that's going on ... that's their job!

That's the notion, and it extended beyond that ... we used it in other forms ... perhaps most noteworthy being the election of delegations sent to the national political conventions to select those who would lead their respective parties in the national elections and decide upon the party's political platform.

That gradually changed over the years and in recent times, the selection of candidates has become a well orchestrated series of scheduled media events ... popularity contests controlled by special interest groups ... most notably, the Media, Party power brokers and the offices of the would be candidates. They would have us believe that we're more directly involved in the process ... have a more powerful voice.

Nothing could be further from the truth ... the system is as totally flawed as it is controlled ... we no longer have an effective voice. Even were that not the case, it violates many of the principles upon which we were founded ... something of which they're well aware ... but they do it, because they can, and because it serves their purposes.

Certainly the playing field is not level ... not when you consider that the candidates for whom we're given the opportunity to vote generally depends upon our state's positioning in the "Schedule of Media Events" ... that as they proceed through the schedule, we are directly influenced by the results of previous events, and in some cases, the final outcome is determined before some events are held.

They are mass marketing masters, playing upon our egos ... we're not being asked to select one of our own ... one we know well and trust for their integrity and judgment, and upon whom we can rely to do what is in our best interests. They want us to select one from a group of outsiders that of which we know little or nothing, 'cept what they, themselves, want us to know.

I place stock in Daddy's caution, first heard over 65 years ago ... "You can't tell much of anything about a man from his memorized spiel and how well it's delivered" ... and that especially applies to them what would be king, including the spiels of those in his Court.

I support both Democrats and Republicans ... just strongly oppose the all powerful Political Party Unions to which they pay homage, but until we can eliminate or neutralize them, I would hope that we would strive to have the system changed so that our role would be one of selecting delegates to the convention, trusting them to represent us well, rather than to continue with the current process.

I believe that the most often overlooked, always underrated, element in our system of intended checks and balances is the people ... if we will but actively participate and elect virtuous folks at the local level; folks we well know and respect ... for their integrity, prudence, frugality, benevolence, and wisdom ... then the political food chain would soon be filled with virtuous folks. We could then safely rely upon our representatives to the rest, save one responsibility ... we must hold our elected representative directly and strictly accountable for their performance.

Achieving perfection, with everyone performing their duty, may be beyond our reach but the rewards will be great if we can but progress in that direction ... better government, recovery of lost freedoms and the safeguarding of those we still have!

My guess is that of the two, most consider adequate balances as the more important ... they already have plenty of checks!
Without question, the midwives what helped birth our nation strived for an effective system of proper checks and balances ... the President needed the advice and consent of the Senate, which also provided a check on the House. The President's veto power served as a partial check on the Congress ... partial, since the veto can be overridden. The system of checks on the Supreme Court needs revisiting but it is for good reason protected from the whims of the other branches and the people; subject only to impeachment.

No, I'm not sure where we are, but I'm of the opinion that most of the reasons for our being here can be attributed to a departure from the principles upon which we were birthed, including a strong belief in God and our dependency upon his guidance ... and we are indebted as well to too much control of the mechanism by the media and the judicial branch; neither of which have proper checks or balances.

If we have lost our way and this isn't where we want to be, I believe we can turn this vehicle around by returning to those very same time proven and ageless principles.

Non-Political Politics?

Well, following the recent elections, I was taken aback with the journalistic posture that the "Republicans" were out of step ... and constituted a shrinking minority, not to mention the Whigs. Heard the same thing about the "Democrats" just a few years back.

Democrats, Republicans ... Liberals, Conservatives ... forget them names, they don't mean squat!

The Liberals have some good ideas ... as do the Conservatives ... and they're both impassioned. The problem is that they seem to fear and hate each other ... they simply don't trust one another and spend their time preaching to their respective choirs. What's needed is to find common ground that we can all support ... what's needed are statesmen and patriots rather than professional politicians.

It seems that when one side comes to power, they spend much of their time and energy attempting to undo what the other side did ... and as a result, we always have a convoluted mess with very little of consequence ever getting done ... one of the important reasons for opposing political parties.
For the benefit of the Doubting Thomases, I suggest that the notion of bailouts is proof positive that our society and our government are permeated with corruption ... forget if you must, the obscene monies and great imposition placed upon the people ... you need but to consider just the notion.
The need for bailouts are a long time in their coming ... had either the involved companies or the government properly attended their duties, there would be no need for such bailouts. Those involved are victims of their own abuses, mismanagement and malpractices ... the importance of industries qualifying for such special treatment demands that our government maintain a watchful regulatory eye to assure that standards are set and being met ... and for that, our governors must be held strictly accountable, for it is their negligence in the performance of their duties that is directly responsible for hundreds of billions of dollars being imposed upon the people.
The notion that the senior management of the involved companies should be allowed to continue under any circumstance further suggests governmental corruption ... that the ownership of the involved companies would even consider allowing it, is proof positive of their corruption, as is indeed the notion that bailout monies be used to pay bonuses and increase salaries. That the government would not anticipate such abuse and effect appropriate safeguards should be grounds for impeachment.
Instead of condemning them for what they are, bailouts are presented as a good thing ... a stimulus with everyone benefiting and getting their share.

We may find ourselves in one shrinking minority or another but my guess is that we still have a majority of folks in this country who share a common set of core values that transcend the traditional politics ... most of us want the same things, same but different ... and down deep, most believe that both the means and the end are important.
My guess is that most of us still oppose little boys and girls carrying deadly weapons to school ... big boys and girls too! My guess is that most of us still oppose the distribution of illegal drugs and pornography to our youngsters ... my goodness, to folks of any age! My guess is that most of us understand that our economic system must be predicated on some redistribution of wealth since there are more and more mouths to feed, but oppose policies that engender inflation where what a fellow manages to save during his productive years ain't enough to keep a body alive when he retires.
Cost me less than $2 to enjoy a baseball game with good seats, and all I wanted to eat, when I was a kid ... a very nice home was under $20,000, a fancy new car less than two. Guess they just print it when they need it ... we would go to jail if caught so doing! My guess is that most oppose wrongdoers going unpunished because of technicalities.
My guess is too that most of us share common beliefs relative to morality, propriety and proper codes of conduct.
The point is that my guess is that most of us still support a whole bunch of stuff what ain't ... and still oppose a whole bunch of stuff what is. What's more, nothing much is being done about it ... unthinkable! Common ground! I guess we simply get used to things as they are or ain't ... can't do much about it no ways.
Well, I don't buy that ... what if them boys back in 1776 had felt that way?! Those idiots imposed a "unanimous agreement" constraint upon themselves ... rather than a simple or two-thirds majority ... unbelievable! And having overcome that impossible task, took on the mighty British, seemingly without a chance.
Our four fathers may have been brilliant, well educated men ... but thank goodness, they could spell neither apathy nor fear! Like Franklin said to Adams, "it don't hurt none to try, John" ... my guess anyways! I'm with Dr, Ben ... what say Ye?
Harry Truman rose to the occasion, surprised most everybody and gave 'em Hell when he unexpectedly found himself in a difficult situation ... we can too!
To minimize spam and facilitate discussion, we have created our own GDAs ..."General Discussion Areas" ... where we hope everyone will leave their comments and enter into the discussions. The entrances are located in the sidebars, next to the currently featured posts ... but some posts have embedded buttons that will take you directly inside!
For those with Blogger Sites who like our fare and would like to help promote the Shop ... you'll find our Marquee Widget in the Shop's Sidebar, available for easy installation.
Please note that I have me own brand of multipage posts ... don't be among the many who miss the paging buttons located at the top and bottom right of each multipage post. pages 1 2 3 4
To help get things started, the Shop's recent focus has been on our beginnings ... a tour with John Adams and his friends ... our last seven featured posts. Hopefully they will serve us well ... I've learned much, and it's been fun.

Chamberlain's Hangover
Parties ...
Thoughts ... John Adams
By Virtue Of ...
The Genius of Genius
Grosvenor Square, London ...
John Adams - Constitutional Midwife

Well, that's where we are, pretty much ... for those who haven't, we hope you'll please take the time to read, ponder, consider and evaluate these pieces, not forgetting that many have multiple pages ... it's the essence, not me words or style, what's really important, but I'd still be much obliged for suggestions as to how they can be improved. Together, we'll figure out where we are ... where we want to go, and how we might best go about getting there!
Let's start by remembering that political correctness is political ... so forgetting it is a good thing to remember, and a good place to start! Let's develop a list of things that shouldn't be political but are, or so seem ... as they will become part of our foundation, our guide to finding Common ground!
Remember too ... it's important that we not fall into the trap of falling in love with our own beliefs on specific issues to the point that we judge others, based on theirs, relative to our own. Those who so do, will succeed only in gaining approval from their respective choirs, and make little progress toward increasing the size of the Church. Though our founding patriot fathers imposed a condition of unanimity on their declaration of independence, there was sincere and passionate disagreement on most of the issues, with many differing views frequently being represented. This was especially true at the Constitutional Convention.
They had the distinct advantage of having had their freedoms overtly taken away by an external tyrant ... made obvious by folks in bright red coats running around with guns, but still, many saw the situation as hopeless and rationalized against taking action. Our tyrants are neither external nor overt ... making it far more difficult, methinks, to broaden the awareness of these threats to our freedoms and gain broad based support for efforts to right the wrongs and restore the integrity of the principles upon which our government is intended to be based.
My opines and posits are but ideas to be considered ... no pride of authorship. Indeed, let them be but our initial store of seeds which, through honest discussion, we can either transform and cultivate into fruit or discard as being unworthy. If we will all submit our seeds, ain't no telling what kind of fruit and pies we'll have to present to judges at the county fair, but my guess is we'll bring home a whole bunch of blue ribbons!
Ronald Reagan got real upset and serious about politics when he heard that a judge had dismissed the charges against a man charged with DUI because he was too drunk to understand his rights being read to him ... and look where it took him!
Reagan, not the drunk ...

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

Grosvenor Square, London ... the letters

2010-10-21T14:12:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

Grosvenor Square, London ... October, 1786
The residence of John Adams ... first Minister to England, 1785-1788. Things had been busy 'round the Adams' house, what with "Nabby," his eldest, getting married in June ... to William Stephens Smith, his secretary, no less.

Ten years had passed since the Independence Declaration ... and, an eventful decade it had been, what with the war and all. Cornwallis' forces had surrendered in October, 1781 ... the last battle at sea won in March 1783, followed by the Treaty of Paris that September.

New Hampshire ratified the first state constitution, six months before the Declaration ... Virginia, South Carolina, and New Jersey also jumping the July 4 gun. Rhode Island and Connecticut just used "white-out" to delete references to the crown in their royal charters.

Interestingly, he Massachusetts Constitution was the last of the first state constitutions to be written ... drafted by John, cousin Sam, and James Bowdoin ... ratified on June 15, 1780 and remains in effect; the oldest functioning written constitution in continuous effect in the world. Would you have expected less?

When our boys did the unthinkable and beat them wearing the red coats, lots of folks took notice ... some more than others. We got more and more space in the fishwraps, sometimes at the expense of local sports and the funnies; but folks wanted to know all about them underdog upstarts ... and the experts wanted to give them what they wanted ... that is, the benefit of their two cents.

According to John, three in particular, wrote and published their criticisms and advice concerning our state constitutions of government ... and that too became an item ... in Europe and in the colonies too, even across the breakfast table of John and Abagail Adams, I'm sure.

To be fair, those three were at a disadvantage as the 1776 Musical had yet to be released ... had they just waited, they would have known better!

With the predictability of an Old Faithful eruption, John Adams responded in epic fashion ... birthing what has come to be known as ... 'A DEFENCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONS OF GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" ... more competely, "against the attack of M. Turgot in his letter to Dr. Price dated 22 March, 1778"

But this was October, 1786 ... what took him so long?!

The principal players in this drama ... John and Anne Robert Turgot, of course. Turgot was at a bit of disadvantage, having died in 1781, but his writings lived on, due in part to Dr. Richard Price's having published the letter 1n 1784 that was now receiving John's full and almost undivided attention ... yes, the same British preacher what sided with the patriots, friend of many, including John and Abigail ... citizen of the world, and supporter of the French Revolution.

Last was noted French political writer, the Abbé De Mably, who thought the state should redistribute wealth on the grounds of equality. Mably and Adams were acquainted from John's days in Paris ... in 1785, writing "Remarks concerning the Government and Laws of the United States of America" in four letters addressed to our man in London ... certainly his last work, having passed in that same year. I think he got included mostly 'cause he had led folks to believe that John encouraged him to write a book on the Americian Revolution ... and he just wanted to set the record straight.

John's opening letter, in which he sets his stage ... acknowledges the three as learned, well respected writers of great ability, experienced in public affairs, and knowledgeable in the nature of man, the necessities of society, and the science of government ... each having praiseworthy characters and the purest of intentions.

However, the point of John's blade is sharp and its thrust deep when he pens ... among the many excellent things contained in each, there are some attitudes that will be difficult to reconcile to reason, experience, the constitution of human nature, or to the uniform testimony of the greatest statesmen, legislators, and philosophers of all enlightened nations, ancient and modern" ... ouch!!

His technique is much the same as mine when besting blaggards brandishing boorish blog behavior, back in the day ... and all this time, I thought it had been of me own invention ... dang! The more common, modern day approach of the enlightened is to describe one's fellows as complete fools, ... and be done with it! That, or attack the sanctity of their mother, with all its vulgar trappings.

Did you notice, John used that ugly word again ... "the nature of man"

Turgot's letter to Price was the main ingredient triggering all the commotion inside the witches' cauldron ... it expressed his dissatisfaction with the state constitutions ... calling them imitations, based on English customs without particular reason; surely an affront to all them what had worked hard and tried their best.

It appears Turgot was of the school what calls a "representative democracy" a republic and uses Marchamont Nedham's 17th century definition, "collecting all authority into one center, that of the nation" ... rather than doing that, he wrote to Dr. Price, the states had "established different bodies, a body of representatives, a council, and a governor" ... all simply because there is in England a house of commons, a house of lords, and a king.

Seemed to me like he was disparaging the efforts of the colonies to create a balance among the legislative, judicial and executive powers and establish restraints ... conceding that while it might be necessary in England because of the enormous influence of royalty, it could be of no possible use in republics founded upon the equality of all the citizens.

He concluded that the constitutions established different orders of men ... and thus, were an unnecessary source of division and dispute. Others had expressed similar notions; some more, some less ... most notably John Paine, methinks ... but, I sided with John Adams and more importantly, I thought M. Turgot was rude!

I'm like today's unqualified teacher what first reads the lesson, night before the class, so I don't yet know what John's reaction will be, but to me ... the Revolution was against the tyranny of the Crown ... fought mostly by patriots what themselves were of English descent and had themselves been among its subjects ... raised, trained and so educated, good reason for their form of government to be patterned after the one they knew and best understood.

My reaction was that M. Turgot would have been well advised to always have umbrella in hand, ... for there are indeed different orders of men, and the nature of man dictates checks and balances, even among the the best intending.

That's just me ... actually, Turgot was a very smart man ... he wrote those things, but asked Price that his comments remain private, so while I still think him wrong, I apologize for thinking him rude. I had been taken in by the lawyer from Boston, now residing in Grosvenor Square ... jumping to conclusions after reading just the opening paragraph of his first letter - "THREE writers in Europe, of great abilities, reputation, and learning, Mr. Turgot, the Abbé De Mably, and Dr. Price, have turned their attention to the constitutions of government in the United States of America, and have written and published their criticisms and advice" ... guess I'll have to dig a bit deeper if I'm to find out what criticisms and advice M. Turgot published.

While I attempt to recover from that trickery, let's see what else is in his opening letter, remembering that the Convention would begin writing the US Constitution in May 1787 ...

There has been, from the beginning of the revolution in America, those in every state, who have entertained sentiments similar to those of Mr. Turgot. Two or three states having had established governments upon his principle. Based on information from Boston, certain committees have been held, and other conventions proposed in the Massachusetts, with the expressed purpose of deposing the governor and senate, as useless and expensive branches of the constitution.

As it is probable that the publication of Mr. Turgot's opinion has contributed to excite such discontents among the people, it becomes necessary to examine it, and ... if it can be shown to be in error, then hopefully, Americans will not be misled by his authority ... even should his memory always be revered.

There we have it ... these publications, especially that letter of M. Turgot to Dr. Price, gave John Adams a forum where he could use his influence and arguments to quell the growing unrest. John's going to plead another case!

Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! There was, of course, a second letter ... John Adams had no choice, as 18th century England had no phones, even after the war.

The second letter rebuts the body of M. Turgot's ... again, this is my rendering of John's expressed thoughts ... I changed things a bit whenever I had trouble understanding his 18th century, harvard educated style and word choices. I ain't no qualified interpreter, so them what have a different picture, go directly to the Shop's General Discussion area and take the podium ... no passing GO and no $200, but there's always the possibility of Mama's homemade fudge.

Warming to the task, John first gets his teeth into M. Targot being offended because the customs of England are imitated in most of the new constitutions in America, without any particular motive.

If we assume that English customs were neither good nor evil in themselves ... and the people, by their birth, education, and habits, were accustomed to them, was not this a motive particular enough for their preservation, rather than endanger the public tranquillity, or unanimity, by renouncing them?

If those customs were considered wise, just, and good, and calculated to secure the liberty, property, and safety of the people, as well or better than any other institutions ancient or modern, would M. Turgot have advised the nation to reject them, merely because it was, at the time, justly incensed against the English government?

What English customs have they retained which may in any way properly be called evil?

M. Turgot's singular example ... "that a body of representatives, a council, and a governor, has been established, because there is in England a house of commons, a house of lords, and a king." The reason that such a division of power was adopted by the states was not so much because the legislature in England consisted of three branches as much as it was because their own assemblies had always been so constituted.

However, the continuation of such a plan of power was primarily from the conviction that it was founded in nature and reason.

It's fun to watch a master at work ... funner still that he agreed with me! He next addressed M.Turgot's preference for "collecting all authority into one center, the nation."

It is easy to understand how all authority may be collected into "one center" in a despot or monarch; but how it can be done, when the center is to be the nation, is more difficult to comprehend.

After rightfully cautioning that before attempting to address the notions of an author, we should be careful to ascertain his meaning ... he proceeds to examine the possibilities ... reducing the most literal to absurdity

if the center is to be the nation, "we shall remain exactly where we began, and no collection of authority at all will be made. The center will be the circle and the circle the center"

Noting too the obvious impracticalities and fatal flaws of large scale democracies ... and observing that a simple and perfect democracy has never yet existed among men. From his pulpit,

"If a village of half a mile square, and one hundred families, is capable of exercising all the legislative, executive, and judicial powers, in public assemblies of the whole, by unanimous votes, or by majorities, it is more than has ever yet been proved in theory or experience."

After long reflection, he was forced to conclude that Turgot intended,

"that an assembly of representatives should be chosen by the nation, and vested with all the powers of government; and that this assembly shall be the center in which all the authority shall be collected, and shall be virtually deemed the nation"

We reached that same conclusion without all that work ... it was founded in nature and reason, methinks.

I knowed John was psychic ... said as much in "Parties ... " He wrote,

"To examine this system in detail may be thought as trifling an occupation" ... Yet the mistakes of great men, and even the absurdities of fools, when they countenance the prejudices of numbers of people, especially in a young country, and under new governments, cannot be too fully confuted.

You will not then consider my time or yours misspent, in placing this idea of Mr. Turgot in all its lights; in considering the consequences of it; and in collecting a variety of authorities against it.

It didn't make John no instant, overnight multimillionaire like Obama's book did him; that wasn't his purpose ... he had about 200 subscribers what subsidized its printing and other folks read it too. We know this "Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" ... by JOHN ADAMS, LL. D. and a Member Of The Academy Of Arts and Sciences at Boston ... had a definite impact on those charged with the writing and ratification of our constitution ... there's little doubt that those directly involved, and a majority of others having a keen interest in the outcome, read it from cover to cover. Filled with accounts and insights concerning the nature of man; the "evidence" presented to support his case against the "Single Assembly" ... some folks just wanted what John had to say.

We already know what happened, more or less ... so as John said, to examine this in detail may be thought as trifling an occupation. Nonetheless, they don't make laws against rustling unless folks has been stealin' livestock. Many of his fears and things he warned against have been, and are being realized ... in spite of the safeguards and forewarnings, so you will not then consider my time or yours misspent, if we examine some of his work ... then is now, methinks

There was yet another letter ... and 53 more after that!! The fact that he was in London and would be until after the Constitution was written, must have been a heavy burden ... it might help explain the 56 letters and 308 pages, not counting a lengthy preface, devoted to his "Defence" too ... a powerful lot of reading; a powerful lot of stuff to consider from this sampler platter.

Without three divisions of power, stationed to watch each other, and compare each other's conduct with the laws, it will be impossible that the laws should at all times preserve their authority, and govern all men
it is of great importance to begin well; misarrangements now made, will have great, extensive, and distant consequences; and we are now employed, how little soever we may think of it, in making establishments which will affect the happiness of an hundred millions of inhabitants at a time, in a period not very distant
Another remarkable circumstance is, the reluctance of the citizens to attend the assembly of the arengo, which obliged them to make a law, obliging themselves to attend, upon a penalty. This is a defect, and a misfortune natural to every democratical constitution, and to the popular part of every mixed government. A general or too common disinclination to attend, leaves room for persons and parties more active to carry points by faction and intrigue, which the majority, if all were present, would not approve.
we have not yet considered how the legislative power is to be exercised in this single assembly.
Is there to be a constitution? Who are to compose it ... the assembly itself, or a convention called for that purpose? In either case, whatever rules are agreed on for the preservation of the lives, liberties, properties, and characters of the citizens ... what is to hinder this assembly from transgressing the bounds which they have prescribed to themselves, or which the convention has ordained for them?
The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If Thou shalt not covet' and `Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.
The rich, the well-born, and the able, acquire an influence among the people that will soon be too much for simple honesty and plain sense, in a house of representatives. The most illustrious of them must, therefore, be separated from the mass, and placed by themselves in a senate; this is, to all honest and useful intents, an ostracism.
To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion ...
except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, counties or districts of a state ... is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government

In the main, they seem to be speaking to the nature of man. The situation with which we're now confronted suggests, relative to some, that either our federal constitution failed to include proper provisions and/or requisite safeguards, or that they have somehow been compromised. The exercise will do us good, and hopefully add some more pieces to the puzzle and get us closer to being able to consider a prescription for controlling the cancer while we strive for its eradication ... let's have at it!

When attempting to relate the truths found among the letters to the situation with which we're currently faced, we must be ever mindful of the role played by the imposition of formally organized, powerful political unions. Because of the English Whigs and Tories, it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking political parties were in vogue during colonial times ... however, these were not political parties in the modern sense but somewhat looser alliances of interests and individuals ... that to me is founded in nature and reason, so to speak ... and with those I have little problem, but in my view, the modern day versions are truly menacing. The system became fatally flawed with their introduction ... and the situation progressively worsened as their power and influence increased.

Seems like a question is being begged ... and if it ain't, I is ... It seems governing has become a bit like today's practicing before the bar ... it's winning the case ... or in the case of the party, the election ... that counts. Justice has taken a back seat, methinks ... perhaps unjustly, I somehow feel their interest is less in governing than it is in having power, regardless of contraiwise protestions. Perhaps more on point, as the power of the modern two party system emerged, the integrity of the intended mission of the Senate was comprimised ... for man cannot properly serve competeing masters ... it is impossible, regardless of intent, and it becomes treasonous when the allegiance of its members is more to the party than to the people or the government they represent.

The question, simply put ... given that the threat from party politics was well recognized, long before the emergence of the all powerful version ...why were there not better safeguards effected to protect us from them? Perhaps it was a combination of apathy and greed ... apathy in that it was the nature of man, and greed in that it offered the potential for increased power, and facilitated the effecting of broad agendas ... it does give one pause, methinks.

There can be no question that our founders appreciated the setting in which they found themselves ... and the magnitude of the moment. Toward the end of his "conclusion letter," John wrote ... "In the present state of society and manners in America, with a people living chiefly by agriculture, in small numbers, sprinkled over large tracts of land, they are not subject to those panics and transports, those contagions of madness and folly, which are seen in countries where large numbers live in small places, in daily fear of perishing for want: we know, therefore, that the people can live and increase under almost any kind of government, or without any government at all.

But it is of great importance to begin well; misarrangements now made, will have great, extensive, and distant consequences; and we are now employed, how little soever we may think of it, in making establishments which will affect the happiness of an hundred millions of inhabitants at a time, in a period not very distant" ... not sure folks believed that, but did themselves proud, they did ... us too!

Ever the wordsmith, John writes that a proper conclusion to all of the effort to adjudge M. Turgot's notion of a perfect commonwealth ... " the most interesting subject which can employ the thoughts of men" ... is to consider in what manner such an assembly will conduct its deliberations, and exert its power. That is to say, a single assembly possessing all the authority ... legislative, executive, and judicial.

A touch of wry humor, perhaps ... but this notion had support, and his was a real concern that it might unduely influence the constitutional convention ... so it was sincerely felt, methinks.

John's focus was first directed at the executive power as "the laws are of no consequence until an administration begins to carry them into execution" ... true enough, but surely the beginning must have been the Assembly's selection. Who are these folks, and how did they get selected?

He considered selecting a representative assembly to be the toughest of chores ... "great care should be taken to effect in miniature, an exact portrait of the people at large ... to think, feel, reason, and act like them" ... so counseled the man himself. However, from that same pen ... "the citizen must decide who is the man in his neighborhood whom he most esteems, and loves best, for his knowledge, integrity, and benevolence." Those aren't quite the same ... either way, it's a tough chore.

Surely the latter more strongly suggests men of the highest reputation, integrity, education, intelligence, courage and influence in each community will in most cases be selected, if the citizens do their duty at the local level. Gentlemen, by birth or industry ... virtuous men ... for if they are not, the community will soon be filled with slander, suspicion, and ridicule against them, as ill-bred, ignorant, and in all respects unqualified for their trust ... and these cries will come from every corner ... from every station, rich and the poor alike. If they are not, is not the government ultimately doomed, regardless of form? Thus posited John Adams ... and them's the clothes I wear as well.

Note that it doesn't not attempt to achieve a miniature portrait of the people at large ... rather a miniature of whom they trust to well represent them. Almost by definition, a very select group, one admired by the people ... the best of each community ... and regardless of definition, in the day of M. Turgot, one which would probably be dominated by the aristocrats.Perhaps John figured them were chores what had to be done, regardless of the model ... or, that the jury themselves had already been selected, them what would draft and ratify our constitution ... whatever the reason, he went straight to the chase.

He argues that the executive power should not be vested in the assembly for many reasons, the leading of which are the frequent demands for secrecy and/or timely action. Indeed he proposes that the executive power be vested in one individual rather than a group of any size ... for these reasons; an important third ... accountability, and another ... the need for an identifiable head of state ... said John "there never was yet a people who must not have somebody or something to represent the dignity of the state, the majesty of the people, call it what you will ... it is the executive power"

One of his arguments against a single assembly holding and effecting all the power, the executive, judicial, and the legislative ... is that it doesn't lend itself to an effective division of labor ... with everyone participating in everything, the assembly would tend to frequently become overwhelmed in its routine administration ... impairing its ability to effectively govern.

Certainly, those arguments, with their accompanying evidence, are more than sufficient for John to win his case. However, It does not go unnoted that the single assembly can, through committees and appointments, delegate just about everything, including the executive power ... can, and must, if it is to long function. Thus, creating in effect, those different orders of men, divisions and disputes to which Turgot was so opposed.

And so it is the nature of man that takes center stage, and it is on that which John seems most focused ... that is, identifying the potential and inclination toward corruption, abuse and control by the select few within the assembly, and the need for safeguards against those internal forces that will undermine and destroy the government, regardless of form ... yes, the checks and the balances ... facilitated by the separation of powers and featuring a legislative power of two houses.

The threat of abuse of power in our government was of paramount concern to our founding fathers ... including the passing of laws granting special privileges to the lawmakers themselves ... it is the nature of man to push the envelope ... starting with little, seemingly insignificant abuses, and when those are permitted or become accepted as being appropriate, the inch becomes a mile.

John rests his case with the notion that ... "Where the people have a voice but there is no balance, there will be everlasting fluctuations, revolutions, and horrors, until a standing army with a general at its head, commands the peace ... or the necessity of an equilibrium becomes apparent to all, and is adopted by all"

II's truly remarkable how clearly we can see so much of which he so long ago wrote ... still hard at work in our assemblies today, this second decade of Century 21! The nature of man, a many faceted force with which to be reckoned ...

It's that time again ... please take a moment to vote in the poll if you ain't already so done ... and then visit our General Discussion Area and share your views ... on this, or whatever strikes your fancy!.

Page four

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

John Adams - Constitutional Midwife - long distance

2010-10-21T13:59:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

Have you ever wondered why our government is as it is ... three separate branches, executive, legislative and judicial ... with the legislative having two distinct and separate parts?

As we now know, the renowned Frenchman, Anne Robert Turgot, said it was because the states had "established different bodies, a body of representatives, a council, and a governor ... all simply because there is in England a house of commons, a house of lords, and a king". John Adams sternly took him to task for them remarks but my guess is that most folks today labor under the same impression, more or less ... them what give it any thought. I'm no student of history but Mrs. Gillespie said as much back in third grade ... said I was no student, too.

Of course our Founding Fathers were influenced by England, seeing as how most everybody had been subjects of the Crown all their lives before the Revolution, so yes, that structure was very familiar to them ... but, John Adams and them boys weren't no bunch of lazies what went and copied somebody else. It was only after they thought about things, long and hard, that we got what we got. Having the benefit of hindsight is like knowing how the magician does his trick ... it usually dulls the senses and lessens the wonder of it, but this is special and we must truly stand in awe ... of their industry, how thorough they were, and the depth of their thinking.

Turgot supported a single assembly and he wasn't alone ... what came out of our 1787 constitutional convention was the resultant of a real tug of war between the competing ideas of our founding fathers. What we have today is the resultant of continual tugs of war over the ensuing 222 years.

John was himself a Harvard graduate and a prominent lawyer; a master wordsmith too ... the pictures he painted back before the 1787 tug of war, are masterpieces, methinks .They are like pictures on the walls of the Post Office, or shown on America's Most Wanted. The art of John Adams, as seen through my eyes, ain't no substitute for the originals, but maybe it'll help us identify that for which we're looking ... answers as to why we find ourselves where we are.

They come mostly from his " DEFENCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONS OF GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" published in London in 1787, but his thinking was long in its making ... dating back before 1776, best I can tell.

John argued strongly against the assembly holding the judicial power ... you'd have to take off both shoes to count his reasons, but basically, it would require the assembly's members to all be well versed in the law and proper administration of justice ... or at least a sufficient number, so that the responsibility could be delegated to specific members. May sound reasonable, but ain't no way to guarantee that always being the case.

The integrity of government depends on consistent interpretation of the laws by those who judge ...with the assembly members doing the judging, they would be frequently changing; making proper jurisprudence all but impossible. Third, the assembly would operate under the rule of the majority, while proper justice demands unanimity of the jury ... no citizen would feel safe, knowing their fate was in the hands of a group of politicians having unknown legal qualifications and deciding things based on majority rule.

As indicated in "Grosvenor Square, London ... the letters" ... even had there been no technical obstacles, the added administrative burden imposed upon such an assembly would have demanded separation! His was a strong argument ... so strong, that there was unlikely to be much serious opposition to keeping the judicial power separate from the executive and the legislative.

Perhaps the most important question is why we have two legislative bodies ... why not just one?

Well, obviously for "checks and balances" stupid ... the most important thing is to have a balance. That's what my friends said back in the third grade! True enough, at least the part about having a balance ... and the "stupid" part too, but I wonder how many really knew what that meant and why it was important. The smarter among us said it was so that the little states could be on equal footing with the big ones ... little and big being population based.

However, there was another, more relevant reason, methinks ... having been long subjected to the tyrannical rule of a young king, many of the founders wanted no part the executive power being vested in a select few, especially not just one. They, like Turgot, thought it best such power be vested in the Assembly, the one with the legislative power. John Adams strongly opposed this for many reasons, the most compelling of which were the needs for secrecy and prompt action ... neither of which were possible with an assembly of twenty, much less 500!

Though he personally preferred a stronger executive power, his suggested solution was a council, selected by the Assembly ... one that would provide counsel to the executive power, whether it be one or a few ... and without whose consent, the executive power would be severely limited. That notion, more than any other, methinks, paved the way for allowing the executive power to have adequate strength and be separate from the legislative power.

That effectively checked the executive power ... the council was to become the Senate, but it wasn't there yet. There was the question of how it was to be constituted ... and, the notion that it be separate with a distinct legislative voice was a horse what still needed to be broke.

And now for the rest of the story ...

That power corrupts was a truth well known to the ancients ... and, one which wasn't lost until times somewhat more recent than 1787. John Adams was one of those fearing that the single assembly, having the executive power under its effective control ... specifically, its being subject to the advice and consent of the council ... would soon become the instrument of the select few; that is, under the influence and control of the most powerful members of the Assembly.

Now, among each state's representatives in the national Assembly ... a collection, one from each of the neighborhoods throughout the state, of the ones most esteemed, and loved best, for their knowledge, integrity, and benevolence ... were a few who stood out as being better looking, smarter, more influential, more persuasive, and most popular ... in a word, more powerful than the rest. John reasoned that he could kill three birds with one rock by having the Assembly select these folks to serve on the Council, separate from the Assembly and giving it a legislative negative.

It was right for the country ... John was stubborn, especially when he "knew" he was right ... a good lawyer too, and he somehow won his case, though he was in London from 1785 to 1788, serving as our minister to the Court of St. James, and missed the 1787 Constitutional Convention ... Tom did too, being in France at the time. And thus, we got our Senate; separate from the rest, which became the House ... that's the skinny ... or at least that's what he told me.

I looked it up, having a legislative negative meant they could veto whatever the House proposed, keeping them under better control. Well, the select few would have their own playground and what with them all being good looking, smart, influential, persuasive and popular ... they were equals, less likely to be able to dominate each other, so they were less likely to become corrupt than if they were power brokers in a single assembly. Perhaps more importantly, they couldn't unduly influence the less handsome, that is, the members of the house, so it too would be less subject to corruption. It made for a better distribution of labor too ... under the single assembly setup, with everybody doing everything, the resulting administrative quagmire would have doomed them from the start. Three birds, maybe more ... one rock!

When the Convention got down to business, Roger Sherman of Connecticut proposed that House membership be determined according to population, with each state having the same number of senators ... one of his ideas of long standing.

You'll remember from the 1776 musical that he served on the Independence Declaration Committee, along with John, Tom, Doctor Ben, and Robert Livingston of New York ... interestingly, he's the only man to sign the major documents birthed by the Revolution... the Continental Association of 1774, the Independence Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution. Well recognized for his contributions, but still under appreciated, methinks ... he also served in both the House and the Senate!.

Almost lost in the shuffle is the fact that initially, the senators were to be selected by their fellow representatives from their home states. I like that idea ... who would know them better, certainly not the people of the state at large. Remember, it was the job of the people to select the most esteemed, and best loved in their neighborhood, for their knowledge, integrity, and benevolence to represent them ... folks they knew, in whom they had confidence ... our whole system of government was based on that principle.

It was the natural and right thing to do ... folks couldn't be expected to know enough about candidates from outside their neighborhood to make an intelligent decision ... better to rely on the best judgment of their representative from the neighborhood.. Had they violated the principle and required the people to make poorly informed choices, the entire system would have been placed at risk ... subjected to failure and collapse. The violation of principle is the worst of all corruptions, regardless of intent!

Our founders knew that ... actually, the agreed upon solution at the Convention was that senators would be selected by the respective state legislatures ... not much difference; almost as the good and simpler to administer. When you think about it, the Senate as so established, was the most important of all the pieces on the board ... having influence and control over both the House and the executive power. Maybe that's the best reason of all for making sure the best looking and smartest were in it, ... maybe not, but certainly another bird felled by that rock.

The 17th amendment of 1913 changed things to where senators were elected by a direct popular vote of the people ... widely applauded, but truly a sad day in our history, methinks. The old way had lasted for over a century and certainly there would have no such change had there not been long standing problems. Amending the constitution is by design, a most arduous task, but ultimately, the chore was done and the problems addressed ... but as is so often the case ... an essential principle was sacrificed in the process.

Rather than burdening the people with having to make poorly informed choices, the problem that should have been addressed was that "those responsible for seeing that the possess was effectively administered in a timely fashion" were not held properly accountable ... indeed, that would be the best and almost universal solution to every long standing problem we have faced since our inception ... or likely to face in the future. It would have saved a lot of time, effort and frustration ... and the integrity of the system would not have been impaired. Translation ... we must try to support those things we believe are in our nation's long term best interests and oppose those which are not ... I support Repeal of the 17th Amendment!

Dang! Like Dame Agatha said ... best place to hide something is right out in the open where everybody can see it. That's the answer for which we've been looking, methinks! Maybe John and his pet rock deserve the credit for that bird too, for while he was big on built-in safeguards to protect us against ourselves, he also put great stock in virtuous people, and I believe his answer would be to always strive to elect or appoint them to positions of trust and great importance ... give them the power to conduct the affairs of their office ... and, always, always hold them accountable to the letter!

We must always remember, which means never forget ... that so long as our principles are sound and our governors virtuous, our problems can always be effectively addressed ... the greatest of all corruption is the violation of principle, wittingly or no. When principles are violated, the integrity of the entire system is undermined, if not doomed ... redundant, perhaps ... repetition worthy, for sure.

James Madison, Father of our Constitution ... he done real good, ... but, methinks it had more than one!

Comments are what gives us direction and fuels Miss Maude Murray ... please share your views ... on whatever strikes your fancy!

... what say ye?

page 2

page 3

page 4

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

The Genius of Genius

2010-10-15T14:14:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

It's been worthwhile examining the past, attempting to find the pieces to this interlocking puzzle of ours ... why we find ourselves where we are, and how we might make things better.

The search is not yet complete but some good progress is being made, methinks. Something that has long been made, even back before Century 21 began, is a case for our society and government being filled with corruption. The blame can be laid at many a door and frequently is ... it just depends on who is asked. The better question may be ... "has the case here been made for the corruption and abuse in our governing being directly tied to our failure as a people to be virtuous, especially in the selection of our governors?"

To be clear, I firmly believe that it's true, almost by definition ... just unsure that the case has been made. Folks don't like being blamed, 'specially when they're guilty, so please understand that I'm talking about everybody else, not you and me. Let's take another look at the first of them openers what John Adams dealt me and examine its relevance to the price of tea in Boston Harbor. John said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other" ... but there's an opposing view ... some folks would have you believe that virtue and morality are subjective properties of the religious, and without relevance to the governing of a free state, ... that the government should be concerned only with the civil rights of its people.

Others want to compromise ... they think that a very moderate amount of virtue is enough, but set no limit to their desires of wealth, property, power, reputation and the like ... indeed, they include those as virtues when allowed. .

Well, I guess that answers that ... the case hasn't been made; at least there's not universal acceptance of the importance of the virtue of the people to good governing. Borrowing again from John Adams ... thanks to God that he gave me stubbornness when I know I am right, ... so let's have at it!

Virtue is another of those words that is misunderstood, abused and misused ... it is situation dependent ... according to Aristotle, every moral virtue stands in relationship to two opposing vices ... for example, courage lies somewhere between foolhardiness and cowardice, and what may the foolhardy in one situation, may be courageous in another ... Luther DooLittle standing up to them Sedgewick boys may be courageous, but backsassing his mama is downright foolhardy!

As always, we'll try to carefully select our words and ascertain the meaning of words used by others ... though the notion that "virtue and morality are without relevance to the governing of a free state" hardly seems worthy of serious contemplation, regardless of definitions. Better to consider the source, methinks.

Defining virtue may prove a mite difficult so let's first check out some things with which we're apt to be better acquainted ...people who adhere to a strict code of absolute sincerity, honesty, and candor, or at least sincerely so strive ... and those whose for whom sincerity, honesty, and candor are instruments of convenience, expediency, and advantage.

Worry not, this ain't no democracy where the majority rules ... not yet. I put in that "sincerely so strive" 'cause the folks what actually adhere to them things is on the endangered list ... but, regardless of our religious beliefs or where find ourselves positioned, my guess is that they're the ones we consider most worthy of our trust.

Let's try another ... those whose decisions and management of affairs reflect acumen, good judgment and self control, characterized by deliberateness, caution, and circumspection ... involving foresight, forethought, frugality and discretion ... in a word, those who are prudent, and ... those whose decisions tend to be passion driven, impulsive, and rash, with inadequate regard for possible adverse effects or long term implications.

I have no idea regarding the percentage, but again suspect a majority belong to the latter group ... and as before, regardless of religious beliefs or where find ourselves positioned, it is the former group that houses those we consider most worthy of our trust in representing us or handling our affairs.

One more ... those who are genuinely kind, whose actions are selfless; whose disposition is to do good, be fair in their dealings, and promote the welfare of others, and ... those who are driven by ambition and self-fulfillment.

By now you know the routine ...

In each case, the desirable group, and one to which most would like to belong, is the smaller methinks ... but, like Sam Adams said, "it is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue!"

Rare are the men who share membership in all three of those desired groups ... a most special ilk of man ... it gives one pause. A sign of the times? Sure seems that way ... but the story history tells is that folks is folks. We've been lucky these past 200 years or so ... having the protection of all them safeguards John, Tom, Ben and the rest of the boys insisted upon ... this government of ours has proven a better experiment than expected ... it taken a long time for the nature of man to get the upper hand.

There's been no talk of religion ... no subjective morality issues, neither ... so let's put that to rest. If we are to have a government that serves us well and endures, it must be based on high principles .... and it must be administered by those who themselves are driven by high principles, regardless of religious beliefs. It should be the strength of our government that it serves you well regardless of your religious beliefs ... and I would hope, the strength of your religion allows for different beliefs as well.

Surely a man's ability to overcome fear and confront danger and uncertainty is very important in evaluating his stock, perhaps most especially, the ability to stand up for what he believes to be right when his position is unpopular ... does not war prove that most men can summon the courage to fight, when left with no option? Standing up under adverse circumstance for what one thinks is right, takes special courage indeed ... as the danger can be avoided by simply staying seated.

Again, it gives us two groups ... those who chose to stand, and those who choose to remain seated.

Is it in our best interest as individuals and as a people, that men strive to be brave, control their appetites, pursue knowledge and act both justly and prudently ... and is it a reasonable expectation? Those are the virtues of long standing ... of Plato, back when he opened the Shop. Maybe it's a reasonable expectation, maybe not ... but, it's the key to the interests of self, the people and the country all getting along and living together in harmony, methinks. That's what it's all about ... surely the intended uniqueness of our government is that we enjoy the freedom to attend our personal interests as we choose, so long as the interests of the people and the country are not abused.

That's important to understand ... to me, it suggests that self interests are inherently good, not bad. They become bad when they're allowed to run rampant, out of control, abusive ... and, relative to out current focus; infringe upon the best interests of the people and/or the country. Evil forces take over ... lust, greed, selfishness, avarice, corruptness, malice, pettiness, unscrupulousness, ruthlessness, manipulation. deceitfulness ... a beast of many guises but usually easy to recognize. Of all the corruption and abuses to which we're subjected, what percentage is not associated with the coveting of power, wealth and influence? Honesty forces me to admit not knowing the answer ... is it one or two percent?

In absolute terms it really matters little ...

In the absence of divine guidance, or perhaps because of it ... it may well be that man's purpose is best attended through benevolence and selflessness ... déjà vu all over again ... just a recurring thought

Dr. Franklin had this to say regarding Divine guidance during the deliberations of the 1787 Constitutional Convention ...

Mr. President:

The small progress we have made after four or five weeks close attendance and continual reasonings with each other ... our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ayes, is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the human understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of government, and examined the different forms of those republics which, having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution, no longer exist. And we have viewed modern states all round Europe, but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our circumstances.

In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of Lights to illumine our understanding?

In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor... and have we now forgotten this powerful Friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?

I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: 'that God governs in the affairs of man'. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?

We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writing that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel; we shall be divided by our little, partial local interest; our projects will be confounded; and we ourselves shall become a reproach and a byword down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing government by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war, or conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move that, henceforth, prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven and its blessing on our deliberation be held in this assembly every morning we proceed to business.

That, from the smartest of the smart, methinks!

Well, what about those who want to compromise ... those who think that a very moderate amount of virtue is enough, but set no limit to their desires of wealth, property, power, reputation and the like?

Aristotle's view, back in the day, was ... "happiness is more often found with those who are most highly cultivated in their mind and in their character, and have only a moderate share of external goods, than among those who possess external goods to a useless extent but are deficient in higher qualities. Let us acknowledge then that each one has just so much of happiness as he has of virtue and wisdom, and of virtuous and wise action. The best life, both for individuals and states, is the life of virtue, when virtue has external goods enough for the performance of good actions"

Team players understand and will acknowledge ... not so sure about those who would be stars.

We know of John Adams' religious convictions and his beliefs concerning the importance of virtue and being virtuous ... we know too that he wasn't alone ... there were many more than just him and Dr. Ben. This, for your own contemplation and reflection ... it makes our case methinks!

"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate ... look at his character. It is alleged by men of loose principles, or defective views of the subject, that religion and morality are not necessary or important qualifications for political stations. ... It is to the neglect of this rule that we must ascribe the multiplied frauds, breaches of trust, speculations and embezzlements of public property which astonish even ourselves; which tarnish the character of our country and which disgrace our government. When a citizen gives his vote to a man of known immorality, he abuses his civic responsibility; he not only sacrifices his own responsibility; he sacrifices not only his own interest, but that of his neighbor; he betrays the interest of his country."

It's from the pen of Noah Webster, the one with the dictionary ... and quoted in a previous post, "In Virtue Of" ... as said there, we need not look far to find corporeal evidence of those truths. It's worth rereading, that's why it's here ... indeed it's worth memorizing! It should be republished in every newspaper and church bulletin on the eve of every election ... and permanently posted on the walls of every classroom throughout the land ... and on every blog that supports freedom!

Most of those to whom we've looked have been of the same ilk ... preaching similar sermons ... wanting what's best for the people and the country ... and thank goodness that it was so. However, for those too young to remember, those concerns of Noah Webster aren't new ... not exactly sure when they were written, but he was pushing thirty when the Constitution was signed ... the abuses, corruption, and their attendant evils have been a long time in their coming..

Mama frequently counseled ... "you're known by the company you keep!"

For them what's riding the fence, it might help to compare those counseling the importance of virtue and morality to those offering differing counsel ... and decide which places you in the better company. Here's what a few of our nation's midwives and attending physicians had to say:

Jefferson ... Whenever you are to do a thing, though it can never be known but to yourself, ask yourself how you would act were all the world looking at you, and act accordingly. Encourage all your virtuous dispositions, and exercise them whenever an opportunity arises, being assured that they will gain strength by exercise, as a limb of the body does, and that exercise will make them habitual

Washington ... Human rights can only be assured among a virtuous people. The general government . . . can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, an oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any despotic or oppressive form so long as there is any virtue in the body of the people

Franklin ... Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters

Benjamin Rush ... The only foundation for... a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments

Fisher Ames ... Our liberty depends on our education, our laws, and habits . . . it is founded on morals and religion, whose authority reigns in the heart, and on the influence all these produce on public opinion before that opinion governs rulers

Charles Carroll ... Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments. ...

John Witherspoon ... Let a man's zeal, profession, or even principles as to political measures be what they will, if he is without personal integrity and private virtue, as a man he is not to be trusted ...

It is the duty of all wise, free, and virtuous governments to countenance and encourage virtue and religion ... John Jay

A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy.... While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader ... Samuel Adams

It is certainly true that a popular government cannot flourish without virtue in the people ... Richard Henry Lee

The institution of delegated power implies that there is a portion of virtue and honor among mankind which may be a reasonable foundation of confidence ... Alexander Hamilton

The aim of every political Constitution, is or ought to be first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust ... James Madison

Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles ... Patrick Henry

Thirteen examples, same number as there were colonies ... a pretty good testament to what they believed, methinks, surely enough to persuade the most doubting Thomas!

Well, perhaps there are some who are thinking ... them fellers were all part of the same conspiracy and probably had to say those things! Maybe ... but many others have expressed their thoughts and me benevolence forces me to be fair and give them equal time ...

All the gold which is under or upon the earth is not enough to give in exchange for virtue ... Plato

The shortest and surest way to live with honour in the world, is to be in reality what we would appear to be; and if we observe, we shall find, that all human virtues increase and strengthen themselves by the practice of them ... Socrates

The superior man thinks always of virtue; the common man thinks of comfort ... Confucius

When virtue is banished, ambition invades the minds of those who are disposed to receive it, and avarice possesses the whole community ... Montesquieu

No people can be great who have ceased to be virtuous ... Samuel Johnson

Fruits are always of the same nature with the seeds and roots from which they come ... that society of men which constitutes a government upon the foundation of justice, virtue, and the common good, will always have men to promote those ends; and that which intends the advancement of one man's desire and vanity, will abound in those that will foment them ... Algernon Sidney

America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great ... Alexis de Tocqueville

Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their appetites; in proportion as their love of justice is above their rapacity; in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption; in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsel of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves ... Edmund Burke

Douglas MacArthur ... History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster

No free government can stand without virtue in the people, and a lofty spirit of patriotism ... Andrew Jackson

George Will ... Today it would be progress if everyone would stop talking about values. Instead, let us talk, as the Founders did, about virtues

Ronald Reagan ... Without God there is no virtue because there is no prompting of the conscience... If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under.

Somehow strangely the vice of men gets well represented and protected but their virtue has none to plead its cause -- nor any charter of immunities and rights... Henry David Thoreau

If I've counted correctly, that makes 13 ... a scary thought perhaps is that our future will soon be in the hands of our youth ... it is as it has always been, our duty to see that they are well prepared ... the primary reason for the thought being scary, methinks. As the brilliant Algernon Sidney's words suggest, from the acorn comes the oak ... as the twig is bent, so grows the tree. We can have no greater duty, and the long standing lack of its proper attendance is at the heart of things being as they are.

Noah Webster said, “I have been a believer in the magic of language since, at a very early age, I discovered that some words got me into trouble and others got me out” ... a club to which many of us belong. I wish I could select the words that would keep me out of trouble and truly convey my feelings ... to convey the urgency of the moment ... the need for an awakening ...effective action needs to be taken, now and without delay ... but, we must always, without fail, properly attend our children!

His counsel to students ... "The virtues of men are of more consequence to society than their abilities; and for this reason, the heart should be cultivated with more assiduity than the head"

As proof that words are more powerful than the transporter of the Enterprise, we return to 1787 ... Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! They done did the impossible and beat the mighty British ... they would do it again in New Orleans, but just now the struggle was with ideas and words ... Noah had yet to write his dictionary and no, they didn't have no Spell-Checker ... don't think they knowed how to use computers. Lots of good folks with different notions and strong feelings ... the smart money was 7 to 1 against ... and then it was done, ... a constitution..

Or was it?

Would it be signed and ratified ... again, the smart money said no, possibly because our eldest and most respected statesman, Ben Franklin was among those having serious problems with the proposed version.

Dr. Franklin asked permission to address the Constitutional Convention but wasn't strong enough to deliver his speech ... it was read for him by fellow Pennsylvania Delegate, James Wilson ... impossible to improve upon stuff from the smartest of the smart, it's presented here as written ... for your consideration and comments.

Mr. President

I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them: For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others.

Most men indeed as well as most sects in Religion, think themselves in possession of all truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far error. Steele, a Protestant in a Dedication, tells the Pope that the only difference between our Churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrines is, the Church of Rome is infallible and the Church of England is never in the wrong. But though many private persons think almost as highly of their own infallibility as of that of their sect, few express it so naturally as a certain french lady, who in a dispute with her sister, said "I don't know how it happens, Sister but I meet with no body but myself, that's always in the right — Il n'y a que moi qui a toujours raison."

In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.

I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution. For when you assemble a number of men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with confidence to hear that our councils are confounded like those of the Builders of Babel; and that our States are on the point of separation, only to meet hereafter for the purpose of cutting one another's throats.

Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure, that it is not the best.

The opinions I have had of its errors, I sacrifice to the public good. I have never whispered a syllable of them abroad. Within these walls they were born, and here they shall die. If every one of us in returning to our Constituents were to report the objections he has had to it, and endeavor to gain partizans in support of them, we might prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary effects & great advantages resulting naturally in our favor among foreign Nations as well as among ourselves, from our real or apparent unanimity.

Much of the strength & efficiency of any Government in procuring and securing happiness to the people, depends, on opinion, on the general opinion of the goodness of the Government, as well as of the wisdom and integrity of its Governors. I hope therefore that for our own sakes as a part of the people, and for the sake of posterity, we shall act heartily and unanimously in recommending this Constitution (if approved by Congress & confirmed by the Conventions) wherever our influence may extend, and turn our future thoughts & endeavors to the means of having it well administred.

On the whole, Sir, I can not help expressing a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections to it, would with me, on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument.

That's as good as it gets!

The qualities that find our favor, so do without first asking us to identify our religion ... good and bad were created a long time ago, about the same time as man, methinks.

Definitions can be tricky but if being religious is faithfully attempting to adhere to a set of canon prescribing behavior and beliefs, then it really doesn't matter so much what our own might be ... seems to me that it's the Super Glue that holds us together and allows us to rise above our baseness, control our appetites, endure adversity and spit in its eye ... to stand tall and be virtuous, if you will.

For some reason, my thoughts keep returning to the notion that the key to it all is selflessness ... being devoted to doing good for good's sake, devoted to the welfare and best interests of others rather than self fulfillment, especially as it applies to our governors.

Without the restraining bounds of religion, man seems to be all about self and is driven by ambition and self-fulfillment ... man covets power, wealth and influence, and it is to this that we owe virtually 100% of the corruption and abuses to be found in our society, including our government ... again, perhaps most especially.

The doctrine that discounts the relevance of virtue and morality and focuses upon civil rights belongs to those who would have us all do what is right in our own eyes, with accountability only to ourselves, methinks. Sounds pretty good ... if we could depend on everybody doing that ... except for them crazies what thinks wrong is right. It would certainly have natural appeal to the oppressed and very poor, as well as those who see themselves as enlightened and capable of self government. But surely this is a road paved with fool's gold ... leading to a state of anarchy in which none would be safe ... the very notion of civil rights would be lost ... and it is not extreme to expect man, left to his own devices, to become enslaved by his wanton desires and pleasures.

That is not intended as a religious position ... there are no easy answers ... we must just as carefully examine the credentials of those wearing the mantel of faith, proffering kindred doctrine that would impose their morality upon us, while making them exempt from our scrutiny on the grounds that they're doing God's work, and should be allowed to so do with impunity.

If indeed they are genuine, it should be readily discernible, from deed rather than assertion ... those who fear, resent or refuse our probing questions and closest scrutiny ... are not worthy of our trust or our consideration, for if it is God they serve, and to whom they hold themselves accountable, then surely our desire to be satisfied regarding their legitimacy would be embraced rather than rebuffed.

That we endorse the individual's right to a private relationship with their God, is applauded by all ... or so we would hope and so it would seem ... but, while the infinite nature of God is beyond our finite comprehension, it is the nature of man to feel his beliefs superior to those of others, something of which we should be ever mindful ... folks is always tolerant of those what think and believe the same as them.

Self expression is not my forte but the wisdom of placing of trust in those who would seek exemption from accountability, on any grounds, for any reason is suspect ... for regardless of how sweet sounding the melody, such is the music played on the instruments of those motivated by personal self interests and ambitions.

Our Founding Fathers ... James Madison, and his helpers, what wrote our Constitution ... and them what attended the Convention, were as a group what we would call virtuous men. It's not perfect, and neither were they, that's for sure ... but it's a framework like no other, set up to enable the best governing possible and providing safeguards to protect us from external threats and more importantly, ourselves.

They did all this, being well aware of AEsops' "The Man, the Boy, and the Donkey" ... imagine that.

The enlightened who bathe in the waters of their desires and vanities scoff at the wisdom suggested by the biblical question "what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" ... as being the stuff of flawed religion. I would suspect that it is embraced by all religions of consequence ... and for the enlightened who reject such stuff as nonsense,here's a substitute, from the earlier provided list ... "all the gold which is under or upon the earth is not enough to give in exchange for virtue" ... preached by Plato, way back when he owned the Shop.

As you may have guessed, Miss Murray is equipped with a special transmission allowing us to change gears at any time without transition or warning ... adds to the ride, but is oft unintended ... seatbelts advised! "Failure seems to be regarded as the one unpardonable crime, success as the all-redeeming virtue, the acquisition of wealth as the single worthy aim of life. Ten years ago such revelations as these would have sent a shudder through the community, and would have placed a stigma on every man who had had to do them. Now they merely incite others to surpass by yet bolder outrages and more corrupt combinations" ...

Seems like somebody on the nightly news getting carried away in their commentary, but actually, those were the words of Charles Francis Adams, John Quincy's boy ... talking about the infamous scandal involving the Erie Railway Company. From 1866 to 1868, a group used unauthorized stock issues, political chicanery, and continual nuisance litigation to out maneuver Cornelius Vanderbilt and keep control of the company ... things were so bad Erie Railway became known as the "scarlet woman of Wall Street."

That's history ... the "pushing the envelope" message remains relevant, more so today than back then, methinks!

While it may be misunderstood and of those words what will get me into trouble, I would suggest to the enlightened that rather than a man's religion defining his morality and virtue, the reverse it true. The solution lies in the people reclaiming their virtue, ... restoring it to its former self, and becoming virtuous in the selection of its governors ... but they must first realize that they've lost it.

The people seem divided into two competing camps ...those most interested in "what's best for the people and the country" ... that's me and you ... and those most interested in "their own self interests" ... everybody else. If we took a poll of the people, most all would agree that the self serving blaggards are at the heart of the problem... should be flogged, have their citizenship revoked, then exiled to the salt mines.

A poll of the people regarding apathy being the at the heart would bring the same results, methinks ...

Of course, they would all raise sand when loaded on the trucks ... except maybe a few salt addicts. We must be ever mindful that human nature is to replace mirrors with self portraits when looking at one's self.

Our government has endured for almost 225 years ... your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to help restore it to its intended and rightful state ... perhaps more importantly, help reinvigorate the people so that it will be properly maintained, hopefully for at least another 225 years. Perhaps it's a mission impossible, but that was the conventional wisdom, back in 1776 as well!

Has the case here been made for the corruption and abuse in our governing being directly tied to our failure as a people to be virtuous, especially in the selection of our governors?

Well, it's safe to unfasten your seatbealts ... time to stop, pause, and refill Miss Murray's tank. Comments are the sweet feed what gives us direction and fuels Miss Maude Murray, and we hope you'll leave yours in the virtual sweet feed depository ... what say ye?

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

By Virtue Of ...

2010-10-10T14:20:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

Don't be fooled into believing that John Adams was a loose cannon, wrapped in his religion, morality and sense of virtue ... many men held similar cards, all potentially winning hands; methinks.

In considering whether or not to select Mister Adams to represent me in the assembly, I had to first decide if he was the one whom I most esteem and love best for his knowledge, integrity, and benevolence. Remembering his caution about misuse and abuse of words being "the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery" ... I googled "knowledge, integrity and benevolence" just to see what them words meant, and triple dang!!!

It came back "John Adams" ... I kid you not!!

Mama didn't raise no fools ... that was an omen! I didn't look no further ...

Actually, I kinda knowed he was the right man for the job, almost from the first when I seen he weren't afraid to stand up and speak his mind ... to tell it like it is, well so to speak ... since he told it like it was, 225 years ago. What's remarkable to me is just how often he was spot right on.

It didn't hurt none that he had Miss Abbie to keep him straight. Speaking of omen, the Independence Declaration of 1776 ... the work of many, but a bit more of John, Tom and Dr. Ben ... those three had busy lives, with both Tom and John passing on the same day ... 4 July, 1826 - its fiftieth anniversary.

Truth is truth, and truth is that the more I read, the more I find myself liking this obstinate little man ...he was a keen student of history and seemed especially sensitive to the nature of man and the need to have builtin safeguards that would protect us and our governing mechanism from our governors and indeed ourselves ... governors being the collective of those involved with our governing. Five foot seven he was, as was John Quincy, methinks. It's strange how some real tall fellers needed elevator shoes to stand as tall as John Adams!

He once wrote to Miss Abbie ... "I would give three guineas for a barrel of your cyder ... a guinea for a barrel of your beer" He smoked and chewed, this little man what was graduated by the Harvard College.

Neither be ye fooled into believing that he was the only one sensitive to the nature of man and the threat it imposed to any free government ... our eldest statesman, known to some perhaps as Richard Saunders and the inventor of the stove, signed our constitution ... saying, "I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, — if they are such" .... adding, "I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people, if well administered."

Not a ringing endorsement ... and then, dropping the other shoe ... "this," the Constitution and resultant government ... "is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other"

Scary, now ain't it?!

Why is it that we refuse to accept responsibility and accountability for where we find ourselves, a prerequisite, for something being done? In a free republic, there is nobody to blame but the people!

What first caught my eye, other than all them quotes of our Fathers, was an article taken from the works of John Adams ... in which, among other things he takes great philosopher and noted barber Aristotle to task. That took some gumption and was probably after he'd had bout six guineas worth of Miss Abbey's cider ...

John agreed with Aristotle that six things are so necessary to a city, that without them it cannot stand. Actually, Aristotle had a seventh thing vital to a city's survival ... a good barbering school! He learned barbering from Plato, right here in the Shop, and later opened one of his own ... to make the men more attractive to the ladies, methinks, essential for maintaining the population ... but as Whigs were popular when John was then writing, good haircuts weren't considered vital to a city's survival and he convinced Greek historians to have it deleted. Looking at the portraits of John Adams, there may have been other reasons.

Them fellows was smart, very smart ... still are, as their writings and those of their fellows keep them alive and well.

John Adams' is not light, bedtime reading ... I've long had the well deserved reputation for being difficult to understand but here are times when I sense being outclassed by the master when trying to comprehend the musings of our first vice president ... yes, there are times ...

I doubt that Uncle Virgil and SJA have any trouble understanding Mister Adams and them other intellects found among our founding fathers ... but I suggest that most of us would be well served to be ever mindful that while most folks think of pie as something grandma made what tasted good, others think of it as a transcendental number starting with 3.1415926535897932384626433832795. Yes, that's just an approximation but it's good enough for most purposes. Perhaps more to the point, them boys was talking and writing over 200 years ago, long before Uncle Virgil's daddy was born ... and what was then common usage, ain't necessarily so today.

Take "comprehend" ... my guess is that today, most everybody grasps the nature, significance, or meaning of that word ... that is to say they understand it, almost by definition. However, when John Adams and his fellows used the word, it usually meant to "include" or "contain" ... still means that, at least some of the time.

	WHAT	WHY	WHO
The City's Vitals
1	Provisions	Without which its inhabitants cannot live	Farmers
2	Clothes, habitations, houses, and other things, which depend upon the arts	Without which civil and political life cannot subsist	Artificers
3	Arms	To defend the city from its enemies, and to repress the boldness of those who rebel against the laws	Soldiers
4	Money	Most necessary to a city in peace and in war	Merchants and Capitalists
5	The care of divine worship		Priests
6	The administration of justice, and the government of the people		Judges and Magistrates

"Seven sorts of men, therefore, are necessary to a city: husbandmen, artificers, soldiers, merchants, rich men, priests, and judges" ... note how John was careful not to mention barbers.

Still being ever mindful and well served? There's another of them words ... "husbandmen" ... why didn't they just say "married men" and be done with it? Well, the way things are going, probably won't be long before husbandwoman and wifeman will be added to the Webster.

I don't know nothing about this city of Aristotle's that John's talking about but I'm guessing it could almost just as well be a town, a state ... even a whole country or a republic.

My interpretation of Aristotle is that a city is established with an ultimate purpose ... and that those whose motivation and activities are not directed toward that end are not truly part of the city and should not be counted among its citizens. As the city has an ultimate purpose, it follows almost by definition that it has a government with the chore of making progress toward achieving success and keeping the city headed in the right direction.

Being a citizen meant having a voice in the governing process ... being able to both vote and serve. Same as now.

It would seem to be counter productive to allow those who did not share the city's vision and support its ultimate purpose to vote and participate in its governing ... excluding them makes pretty good sense to me, so long as they're treated fairly. Being able to vote ain't as easy as some folks think ...at least not back then ... it meant knowing and understanding what was going on, deciding what was good and bad for the city ... and who was good and bad too! No, it wasn't easy ... and it was obviously time consuming, it took time to consider things and make the right decisions.

That was just the voting part ... as a citizen, you had to be able to serve too ...

The way I read Aristotle, a city's ultimate purpose is the realization of true and lasting happiness for its citizens. That was a long time ago, but I don't think that's really changed. According to Aristotle, John Adams, and just about everybody else what mattered ... true happiness was to be found through being virtuous, especially in exercising prudence and wisdom.

I'll concur with them out of respect for their intellect, and wisdom ... but mostly their age! Truth be known, that ain't changed neither, nary a bit ... though, I can't speak from experience about being virtuous; especially exercising wisdom and prudence!

In Aristotle's city, those whose activities were not directed to those virtues ... wisdom and prudence ... were not included among its citizens.... were that our rule today, most of our cities and perhaps our nation would be as anarchical ghost towns, methinks ... tell me, who would there be to govern?

Yes, entire classes of folks were excluded!

That included the husbandmen ... farmers is good folks, but the demands of tilling the soil and tending the crops left inadequate time for the nurturing of virtue and the proper performance of political duties. My guess is that the farmers understood ... nothing worse than crops what ain't been properly attended, regardless of how good the land or the planting, except maybe the government.

It included the laborers, the craftsmen and merchants too ... for they had neither the time nor the inclination, not to mention that their activities and lives they led were considered prejudicial against virtuous pursuit. The laborers and most craftsmen were of the very poor, preoccupied and working long and hard in their efforts to survive and provide for their families ... they had little time or interest in the pursuit .of wisdom or prudence, which was probably both wise and prudent.

The primary pursuit of those who bought, sold and traded things for profit as a way of living was exactly that ... the pursuit and acquisition of gold, a vice rather than a virtue. Some things never change ... probably an ambitious and not to be trusted crowd too!

Distinguishing merchants from craftsmen and laborers is probably more of form than substance ... doing work for the purpose of getting paid is the pursuit of gold. In general, those needing to toil for their daily bread had neither the time nor the wherewithal to be a good citizen, or at least it was so thought by Aristotle, methinks.

Maybe it's a different breed of dog what might or mightn't hunt, but ... could it be that the exclusion of craftsmen and merchants is deeper based and a bit more complex? It wouldn't surprise me none to find them sorta nomadic in nature ... the craftsmen going wherever there was work to be had ... and the merchants maybe even holding multiple residences; in the places where goods were best to be had, and also in them where they were best to be sold ... with allegiance to none.

Speaking of them excluded classes, the noted barber posited ... "It is therefore clear, that they are not parts of a city and should be counted, not as citizens, but only as instruments which serve certain uses and conveniences of the city."

Well, I ain't sure about it being clear but, faced with only the simple choice of either including or excluding a class, it would be a question of which benefits the city most in the pursuit of its ultimate purpose ... to include or exclude? Can't argue much with that ... and can't fault a man none for what he sincerely believes; whether he be barber, patriot, or the neighbor next door.

At the same time, it sure would be good it there was a way of identifying any within them excluded classes what were citizenship worthy! That's just my knee jerk reaction ... but you can take it as my effort to be virtuous and exercise wisdom and prudence, a new experience for me! Well, while I'm on a roll ... having an effective way to remove the unworthy and expunge the citizenship records of their names might be good too, better than that, methinks!

What do all this have to do with the price of tea in China or Boston Harbor?

Well, for openers, the percentage of colonial American citizens who where farmers, tradesmen and merchants was about the same as the pureness of Ivory Soap. If we were to have done what Aristotle went and did ... "exclude them from the citizenry," there weren't enough left to run Lum & Abner's jot 'em down store ... much less a city!

I'm not sure if John would agree with either my interpretation or the reasonableness of the resulting dogma ... but he left no question as to what he thought of Aristotle's rendering! As to be expected, he took Aristotle to task for those class exclusions ... and I doubt it was for reasons of political correctness, as he was a sincere, virtuous man; dedicated to freedom for all ... and besides, he said them's some of the best folks what's around.

John did a mite more than take him to task ... out behind the barn, was more like it!

To John Adams, there could be no possible rational or sufficient reason for excluding them farmers, merchants, and artificers, from the rights of citizens. Said he, in no uncertain terms ... "The dogma of Aristotle, and the practice of the world, is the most unphilosophical, the most inhuman and cruel that can be conceived! Until this wicked position, which is worse than the slavery of the ancient republics, or modern West Indies, shall be held up to the derision and contempt, the execration and horror, of mankind, it will be to little purpose to talk or write about liberty"

John's attitude was that the members of these classes were sufficient judges of the qualifications of a person to represent them in the legislature ... at least them what had a judgment and will of their own. Maybe John was defending our approach to the outside world ... maybe attempting to motivate those within other governments to follow suit ... and maybe just serving notice to those of our aristocrats what were reluctant to give full privileges to the average colonial ... I don't know, but he was certainly all het up!

From his pulpit ... "It is the representative assembly that provides the people with their voice ... fairly constituted, and made an integral part of the sovereignty, it has power forever to control the rich and illustrious in another assembly ... it is the only instrument by which the body of the people can act;... the only way in which their opinions can be known and collected; ... the only means by which their wills can be united, and their strength properly exerted within the government" ... and I don't think he'd been sippin' none of Miss Abbie's cider neither!

John's assertion "that anyone having a judgment and will of their own" is a sufficient judge of the qualifications of a person to represent them in the legislature" is pretty heavy stuff, ... I certainly can't entirely agree, but then he equates it to "being qualified and able to perform the duty of saying who is the man in his neighborhood whom he most esteems, and loves best, for his knowledge, integrity, and benevolence." That's a bit different, methinks ... most should have been so able ... provided, of course, they weren't expected to participate in other functions, like the citizens of Aristotle's city.

In a surprise move, he went and acknowledged this group's tainted reputation as being well deserved ... that is to say, "it is too inattentive to public affairs, and too patient under oppression" ... saying "this is undoubtedly true, and will forever be so; and, what is worse, the most sober, industrious, and peaceable of them, will forever be the least attentive, and the least disposed to exert themselves in hazardous and disagreeable efforts of resistance" ... danged near agreeing with Aristotle's having excluding them in the first place, methinks!

But, morphing retreat into charge, he trumpets ... "The only practicable method, therefore, of giving them the equal right of citizens, and their proper weight and influence in society, is by elections, frequently repeated, of a house of commons, an assembly which shall be an essential part of the sovereignty".

I think Aristotle probably made the better case ... but John was almost certain to get a favorable verdict, especially since just about everybody in the audience and jury was farmers, merchants and craftsmen. Listen as he makes his final plea ... "there arise, in the course of human life, many among them of the most splendid geniuses, the most active and benevolent dispositions, and most undaunted bravery! The moral equality that nature has unalterably established among men, gives these an undoubted right to have every road opened to them for advancement in life and in power that is open to any others!

My understanding and knowledge of Aristotle and those of great thought would fill less than half a thimble, while John's would no doubt fill several of Miss Abbie's cider barrels, so I'll plead "nolo contendere," should anyone take issue with any of my renderings.

In truth, that which I attribute to Aristotle is but my understanding of the renderings given by John Adams himself ... having never myself read Aristotle's Politics.

If my read is right, Aristotle judged the people in every city are divided into the very rich, the very poor, and them's what's left in the middle.

Though the merchants, craftsmen and farmers are excluded from the body of citizens, Aristotle finds the middle class best suited for governing ... and the most reasonable minded. For the very strong, noble or rich, as well as for the very poor, weak or mean ... complying with reason is attended with difficulty.

The extremely rich, influential and powerful are capricious and vicious; the very poor, rascally and mean ... those who enjoy excessive riches, friends, and influence are not willing to submit to command or law ... they are accustomed to being pampered and having their way ... they know not how submit, nor do they know how to rule, but despotically. On the flip side, the constant, never ending want of what the rich enjoy makes the very poor too mean ... they know not how to command; accustomed only to being commanded, whether as citizens or as slaves.

A city or state composed only of the rich and the poor, consists but of masters and slaves, not freemen; where one party despise, and the other hate; where there is no possibility of friendship, or political community, which supposes affection ... and it is doomed, never to realize its ultimate purpose.

A free state depends upon a predominance of relative "equality" ... its composition, as much as possible, should be of equals ... and it will be best preserved when the greatest part of the inhabitants are of the middle sort. They have their standing of equality and will be the happiest. ..They will not covet nor steal from the rich, as do the poor ... nor will what they be the targets of thieves. Without plotting against anyone, or having anyone plot against them, they will live relatively safe and secure.

The best free city is one where the middle rank constitutes a majority of the inhabitants ... a larger and more respectable part of its citizens than both the other combined. When that is not possible, it is most essential to its survival as a free city that the middle rank be larger than either of the other two, so that neither may dominate.

Essential to a citizen's happiness is reasonable wealth ... middle class wealth, if you will ... so as to facilitate the citizen's independence relative to sustenance and virtuous pursuit ... and to support continuation of the status of equality.

Free states which are poorly constituted ... those where the middle class is too small ... those who are the more numerous, whether the rich or the poor, will always overpower them and assume the administration of the government. When in power, neither the rich nor the poor will establish a free state, ... rather, they will form one which inclines to their own principles, either a democracy or an oligarchy.

John, in other writings has cautioned that when critiquing, it is essential to first know the author's word definitions ... we know that well enough, though our tendency is assume our own ... in this case, I think it's clear that "oligarchy" means despotic government, controlled and administered by the rich and powerful. I think "democracy " is a bit more difficult ... a government, directly controlled and administered by the people, destined for failure, that's for sure ... but as Aristotle is talking about the poor having won the day, the power will rest with the victors, again resulting in a despotic government, controlled and administered by the meanest rabble.

John Adams concurs with those notions ... more than that, he considers those to be among Aristotle's wisest sentiments ... but can't seem to reconcile the two doctrines ... this, with which he strongly, agrees and the exclusion of farmers, merchants, and tradesmen from the ranks of citizens, which he abhors. I rather think he could, had it been to his advantage and had he so wanted.

I rather doubt that Aristotle would have advocated the exclusion of worthy members of the middle rank from the citizenry as so doing would lessen the middle's relative strength and impair the vitality of the free state. My conclusion is that unlike the situation in colonial America, the worthy members of excluded groups, if indeed there were any, were of such a minority as to make it impractical to otherwise so do ... and besides, it appears to be a question of apples and oranges, as they were adjudged by Aristotle as generally being of the lower rather than the middle ranks.

Deposited by John Adams into our bank ...

For the free state to thrive and survive, its middle class must predominate both the citizenry and the government. Unfortunately, this class is too inattentive to public and national affairs, and too apt to submit to oppression ... have always so been, will always so be. When provoked beyond all bearing, they will aim at demolishing the government, and having accomplished that, they will sink into their usual inattention, and leave others to erect a new one, as rude and ill-modeled as the former.

A representative assembly, elected by them, is the only way they can act in concert ... but they have always allowed themselves to be cheated by false, imperfect, partial, and inadequate representations of themselves, and have never had their full and proper share of power in a state.

Most, at least in the privacy of their thoughts, will admit, methinks, that this short little meteorologist did a pretty good job of forecasting, better than most weathermen. Hopefully, it won't be too long before we have enough in our account to start making withdrawals and putting it to use, not to mention the purchasing of a good umbrella.

Back to me openers ...

Among the more famous of the many from the mouth and pen of Mister Adams are

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people ... it is wholly inadequate to the government of any other;
Because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases;
The people have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge ... I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers; and
It should be your care, and mine, to elevate the minds of our children and exalt their courage; to accelerate and animate their industry and activity; to excite in them an habitual contempt of meanness, abhorrence of injustice and inhumanity, and an ambition to excel in every capacity, faculty, and virtue. If we suffer their minds to grovel and creep in infancy, they will grovel all their lives

Four aces, methinks ... not bad for openers!

Both them "A" boys ... Adams and Aristotle, was real smart, much smarter than me and maybe even uncle Virgil Hunnicutt. One thing upon which they agreed that we'll surely carry with us, regardless of where Miss Murray may take us, ... is the importance and relevance of virtue, both private and public, to us individually and collectively ... and to our dependence upon it; for our survival, that of our kids, theirs, and yes, for that of our government too.

A final card to fill the hand ... "if the citizens neglect their Duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the Laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizen will be violated or disregarded" ... true when written, true now in Century 21 ... timeless, methinks!

We need not look far to find corporeal evidence of those truths as it is a vision what's oft been fulfilled ... they are not from John's magic pen, but that of Noah Webster. Some are no doubt familiar with his dictionary.

Them's me views ... at least for now ... what say ye?

Another omen ... known in these parts as déjà vu all over again. Without your comments, it is all but much ado ... they are the sweet feed what what gives us direction and fuels Miss Maude Murray ... please leave yours in the sweet feed depository ... see you there!

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

Thoughts ... John Adams

2010-09-18T14:26:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

You know this old Tucker has sort of a built in guidance system, methinks ... maybe Preston's version of GPS ... it's been acting up lately and now, if I don't tell it exactly where I want to go, it sputters with the emergency flasher going on and off ... and then starts going round and round in circles, as if it can't make up its mind ... sorta like a woman ... so I'm naming her Maude ... Miss Maude Murray.

As perhaps suggested in "Chamberlain's Hangover," and reinforced in "Parties, ... I've discovered and taken somewhat of a liking for the obnoxious and disliked John Adams, who delights in letting you know what he thinks and why! Discharging my sacred duty, it's he whom I select as the one whom I most esteem and love best for his knowledge, integrity, and benevolence ... and it's to him I will on occasion yield, trusting him to represent me well.

I've been reading a bit in the hope of being able to give Miss Maude some direction ... well, at least a bit. When I was young, I read a lot, mostly about Great Grandpa Doolittle's English cousin John, until I developed a strong, well founded aversion to reading, lest I be unduly influenced by others ... mainly my teachers who tried to make me read.

Now that I've shed the aversion, I find I now longer have the necessary energy. Thus, I must plead guilty of gross ignorance, at least relative to most things of consequence, including the writings of the great philosophers, our founding fathers, the history of our great land and pretty much everything else what weren't played in the movie theater, on the radio or on the TV. In other words, the only advantage I have over most folks is what I saw in the Movietone News or heard on the radio.

Unlike me, John Adams was well read ... "let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write" ... speaks well for him, methinks. His money backed his words for he was a deep thinker with a prolific pen. He wasn't alone ... our empassioned founding fathers were smart, real smart ... still are, as their writings and those of their fellows keep them alive and well.

He cautioned ... "abuse of words has been the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery, of party, faction, and division of society" ... so as we read his, we can rest comfortable that his were fastidiously chosen.

He's right of course and in spite of contrariwise appearances, I too abhor the abuse and misuse of our language ... it often makes me cringe, like the scraping of ones nails on the blackboard. Yes, unlike me, he was well read ... does that mean he read a lot more than me or that a lot more folks read what he writ? Danged if I know!! It don't matter none ... both are true!

Citing "republic" as one of the most abused words in history, John Adams asserts that it orignally meant a government in which the property of the people predominated and governed ... one in which the property of the people, and of every one of them ... was secured and protected by law.

The notion of property taking precedence over people may be difficult for some to understand or swallow, but as the costumes, scenery and stage remain long after the actor's hour is over ... changes in ownership and management too ... it's important for it to so be. It will ever be, methinks ... and increasingly so, as the world's population continues to increase while there are no indications that the Lord plans to increase the size of the rock.

As noted in "Chamberlain's Hangover," he concluded that the true and only true definition of a republic was "a government in which all men are equally subject to its laws"

Through our glasses, and those prescribed by Doctor Franklin for our founding fathers, King George is clearly seen as an unreasonable tyrant, imposing taxes without proper representation ... and while Neville Chamberlain's were flawed, most folks recognized der Führer for the monster that he was. Indeed, Herr Hitler's "Mein Kampf" spelled it out for folks what might have defective glasses.

Unfortunately, times have changed and those who would be king have become far more insidious and beguiling ... hiding behind many masks and difficult to discern ... that they have developed a great penchant for abusing our language ... and become increasingly proficient in so doing ... bespeaks the cancerous condition with which we we find ourselves beset. That we, ourselevs, are so guilty is also symptomatic of the same condition, methinks.

Seeing as how we're getting somewhat "familiar" with the most honorable, esteemed and well respected John Adams, let's be somewhat familiar and irreverently call him "John" ... at least sometimes when it don't cause no confusion ... don't worry, he won't mind, now that he's pushing 265 years old.

The original definition of "republic" still survives ... but there is another, more recent, special meaning for the words "republic, commonwealth, popular state" ... introduced by 17th century journalist and publisher, Marchamont Nedham and used to denote a Representative Democracy ... a "government in one centre, and that centre the nation"

That is to say, "A single assembly, chosen at stated periods by the people, and invested with the supreme governmental power; encompassing the whole of legislative, executive, and judicial power, to be exercised in a body, or by committees, as they shall think proper."

That's a lot of power ... and as power corrupts, the potential for a lot of corruption, methinks. John agrees ... "because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases".

Well, It's really not my intent or intended purpose to either recite or to put into my own words very much of that which has been written by our founding fathers regarding the Constitution ... that's work what's done been did, much better I could ever ... and, that, folks can do for themselves, if they feel so obliged.. Me hope is to find some of the answers to the questions begged by the problems with which we find ourselves confronted ... a task requiring our very best efforts, yours, mine and theirs, if we are to be successful.

It seems fate may have taken a hand ... for as I read and pondered what might be used as a basis for getting us started on our quest ... I found, totally by accident, that others had done did the same. John' Adams is a pretty smart for a Yankee, methinks ... word gets around and others thought so too, at least as far south as North Carolina.

No place better to start than this ... sometime in late March of 1776, members of the North Carolina Provincial Congress asked John for his suggestions on the establishment of a new government and the drafting of a constitution for themselves. Talk about "Seek and Ye Shall Find" ... well, I found that out when I was seeking some pictures of the White House back when it was first built!

What about "Ask and Ye Shall Receive?"

North Carolina asked and she received John's "Thoughts on Government, Applicable to the Present State of the American Colonies" ... jump in the Tucker, only if you dare, for where it's gonna take us is anybody's guess ... just found it ... will read it as I write!

These folks had no sense of mystery or intrigue... says right up front that a revised version was published as a pamphlet in April, 1776 as "Thoughts on Government," considered to be one of his most influential Revolutionary writings.

In the propriety of the day, John claimed himself unqualified but considered it an honor to be so asked, ... accepted, saying " the divine science of politics is the science of social happiness, and the blessings of society depend entirely on the constitutions of government, which are generally institutions that last for many generations, there can be no employment more agreeable to a benevolent mind than a research after the best" ... sounds like he kinda enjoyed being asked, methinks!

Remember, this was the spring of 1776, before even the declaration ... the situation was tense, to say the least ...or in the words of the man himself ... "In the present exigency of American affairs, ... it has become necessary to assume government for our immediate security." ... the colonies each had their Tories as well as their Whigs.

As we know what ultimately transpired, we can't expect many surprises ... but still, if we can but find out what he and others thought and why, then those insights just might offer the keys that'll open the locks of our bounds and set us free ... well, help us figure out what went wrong and why ... and how to best go about fixing it.

I sense that we tend to under appreciate the intellect and how learned these men were ... Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Franklin and the others ... especially the others, them from North Carolina, and the other twelve! I sense too that most recognized, far better than me, if not we ... the relevance of the natural nature of men, as a piece of this interlocking puzzle.

John stressed that the end of government dictates it's form ... and that speculative politicians would agree, that the happiness of society is the end of government ... "just as all divines and moral philosophers would agree that the happiness of the individual is the end of man."

Cudda knocked me over with a feather when I read that ... yes, there are politicians today who will speculate that a happy society means an end to government ... and many who believe that man won't be happy until he self destructs ... but, that was back in 1776 ... 21st century thinking in the 18th, who wudda thunk?! Scary!

Maybe what he meant was that the purpose and ultimate objective of government dictates its form ... to wit, "the happiness of society" ... you think?

I do ... and while I consider the purpose of man to be one of God's best kept secrets, I agree with the notion that the happiness of the individual is on man's short list of ultimate objectives. If we take it a step further ... if government's purpose is to facilitate man's fulfilling his, then is that not in close equivalency with the notion that the ultimate purpose of government is to serve God?

Maybe we'll see where this takes on a later trip ... as John is well known for having so said ">Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other" ... I think we're proof positive of his posit!

For them what don't know, it's time you do ... part of the abuse folks think I inflict on me mother tongue is to turn verbs into nouns without permission ... "posit" is one of me favorites!

John started out wanting to be a preacher but became a lawyer ... same, only different. He starts this sermon by pleading his case for a republican form of government, positing ...

while fear is the foundation of most governments, the form what delivers the greatest degree of happiness to the greatest number of people is the best ... something like that. That throughout history, those seriously seeking truth have all concluded that the happiness of man, as well as his dignity, consists in virtue ... and they would acknowledge any form of government whose principle and foundation is virtue, as the form best designed to promote the general happiness.

He makes it clear that "virtue" encompasses the whole of at least the cardinal virtues, injecting that while honor is a truly sacred virtue, it is but part of the whole, holding a lower rank in the scale of moral excellence than virtue and thus less suitable as a foundation.

John's thrust was that as the foundation of every government is some principle or passion in the minds of the people ... the noblest and most generous models of government will thus have thew best chance of appealing to their noblest principles and most generous affections ... and bring their best to the fore."

Sidney, Harrington, Locke, Milton, Nedham, Neville, Burnet, and Hoadly greatly influenced John's thinking ... he wrote that the wretched condition of the country leading to the Revolution frequently reminded him of their principles and reasonings ... "they will convince any candid mind, that there is no good government but what is republican."

In 1787, John would write "of all the words in all languages, perhaps there has been none so much abused as the words republic, commonwealth, and popular state". Of course, that was was close to 225 years ago and I'm not so sure that those words haven't been surpassed in terms of the abuse inflicted upon them. In recent times, we have developed a great penchant for abusing our language ... symptomatic of the cancerous condition with which we're concerned, methinks.

He then concluded that the true and only true definition of a republic was "a government, in which all men, rich and poor, magistrates and subjects, officers and people, masters and servants, the first citizen and the last, are equally subject to the laws" ... one of his most famous quotes, methinks.

But this was Spring, 1776 ... and he said it differently ... The very definition of a republic is 'an empire of laws, and not of men"

His posit was that ... since a republic is the best of governments, it follows that the one which is "best designed to effect an impartial and exact execution of the laws," is the best of republics, noting that there is an inexhaustible variety, because of the possible combinations of the powers of society.

Satisfied with his impassioned plea, John's task turned to one of helping them to select one from the inexhaustible variety ... that is, lend substance to the form.

The questions, to be asked and answered ...

As good government is an empire of laws, how shall your laws be made?

In a large society, inhabiting an extensive country, it is impossible that the whole should assemble to make laws. The first necessary step, then, is to appoint or elect a few of the most wise and good and empower them to act for the many on their behalf.

But by what rules shall you choose your representatives?

Agree upon the number and qualifications of persons who shall have the privilege of choosing, or give this privilege to the inhabitants of a certain area.
The primary difficulty lies in constituting the representative assembly ... great care should be taken to effect in miniature, an exact portrait of the people at large ... to think, feel, reason, and act like them.
To assure that the assembly's interests will be to do strict justice at all times and to prevent unfair, partial, and corrupt elections ... great care should be taken to effect those same interests among the people.
It would be safest to proceed with well established selection practices to which the people were well accustomed ... leaving the enactment of new practices and reforms for times of greater tranquillity when all the powers of government come to be in the hands of the people's friends.

Having established the framework and obtained a representative assembly, it must be resolved as to whether all the powers of government, ... legislative, executive, and judicial ... should rest with that body.

While it may sometimes be difficult for us of the 21st century to grasp the exact and intended meaning of what was written in the 18th and before, especially that penned by John Adams, his answer was light bedtime reading and left no room for doubt ... "I think a people cannot be long free, nor ever happy, whose government is in one assembly" ... and supplied the reasons for his so thinking, which can be condensed to three, methinks'.

A representative assembly, although extremely well qualified, and absolutely necessary, as a branch of the legislative, is unfit to exercise the executive power as it lacks two essential properties, secrecy and dispatch.
A representative assembly is even less qualified to exercise the judicial power, because it is too numerous, too slow, and too little skilled in the laws.
The natural nature of men!
- A single assembly is liable to all the vices, follies, and frailties of an individual; subject to:
  - fits of humor,
  - starts of passion,
  - flights of enthusiasm,
  - partiality and/or prejudice
  resulting in rash actions and absurd judgments.
- A single assembly is apt to grow ambitious, and after a time will not hesitate to vote itself perpetual. A truly noteworthy case in point occurred in Holland where the assembly first voted themselves from annual terms to every seven years, then for life, and after a course of years, that all vacancies happening by death or otherwise, should be filled by themselves.
- Because a single assembly, possessed of all the powers of government, would make arbitrary laws for their own interest, execute all laws arbitrarily for their own interest, and adjudge all controversies in their own favor.

Seems like John's notion of a republic is a mite different from Marchamont Nedham's ... now don't it? He would call it yet another example of abuse and misuse inflicted upon the word, methinks.
regarding the need for an assembly of two legislative houses ...For many of the preceding reasons, the legislative power ought to be more complex ... and, if the legislative power is wholly in one assembly, and the executive in another, or in a single person, then these two powers will oppose and encroach upon each other, until the contest shall end in war, and of the legislative and executive power be usurped by the strongest.

In such case, the judicial power could not effectively mediate, or hold the balance between the two contending powers, because the legislative would undermine it.

To avoid these dangers, let a distinct assembly be constituted, as a mediator between the two extreme branches of the legislature, ... the one representing the people, and the one vested with the executive power.

Let the representative assembly then elect by ballot, from among themselves or their constituents, or both, ... a distinct assembly, which, for the sake of clarity, we will call a council. It may consist of any number, say twenty or thirty, and should have a free and independent exercise of its judgment, and consequently a negative voice in the legislature.
The executive power ...With the two bodies thus constituted and made integral parts of the legislature, let them, by joint ballot, choose a governor ... who, after being stripped of most of the usual privileges accorded those of such high office, should be given a free and independent exercise of his judgment and also be made an integral part of the legislature.

Adams wasn't all that concerned with the usual trappings of high office but knew the importance of the executive power having enough power and independence to do its chores. Well aware too was he of the passionate, widespread concern and opposition to giving significant power to an individual, courtesy of the young tyrant king, writing ... "you may make him only president of the council ... but, as the governor is to be invested with the executive power, with consent of council, I think he ought to have a negative upon the legislative."

John reasoned that if the governor were elected annually, as suggested, he would always have so much reverence and affection for the people, their representatives and counselors, that ... although given the freedom to exercise of his independent judgment, he would seldom use it in opposition to the two houses, except when he felt it was in the public interest, and would be well received.

Further, that any seven or nine of the legislative council may be made a quorum for doing business as a privy council, to advise the governor in the exercise of the executive branch of power, and acts of state.

The governor should have the command of the militia and of all the armies.
The power of pardons should be with the governor and council.
All officers should have commissions, under the hand of the governor and seal of the colony.
Judges, justices, and all other officers, civil and military, should be nominated and appointed by the governor, with the advice and consent of council.

Commissions, writs and such can be executed as under the crown ... in the name of the colony and under authority of the governor or appropriate official.

Unfortunately, the only available images are those created in the mind's eye by me abuse of Mister Adams' masterful letter ... and for their deficiencies, I apologize ... but from having decided upon the republican governmental form to empowering a governor in but one page ... is itself a feat, methinks.

Given the then current urgent state of American affairs ... being deprived of the protection of the Crown by an act of Parliament, and thus forced to assume government for their immediate security,

John Adams counseled that the ... governor, lieutenant-governor, secretary, treasurer, commissary, attorney-general, should be annually chosen by joint ballot of both houses. Indeed, that all elections should be annual, especially those of representatives and counselors, citing the maxim ... "where annual elections end, there slavery begins."

On a roll, he wrote ... These great men, in this respect, should be, once a year, "Like bubbles on the sea of matter borne, they rise, they break, and to that sea return."

Adding, "This will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey."

Summarizing, John suggested that if the proposed approach should later be found inconvenient, the legislature could, at its leisure, devise other methods ... elections of the people at large, increasing the terms for which they shall be chosen from one to seven years, or three years, or for life, or make any other changes that the people found productive of its happiness.

These persons may be allowed to serve for three years, and then be excluded three years, or for any longer or shorter term ... noting that there are many plausible supporting arguments and advantages to complete rotations of all offices, representatives and counselors ... and many strong advocates. He wrote "if the society has a sufficient number of suitable characters to supply the great number of vacancies which would be made by such a rotation, I can see no objection to it."

The judicial power ...
The dignity and stability of government in all its branches, the morals of the people, and every blessing of society ... depend so much upon an upright and skillful administration of justice, that the judicial power ought to be distinct from both the legislative and executive, and independent of both, that so it may be a check upon both as they on it.

The judges, therefore, should be always men of learning and experience in the laws, of exemplary morals, great patience, calmness, coolness, and attention.

Their minds should not be distracted with jarring interests; they should not be dependent upon any man, or body of men. To these ends, their commissions should be for life, during good behavior, and their salaries ascertained and established by law.

Among the particulars ...

For misbehavior, the grand inquest of the colony, the house of representatives, should impeach them before the governor and council, where they should have time and opportunity to make their defense; but, if convicted, should be removed from their offices, and subjected to such other punishment as shall be thought proper.

A militia law requiring all able men, excluding conscientious objectors, to be provided with arms and ammunition, and to be trained ... requiring counties, towns, or other small districts to be provided with public stocks of ammunition, equipment and definitive plans for supplying their militia when engaged ... and requiring certain key districts to be provided with the means of providing greater defensive support ... is always wise and, given present conditions, indispensable.

Laws for the liberal education of youth, especially of the lower class of people, are so extremely wise and useful, that, to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant.

If our countrymen have wisdom and virtue enough to submit to sumptuary laws, the happiness of the people might be greatly promoted by them, and a revenue saved sufficient to carry on this war forever. Frugality is a great revenue, besides curing us of vanities, levities, and fopperies, which are real antidotes to all great, manly, and warlike virtues.

A constitution founded on these principles introduces knowledge among the people, and inspires them with a conscious dignity becoming freemen; a general emulation takes place, causing good humor, sociability, good manners, and good morals in general.

That elevation of sentiment inspired by such a government, makes the common people brave and enterprising. The ambition it inspires makes them sober, industrious, and frugal. You will find among them some elegance, perhaps, but more solidity; a little pleasure, but a great deal of business; some politeness, but more civility.

If the colonies should assume governments separately, they should be left entirely to their own choice of the forms.

if a continental constitution should be formed, it should be a congress, containing a fair and adequate representation of the colonies, and its authority should sacredly be confined to:

war,
trade,
disputes between colony and colony,
the post office,
and the unappropriated lands of the crown, as they used to be called.

These colonies, under such forms of government, and in such a union, would be unconquerable by all the monarchies of Europe.

Can you imagine such depth in thought being so rapidly and expertly brought to the fore and penned upon request?

John finished his response to William Hooper with "You and I, my dear friend, have been sent into life at a time when the greatest lawgivers of antiquity would have wished to live. How few of the human race have ever enjoyed an opportunity of making an election of government, more than of air, soil, or climate, for themselves or their children! When, before the present epocha, had three millions of people full power and a fair opportunity to form and establish the wisest and happiest government that human wisdom can contrive?

I hope you will avail yourself and your country of that extensive learning and indefatigable industry which you possess, to assist her in the formation of the happiest governments and the best character of a great people."

Upon his return home, Hooper delivered John's letter to Thomas Burke, the chairman of the committee to frame a state constitution. On 12 April, they unanimously adopted the "Halifax Resolves," officially recommending independence from England ... the first colony to so do!.

John expanded, finalized and published his "Thoughts on Government" in April 1776 and it's considered one of his most influential Revolutionary writings ... Thomas Paine's Common Sense had been published in January and in May, John would write the preamble for a resolution to encourage the colonies to form their own governments.

On 12 November, the Fifth Provincial Congress assembled for the purpose of drafting its first state constitution ... them North Carolina boys work fast ... upon completion, it was adopted, 18 December ... with Richard Caswell selected as the first governor.

Caswell, Hooper, and Joseph Hewes had represented North Carolina in the first Continental Congress ... said John Adams, "We always looked to Richard Caswell of North Carolina, he was a model man and a true patriot." In 1787, he served as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia.

North Carolina's first Constitution contains 46 provisions and a "Declaration Of Rights" of some 25 stipulations. It stipulates that the state's legislative authority be vested in a General Assembly consisting of 2 separate houses, each with annually elected representatives .... a Senate having one from each county ...and a House of Commons with two from each county, and one for each of its principal towns.

One year's residence in the county was required to vote in its elections ... and required for election to the Assembly ... both being limited to freemen, age 21 and older. All so qualified taxpayers were entitled to vote for members of the House of Commons ... while only landowners holding at least 50 acres in the county could vote for Senators.

Candidates for the Assembly were limited to landowners ... for the Senate, not less than 300 acres of land in the county, for the year preceding the election ... for the House of Commons, it was six months and 100 acres. All elected to the Assembly ... or appointed to any office or place of trust ... were required to take an oath to the State, and all Officers, an oath of office.

The Constitution gives the General Assembly the broadest of powers and directives ... each house was given the power to choose its own speaker and other officers; be judges of the qualifications and elections of their members; and prepare bills to be passed into laws.
Elections, Appointments and such ...

at its first meeting following each annual election,
- elect a Governor for one year. The requirements were substantial (thirty years of age, 5 years state residency and having property values above one thousand pounds) no one was eligible to serve longer than three years in any six successive years.
- elect seven persons to be a Council of State for one year, who shall advise the Governor in the execution of his office. Their advice and proceedings shall be kept in a journal, made available the Assembly upon request.
by joint ballot of both houses,
- appoint Judges of the Supreme Courts of Law, and Equity, Judges of Admiralty, and the Attorney-General ... to be commissioned, and hold office during good behavior.
- annually appoint a Treasurer for the State.
- triennially appoint a Secretary for the State.
- annually choose delegates to the Continental Congress, while necessary, with no person eligible to serve more than three successive years.
appoint the generals and field-officers of the militia, and all officers of the regular army of the State.
impeach the Governor, and other officers, offending against the State, by violating any part of this Constitution, mal-administration, or corruption. Providing further that those so impeached or charged by the Grand Jury of any court of supreme jurisdiction in the State, may be prosecuted.

Powers Of The Governor ...

The Governor is captain-general and commander in chief of the militia.
Justices of the Peace are to be recommended to the Governor by the Representatives in General Assembly and the Governor shall commission them accordingly ... commissioned Justices shall not be removed from office by the General Assembly, unless for misbehavior, absence, or inability.
use such sums as shall be voted by the Assembly for the contingencies of government, and be accountable to them for the same
grant pardons and reprieves, except where the prosecution shall be carried on by the General Assembly, or the law shall otherwise direct; in which case he may in the recess grant a reprieve until the next sitting of the General Assembly;
by and with the advice of the Council of State, when the General Assembly is not in session
- employ the militia for the public safety,
- lay embargoes, or prohibit the exportation of any commodity, for any term not exceeding thirty days, at any one time
- fill vacancies in appointments made by the General Assembly by granting a temporary commission, which shall expire at the end of the next session of the Assembly
exercise all the other executive powers of government, subject to the provisions of the Constitution and according to the laws of the State.

The Constitution provides that the Governor, Judges of the Supreme Court of Law and Equity, Judges of Admiralty, and Attorney-General, shall have adequate salaries during their continuance in office.
Prohibits ...

There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State, in preference to any other ... neither shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith or judgment, ... but all persons shall be at liberty to exercise their own mode of worship ... however, this does not exempt preachers of treasonable or seditious discourses or from legal trial and punishment.
No person, who shall deny the being of God, the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either the Old or New Testaments ... or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall hold any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.
Govermental Positions
- no member of the Council of State shall have a seat in the General Assembly.
- No functioning Treasurer, Judge of the Supreme Court of Law or Equity, Judge of Admiralty, Secretary of this State, Attorney-General, Clerk of any Court of Record, clergyman or preacher of the gospels ... military officers nor contracted suppliers of the military ... shall concurrently have a seat in the General Assembly or Council of State.
- No person shall hold than one lucrative office, at any one time ... however, no appointments in the militia, or to the office of Justice of the Peace, shall be considered a lucrative office.

Other Notable Provisions:

There shall be a seal of this State, kept by the Governor, and used by him, as occasion may require; it shall be called "The Great Seal of the State of North Carolina," and be affixed to all grants and commissions.
Foreigners, after having first taken an oath of allegiance to the state, shall have the right to acquire, hold, and transfer land, or other real estate ... and, after one year's residence, be deemed a free citizen.
schools shall be established by the Legislature, for the convenient instruction of youth, with such salaries to the masters, paid by the public ... and all useful learning shall be duly encouraged, and promoted, in one or more universities.
any member of either house of the Assembly had the right to dissent from, and protest against, any act or resolve... and have the reasons of his dissent made part of the public record.

They did good! John did good too ... his influence is seen throughout. My personal, singular opine is that under a constitution of this form, it would have been far less likely that we should find ourselves confronted with the consuming cancer with which we're now concerned.

It's that time again ... known in these parts as déjà vu all over again. Without your comments, it is all but much ado ... they are the sweet feed what fuels Miss Maude Murray ... please leave yours in the sweet feed depository, a.k.a. "The General Discussion Area" ... see you there!

I wish to thank my representative assembly of one ... well Done!

Well it would have been,, had I not usurped all the powers as governor of the Shop when the patrons didn't speak up ... and represented him, instead of him, me. Rest assured that he will be reelected for another term ... back again, when we next convene ... under a constitution of his design.

If I should then change me view, just call me Sue.

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

Parties ...

2010-08-30T14:30:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

I suppose the enlightened among us scoff at the notion of a government without political parties ... tisn't me intent to take a poll of our founding fathers on this issue ... but I'm agin the two party system and long have been. I do know that I'm in good company as both our first and second presidents warned against them ... add Ben Franklin to that mix, along with the father of our Constitution James Madison ... our first Treasurer, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, our first Chief Justice. Others too, all long before me.

Lest there be some confusion, I'm against three political parties almost as much as two ... guess I'm just agin political parties, though maybe a whole bunch would be okay ... like 1,000 or more.

Were we considering the establishment of political parties, the task would seemingly be a rather simple one ... assuming those called upon to render judgment were virtuous ... for the case against them seems strong and relatively easy to make.

Unfortunately, we already have them ... two of which are very powerful, well entrenched, and well financed ... making "the job at hand" a bit more complex. Parties are the foundation upon which this facade was built ... a cheap imitation of what was intended by our founding fathers. Well, anything but cheap, but an imitation all the same ... a "house of cards" that will be gone with the wind when the faulty foundation crumbles ... and with it, most of the problems with we're now faced.

The "job at hand" ... to rid ourselves of the faulty foundation and replace it with the intended one, of course! The unasked begged questions deserve and have my attention and hopefully yours. They will be addressed more fully as we move forward ... but, I sense the answers lie in and within the "Neighborhood" ...

It won't be without opposition ... forks don't like it when nobody shows up after they've gone and hired a band and caterers ... bought favors and such. It's expensive and down right embarrassing. Mark my words, they'll make lots and lots of promises, offer more and more free beer ...and plenty of their new and improved, bigger 'n better, free "Hair Of The Dog" elixir too!

John Adams warned quite simply ... "There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution"

Well, that requires no translation or interpretation, and 225 years of history places him at the head of the class ... perhaps even ahead of Michel de Nostredame.

In his Farewell Address, the Father of Our Country did a bit more than thank His Children and say goodbye.

Regarding parties, he said ... "I have already intimated to you the danger of parties .. let me now warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism ... but this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism.

The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

Remaining ever mindful but discounting consideration of such an extreme, the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

The spirit of party serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged.

From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose, ... and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it.
A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume"

Move over, John Adams!

I always thought they elected George president because he could throw silver dollars farther than anyone else ... now I'm not so sure.

I can't imagine anyone not heeding the warning wisdom of men such as these, especially where the truths are so self evident ... except for those of self serving private agenda. What say ye?

Well, for any hard to convince, "Doubting Thomas" stragglers, let me share my $100 worth. As memory serves ... in the 1776 musical, each session started with the Clerk recording the weather and outside temperature ... obtained by simply opening the window and checking the thermometer.

The procedure has remained much the same throughout the years but with the advent of parties came one minor improvement ... before being entered into the record, it is put to a rollcall vote. Fortunately, the Clerk is of the majority party so the result is the same as under the 1776 practice ... because the vote always strictly follows party lines.

Perhaps the most important of the essential cruxes of representative assemblies is how they're are selected. Personally, I like the old way best ... at the local or lowest level, the citizen must decide who is the man in his neighborhood whom he most esteems, and loves best, for his knowledge, integrity, and benevolence ... or so it once was. Today, ladies must be added to that mix.

From those so selected, elections are held to select one from the neighborhood to represent it in the assembly at the next level in the political food chain. That approach works well, very well indeed ... we knew it would 'cause most everybody in the neighborhood knows the person representing them ... and if they don't do their best, there'll be Hell to pay when they come back home. The best part is that the representatives know it ... they are by definition esteemed, knowledgeable folks of integrity, and benevolence, driven by positive motives ... but the possibility of a trip behind the barn and being "given what for" is a mighty powerful, positive influence.

While still in the neighborhood, it's a good time to begin considering the requisite qualifications for participating in the assembly selection process. Current day political correctness and conventional wisdom assert that there are but two ... citizenship and bona fide residency in the neighborhood. I posit that there are at least three.

The logic and arguments supporting the imposition of additional participation qualifications are at least as definitive and strong as those opposing political parties. Unfortunately, abuses and flaws in the adjudication process led to their elimination ... another case of quacks treating the symptoms rather than allowing qualified doctors treat the disease, methinks. Said differently ... "in their eagerness to eliminate the pain, they chose to pull the tooth rather than removing the decay and properly treating it ... oftentimes extracting the wrong one!"

That much of the blame is best laid at the door of the spirit of party is not rocket science ... the most striking difference between the professional politicians and the amateur patriots might just be that the former are driven to validation ... catering to party and that segment of the electorate who will keep them employed, it seems to permeate all that they do ... while the latter are not.

The other requirement is that you know your neighbor ... the one for whom you voted. It's really not an imposition at all since by definition you should ... if you've done your duty, you've selected the one in your neighborhood whom you most esteem and love best, for their knowledge, integrity, and benevolence. It's your sacred duty ... the only thing of consequence asked of you ... and your neighbors depend on your so doing ... we all do ... it's what makes the system work ... it's what keeps us safe ... what keeps us free ... our survival depends upon it!

Truth is truth ... unchanging ... well, pretty much ...

John Adams also said "the people have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge ... I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers" ... right on spot, methinks. It all starts at the local level ... If you don't personally know the candidates well, exercise that right ... it's our own first line of defense, if you will!

This notion of forefathers can be confusing ... I don't know about you, but I had only one. Still, when you consider that twins Danny and Arnold had nine, I suppose that four is a good, happy medium. The common tendency is to read the wisdom of our fathers, whether they be one, fore, or nine ... nod our heads in agreement, and quickly move on.

My ardent hope is that we will instead, take pause and ponder. While I hold that they're privileges rather than rights, there's no argument with the wisdom of Mister Adams ... they're privileges because we lose them when we fail in our inherent responsibility to see that they're properly exercised and kept safe! That's where we stand on this issue too ... as a result of not having diligently so done, our privilege to have the real skinny regarding the character and conduct of those who would govern is now challenged at every turn on the combined grounds of civil rights and irrelevancy. Indeed, we are subject to attack for even so suggesting!

Strange as it might seem, parties impair the process at the local neighborhood level as much if not more than the others ... when you throw parties into the mix ... the situation immediately changes. Doing your duty becomes "selecting the one in your neighborhood whom you most esteem and love best, for their knowledge, integrity, and benevolence ... providing they belong to your party of choice! Well, that automatically reduces your pool of choices ... and, even under the best of circumstances, folks tend to vote along party lines ... bottom line, party politics result in our representative assemblies not always being filled with the best of the best of our neighbors.

As we leave the neighborhood and climb the political food chain, it may seem that the system is doomed for failure but if the integrity of the approach is maintained in all neighborhoods throughout the land ... then we have a large group of folks, a very large group indeed ... what are loved and held in high esteem for their knowledge, integrity, and benevolence ... by folks what know them well.

Surely these are the ones we want to be doing the governing ... it's just a matter of determining how to select from that pool to fill the various positions throughout the chain. We have many options for effectively so doing and we'll examine those carefully as we go forth.

I guess we're most all born with great expectations, I know I was ... that's for sure! A great doctor, another Babe Ruth, or President of the United States, that was me ... all that and more, while I was still in the crib. Problem was, nobody asked me! Scary, ain't it?

When I turned seven, I decided for myself what I was going to be ... to be taken seriously, but things never seem to work out as you plan.

I arrived during a lull ... the Great Depression was all but over ... and the Great War was yet to begin. "War is Hell!" ... but it does one thing better than most any of its competitors ... getting us to put aside our differences, support our government, and work together, focusing on the job at hand. Fortunately, wars don't last forever ... unfortunately, neither does our spirit of active involvement and cooperation.

If we're going to succeed, we've got to come to realize that exercising due diligence in the selection of those of our neighbors who will represent us is a most important lifetime job ... and if we fail in our duty, so too will our dreams and those of our descendants be in great jeopardy!

Ours is a time of specialization, or so we think ... it seems to me that most folks would rather quit than do a task that ain't what they were hired on to do! The job description for "citizen" includes "pitching in and doing what it takes to get the job done" ... trust me! It's also an especially important attribute for those selected to represent us, methinks ... they'll never know what each new day will bring!

Nine men served as our chief executive without being elected to the office. Blasphemy for sure, but nothing in the good book of nonpolitical politics says there has to be general popular elections beyond the neighborhood level! Dang! True too!

Most know that Gerald Ford served as both Vice-President and President without being elected to either office ... that he lived longer than any other may be less well known. Those weren't jobs for which he was hired on ... but, he pitched in and tried to do what it took to get the job done!

Ford loved golf, but unlike Eisenhower, he never asked for no favors at Augusta National. Speakin' of "IKE," he didn't party much, what with being a general and all ... at least not during the war ... but he had to be a pretty good politician, dealing with all them prima donna generals under his command. My guess is that he became a Republican 'cause they asked before the Democrats did ... just being nice. That's how I remember it ...

The other eight became president without being elected to the office, a result of a sitting president's death. The first was John Tyler ... upon becoming president, he stood against his party's platform ... and was expelled from the Whig Party.

Millard Fillmore was the next of the eight and the last Whig to hold the office. In 1856, he tried to win as the "Know Nothing Party" candidate. That party exploited fears that the country was being overwhelmed by elements hostile to Protestant Anglo-Saxon values ... membership was primarily middle class Protestants of Anglo Saxon heritage. Information concerning the party's organization somewhat tightly held and when members were asked about its activities, the official response was always "I know nothing."

Next was Republican Abe Lincoln's Vice President, Andrew Johnson ... the first President to be impeached, avoiding conviction by but one vote. As president, he attempted to establish the "National Union Party" ... failing to so do effectively made him an independent during his presidency, though he was later elected Senator from Tennessee as a Democrat.

The fourth was Chester A. Arthur ... of him is written "No man ever entered the Presidency so profoundly and widely distrusted, and no one ever retired... more generally respected." ... political cynic Mark Twain added, "It would be hard indeed to better President Arthur's administration." An honest man, methinks!

During his presidency, Congress was divided, and both parties were divided ... and he has been adjudged above factions within the Republican Party, if indeed not above the party itself. Arthur was the last incumbent to seek his party's renomination and fail.

Theodore Roosevelt was the fifth ... known for his "Rough Riders," "San Juan Hill" and "Conservation" he was a leader of the Republican Party and founder of the short-lived Progressive ("Bull Moose") Party of 1912.

Calvin Coolidge restored public confidence after the scandals of Harding's administration, and left office a popular president. Of Coolidge was said "He embodied the spirit and hopes of the middle class, could interpret their longings and express their opinions". By Coolidge, "I have found it advisable not to give too much heed to what people say when I am trying to accomplish something of consequence. Invariably they proclaim it can't be done. I deem that the very best time to make the effort."

Harry S. Truman (1945-1953) brought an end to World War II with his decision to use nuclear weapons against Japan, then fooled the pollsters and surprised most everybody ... most of all, Thomas Dewey in 1948. "Give 'em Hell Harry" was known for "The buck stops here" and "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." As President, he had both the lowest public approval ratings that had ever been recorded ... and the highest ever, until George Bush in 1991.

Democrat Lyndon B Johnson(1963-1969) was one of four Presidents who served in all four elected Federal offices of the United States: Congressman, Senator, Vice President and President. A true "party man," he was known for his domineering personality and arm twisting of powerful politicians in order to advance legislation.

Nine men called upon to pinch hit ... they didn't all hit homeruns but they all stepped up to the plate!

Well, we've done our job for now and turned things over to our neighbor ... the one we most esteem and love best, for their knowledge, integrity, and benevolence. We can go to sleep in our beds, knowing that all will be well, without having to worry about awaking with Chamberlain's hangover ... so long as we keep one eye open.

Notice that there is no mention of party, personal beliefs or agenda ... no need ... not if citizenship in our neighborhood and participation in its governing is restricted to those who are virtuous and believe in God. Of our representatives, we ask only that they listen to us ... give us their industry and above all, exercise their best judgment relative to attending and safeguarding our best interests.

And therein lies the heart of the matter ... why it's so important to us and the integrity of our system that we oppose and strive to eliminate parties and their politics. Did you catch it? Use my glasses if you didn't see it ... we're neighbors, right?!

I'm not all that concerned about a proper reporting of the weather ... it's the "exercise their best judgment" part that worries me. Forget all the other if you must ... but always remember, you just can't properly serve two masters at the same time ... and our representatives, can't independently and effectively exercise their best judgment relative to attending and safeguarding our best interests if they're under the control of some party and the influence of the deadly 200 proof stuff they serve

... it just ain't gonna happen!

A closing word from our neighborhood sponsor ... known in these parts as déjà vu all over again.

Without your comments, it is all but much ado ... they are the sweet feed what fuels the Tucker ... please leave yours in the sweet feed depository ... see you there!

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

Chamberlain's Hangover

2010-08-08T14:35:00.000-07:00

pages 1 2 3 4 5

0 1 2 3 4 5

hello all

Neville Chamberlain may be best remembered for his "peace for our time"speech in 1938 ... to loud cheers he said,"My good friends, this is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street, peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. And now I recommend you to go home and sleep quietly in your beds" ...

Chamberlain regarded the Munich Agreement as being "symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again" ...after all, that's what the agreement signed by Hitler and him said!    "never" is a long time, in this case less than a year ... in September, 1939 came Germany's invasion of Poland and with it, WWII ...Great Britian was at war and it would be some time before folks could again sleep quietly.

Yes, it wasn't the first time ... some 60 years earlier, Benjamin Disraeli had said “I have returned from Germany with peace in our time” ... it lasted longer.

Herr Hitler had an evil, self serving agenda... he became a possessed, maniacal monster ... relying on fear and force to achieve his objectives... but he could be a masterful politician with hypnotic powers of persuasion ... could be and often was ... still, I suspect that the fault should be placed at the door of Chamberlain's optometrist ... for the glasses he wore caused him to see things as he wanted them to be, and not as they were.

I fear that most of us wear glasses of similar prescription ... explaining our penchant for accepting Chamberlain like assurances that all will be well, and his recommendation ... that we go home and slept quietly in our beds.

Don't get me wrong, sleep's good!    It's the awakening to the frightening realization that while we were peacefully sleeping, others of different bent and agenda were wide awake ... that our way of life is rapidly disappearing ... that our nation, our society ... indeed the world ... is in a state of chaos, turned upside down, if you will ... that's what's bad, a real bummer of a hangover!   To sleep, perchance to awake with a hangover ... aye, there's the rub!

Most everybody's "cure" for this condition seems to be some "Hair of The Dog" Elixir ... guaranteed to be fast acting and painless ... don't worry, all will be well ... just put back on them glasses, accept more assurances, then go home and get some more sleep!   It's danged addictive, that's for sure!

Had I been there for Chamberlain's speech, I too would have probably cheered ... but I wasn't ... and I wasn't the Proprietor what opened the Old Barbershop and writ its vision neither!   That was the esteemed and widely acclaimed SouthernJackass, most honorable! Don't let his big grin fool you ... behind all them teeth and between them big ears is much more than muddy water.   He ain't talking nor braying neither but I think the Old Barbershop just may have been created as an alternative to that there "Hair of The Dog" hangover cure that everybody's been taking for so long!

Maybe not ... it could be just these new glasses I'm wearing ...

T'is or t'aint ... but, all of his pieces, serious, satire and humor alike, all seem to be purposely done with that in mind ... all containing food for thought ... written as only he can, they reacquaint us with what we were ... our values, our dependence on God ... reminding us of our beginnings and those of our nation ... those things we seem to have abandoned or forgotten. Written for our enjoyment, that's for sure ... but more than that for most of us, methinks ... in a moment of weakness he hired me on as a helper and I've tried to follow his lead.   It was a costly experience, sleeping in all them Holiday Inn Express places, and sometimes the road has been rough and unsure ... a bit like following Uncle Virgil's directions, but it's been fun ... and no hangovers!

I think a lot of the reason that folks choose the "Hair of The Dog" hangover cure is that they feel helpless ... that it's hopeless ... that there's nothing they can do ... feelings of despair, depression, apathy ... bedfellows with whom most are at least somewhat familiar.   That's understandable, what with over three hundred million folks in our fifty ... and over six billion planet wide!   Understanderabler still, what with most everything controlled by the moguls and power brokers of the media and giant corporations.

You won't find the town where the Old Barbershop is located on many maps, but good shaves and haircuts is evidently getting hard to come by 'cause more and more folks are finding us. We're within walking distance of Doolittle Hollar, if that's a help. It's a rather small place where most everybody knows most everybody ... but, they're all different; different but the same.   They all believe in God, America, their little town, and the good folks what's in it ... and if you don't, then shame on you!

Doolittle Hollar residents don't suffer much from the "Chamberlain Hangover" ... preferring squeezings, cider and Grandma's blackberry wine to platitudes, promises, assurances and such.   When folks have a hangover or a burden too big for them to handle on their own, they don't go back to bed ... fishing maybe ... but chances are you'll find them over at the Shop, in the General Discussion Area ... drinking coffee, having some of the Boss' free candy ... sharing their thoughts and problems ... getting the opinions of others, and some free advice too ... free, being a dubious term in most places but not here in the Shop.

It seems to help ... especially folks don't feel so helpless when among friends ... and few things are truly hopeless! About the most hopeless thing of which I can think would be needing unanimous agreement among the 13 colonies on any controversial issue of importance ... can you think of anything seemingly more hopeless?

I can think but of one ... our army of farmers and militia beating the mighty British!

'fore long, somebody usually comes up with a plan. For nuts too hard for them to crack, there's always Virgil, but that comes at a hefty price ... showing him how dumb you are!

Even in Doolittle Hollar and our little town, folks is interested in what's going on in the big cities ... in Washington ... and around the world. It's been that way since Virgil Hunnicutt went off to war over 90 years ago. From all reports, Him and Alvin York done won the War single handed like ... well, four handed if you want to get technical.

No, we don't have Cable but the buzz around the Shop is that Virgil's Grand Nephew, Nathan V. Hunnicutt, III of Chicago has invented a new TV ... high definition with a special built-in antenna that will pick up any program from just about anywheres ... sorta like the old multiband radio Daddy used to pick up Mr. Chamberlain's "Peace For Our Time" speech, I guess. Well, evidently he convinced his great uncle of that and Virgil called a special secret session of the town council last Tuesday night to hear Nate's proposal to create the Hunnicutt Manufacturing Company and build them TVs right here in town ... seems everybody liked the idea, especially if it'll help rid us of all them big TV antennas on our roofs ... and in the trailer park out on the north side of town where them folks don't have no room for their boats and pickups, because of their antennas being out in the yard.

Nate's raring to go, just as soon as he gets his share of the bailout money but according to three attendees who were sworn to secrecy, everything hinges on the pending vote on his request that the Council waive all the back taxes owed on the old abandoned Beefeater Ice Plant and award him the property. The Boss says that if it happens, we'll buy the very first one for the shop. Our "NonPolitical Politics" Special Feature was created mostly to help us identify the problems facing us as a People and seeing what might be done to resolve them ... and we need to stay abreast of things if we're to do that ... might just buy two!

As individuals, things may seem hopeless ... but when we stop and think, there's probably still a few folks with similar values what share our concerns, many of them anyways ... maybe more than just a few ... and if we can come together ... ain't no telling what might be accomplished. As Ben Franklin might have said, it don't hurt none to try!

Don't get me wrong ... the old barbershop ain't no church interested in preaching to no choir ... it's our differences ... in values, talents, interests, ideas, opinions, concerns and beliefs that make us great.   All men aren't created equal ... no two are as far as I know, not even identical twins ... if they were, I could write wonderful stories like the Southern Jackass ... but try as I might, it just ain't gonna happen!   No, while I've little doubt but what old John Locke's prints are all over that gun, I prefer to think that the "all men are created equal" notion of our Tom and his friends was simply expressing our brand of republicanism as later expressed by John Adams ... "a government, in which all men, rich and poor, magistrates and subjects, officers and people, masters and servants, the first citizen and the last, are equally subject to the laws ... while, at the same time, putting young King George in his place!

Neither are spiders ... you know, last time I checked, folks had identified close to 40,000 different and distinct kinds of spiders, and that's not counting Spider Man. Estimates are that there may be over 100,000 ... each created different ... for a reason ... each with a different purpose or job to do ... more proof positive that there is a God, methinks.

The point is that even though we have all these differences, I thinks we can come mighty close to a dang consensus on some things as being serious problems that need fixing ... probably quite a few and some of mighty long standing too.    Simply stated, I would hope that we could identify them things and then do what we can to find out why they remain on the books as unfinished business ... unresolved problems that everybody agrees are serious problems just don't compute, leastwise not to me!

I love this great land of ours ... been in 49 of the 50, more than once in 46 ... Mexico and much of Canada too.   I'm not as old as Uncle Virgil Hunnicutt, nobody much is ... but my hearing isn't the best and my eyes require increasing assistance ... don't get around much any more.   Of course, folks don't have to ... not with the Internet and mobile phones ... especially when we get Nate's new HD TV !

When I see network personalities giving biased news reports, slanted to influence the public's attitude rather than newsmen reporting the news ... elections being heavily influenced if not orchestrated by the media ... when boorish vulgarity and obscene language, coupled with their behavioral counterparts, permeate both network television and the Internet ... it's a strong indication that the moral decent folk in the land have been suffering from "Chamberlain's Hangover" and that there's some unfinished business sorely needing attention.

When the evidence clearly establishes the guilt of the accused but no verdict is reached and no punishment accessed, just because of some little technicalities ... when I see preachers sporting expensive silk suits and big diamond rings - living in luxury and using the lure of the Prosperity Gospel doctrine to gain financial support ... when living together without the marriage commitment is is widely recognized as being the enlightened thing to do and accepted many as morally acceptable behavior ... while the civil right demands of homosexuals include legal recognition of marriage ... the indication is even stronger.

When the distribution of pornography and illegal drugs permeates the land and destroys countless lives, including those of our children   well, when I see all that, it don't take real sharp eyes nor no special hearing aid ... and ! don't have to be danged near a genius ... to realize that there's a rapidly spreading cancer upon this land of ours, that, if left unchecked, will soon consume and totally destroy us. It must be repulsed and eradicated if we and our desired way of life are to long survive!

It wouldn't surprise me none if folks choose to reject and dismiss everything I write as the Chicken Little rantings of an extremist ... or maybe a religious zealot preaching the end times ... or just some old tom fool trying to make some noise while strutting and fretting during the final moments of his hour upon the stage!    I wouldn't blame them much ... it's the pollitically correct way to react ... at least that's the doctrine preached from the pulpit of charlatan tailors when folks refuse to take more of their "Hair of The Dog" and start drawing attention to what the Emperor's really wearing.

Certainly, it's for each of you to decide for yourselves ... but I do hope that you won't just dismiss it all out of hand without taking a few moments to think about and consider what I've had to say before you make up your mind!

Regardless of what you conclude, I truly need and want your help ... Miss Carol really liked the idea behind the Non-Political Politics Special Feature as expressed in my "From Amateur Patriots to Professional Politicians" piece. Her intent had been to write stories about each of those significantly involved in the political process leading up to the signing of the declaration ... what they believed, thought, and why ...

including those by whom they were most influenced. That was to be followed by a similar series devoted to the Constitution ... followed by something on selected key political figures from there forward. A tour guidebook, taking us from where we started to where we are today.

She was well qualified for such an undertaking ... I'm not ... but I think it important that we better understand what happened and why ... the influences of Edmund Burke ... John Locke ... a slightly different way to view our history, perhaps ... a better way.

The 1776 Independence Declaration and the revolt get all the attention ... and rightfully so ... for without them boys doin' what they did, few people would remember GW telling his daddy that he was the one who done cut down the tree. However, when it comes to righting our listing ship, the Constitution is the more important of the two, methinks. If anyone would like to take on the task, in all or in any part ... I'll gladly sign on as your helper ... just let me know!

If you saw the original 1776 Musical, then you know about Ben Franklin, John Adams, Tom Jefferson and the others who helped bring about the drafting and signing of the Independence Declaration.   You know too about George Washington who was the General of what troops they had! While, Franklin had the Gout and was a mite old, the other three wound up serving as the first three presidents of the United States ... but that wasn't covered by the musical so I don't rightly know the exact order. I do remember Miss Carol telling me that John Adams was our first Vice President, so I doubt he could have been both the President and Vice President at the same time ... but since vice presidents don't do much, I guess it might be possible. Selecting him as the Vice President was good because it gave him plenty of time to write lots of letters, mostly to his wife Abigail, methinks.

Abigail was a very smart lady in her own right and a strong influence on John ... outspoken and known for her quotes, the lady had presence ... "If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation!"
I had thought everybody was familiar with the Adams' Family but I had the spelling wrong and that was a different clan. Truth is, I'm not very familiar with this family and read the many quotes of John and Abigail, most for the very first time, while writing this piece.   Unbelievable, but true ...

John Adams was obnoxious and disliked ... perhaps that's why I'm not well acquainted with him but his list of descriptors is long, methinks ... brilliant, honorable respected, impatient, and a man of action being among them. Amazingly, many of his quotes reflect my own thoughts and feelings ... here are four with which I identify:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other”

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution"

“The people have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge ... I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers”

"I cannot conceive such a Being could make such a Species as the human, merely to live and die on this earth”

The only thing surprising to me was how strongly he expressed his opposition to the two party system ... add fearless to that list. I'll do some more reading and perhaps add to this list of special quotes but I believe these provide many answers and valuable insights that may well lead to others.

In case you missed it in the sidebar, there's a new olde shoppe contest ... tin of Mama's Old Fashoned Fudge to the winner!

Okay, here's the deal ... how you can help in a very meaningful way ... step by step

Just go to our "General Discussion Area" ... say Hi! It's the neighborly thing to do ... probably won't be anybody there but I'll get the message and respond with all due haste! That's steps 1 and 2 ... easy, huh?

Then, just complete the following statement: "You know something is seriously wrong when ... "

It can be a single entry ... or a long list!

As is always the case in our General Discussion Areas, you can also share your thoughts or comment on anything ... and you're especially encouraged to comment on the comments of others.   That's what the Shop and the General Discussion Area is all about!   It'll help breathe some badly needed life back into this old place while giving me some valuable input as I attempt to do the same!

We may even change it's name ... maybe to the "Chamberlain Hangover Treatment Center" or the "Doolittle Meeting Hall" ... other suggestions are welcome too. We could let Uncle Virgil decide or put it to a vote ... with Cletus VanMeter doing the counting. It's not what you might think ... I trust them all, even Lester ... but with Cletus, you don't have to worry about no shenanigans.

Here are a couple of examples to chew on ...

You know something is seriously wrong when you have to arrive two hours early at the county aeroport so that you and your luggage can be searched ... with the knowledge that many kids throughout the land face the same treatment each day when they go to school!

You know something is seriously wrong when giant companies and huge industry segments are allowed to become so mismanaged and get into such financial trouble that the danged government has to dole out over a thousand billion dollars so that the economy doesn't collapse and millions of Americans are ruined ... something's even wronger when the mismanagers get to keep their jobs and some are even rewarded with huge bonuses for having worked their magic and obtained millions if not billions from the government so that they can keep on keeping on!    Something's even wronger still when we stand and cheer when these bailouts are distributed ... for it is we who must foot the bill ... well, us, our children, their children, and theirs!

You know something is seriously wrong when eight year olds carry loaded weapons to school and plot to kill teachers and other students what make them mad!   Wronger still when the little boy's mother explains ... I told him not to take that gun to school ... it wasn't even his!

You know something is seriously wrong when more people identify Samuel Adams with Beer than with Tea!
And yes, in a nation where "In God We Trust" is on our currency and all 50 State Constitutions pay homage to God ... and where God is welcomed on our Senate's floor ... you know something is seriously wrong when God's unwelcome in our public schools!

Like it says in the entrance to the General Discussion Area, here in the Shop, we listen to all who have something to say ... paying extra close attention to the Southern Jackass ... and Uncle Virgil, of course!

Here's some more of the same déjà vu all over again ... Without your comments, it is all but much ado ... they are the sweet feed that fuels the Tucker ... you can put your comments in either the Shop's General Discussion Ares or the one established exclusively for Non-Political Politics. The choice is yours ... either one ... or both!

We'll combine and process the sweet feed, ... write some relevant posts that seem most appropriate ... fill up the Tucker, and see where it takes us ... to Washington or maybe Doolittle Hollar, you just never know!

It was fine as it was but I changed it just a wee bit ... so you wouldn't accuse me of being overly redundant.

0 1 2 3 4 5 pages 1 2 3 4 5

Comments and Discussions
Non-Political Politics

Abraham Lincoln's Proclamation Of Thanksgiving ...

2009-11-24T13:44:00.000-08:00

According to most historical records, the first American Thanksgiving was celebrated in 1621 to commemorate the bountiful autumn harvest gathered by the Plymouth Colony after an extremely harsh winter ... in that same year, Governor William Bradford proclaimed a day of thanksgiving ... the colonists celebrated this day as a traditional English feast, to which they invited the local Wampanoag Indians ... days of thanksgiving were celebrated throughout the colonies after fall harvests ... all thirteen colonies did not, however, observe Thanksgiving at the same time until October 1777 ... George Washington was the first president to declare the holiday in 1789.

We are all familiar with the Thanksgiving holiday as being a time for family, friends and feasts -- but we can easily forget the meaning of this national holiday as it was first established by President George Washington on October 3, 1789, and reaffirmed as we know it today by President Abraham Lincoln on October 3, 1863, exactly 74 years later ... a mere glance at their Thanksgiving proclamations reminds us of the noblest purposes of government ... moreover, the simplest meaning of Thanksgiving reminds us - contrary to secularist courts and professors - that these presidents were proclaiming a holy day, a day for prayer and recognition of Almighty God's authority over man ... a day for acknowledgment of our many transgressions ... a day of praise and thanksgiving to our Creator for His gracious gifts of mercy, forgiveness and abundance of blessings toward all mankind ... please read carefully President Lincoln's following proclamation, for within this historic text lies the true essence of Thanksgiving.

Washington, D.C.

October 3, 1863

By the President of the United States of America.

A Proclamation.

The year that is drawing towards it's close , has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of such extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict, while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverences and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hands to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility and Union.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the United States the Eighty-eight.

By the President Abraham Lincoln

William H. Seward,
Secretary of State

The above is the proclamation which set the precedent for America's national day of Thanksgiving ... during his administration, President Lincoln issued many orders such as this ... for example, on November 28, 1861, he ordered government departments closed for a local day of thanksgiving.

Sarah Josepha Hale, a prominent magazine editor, wrote a letter to Lincoln in 1863, urging him to have the "day of our annual Thanksgiving made a National and fixed Union festival" ... she wrote, "You may have observed that, for some years past, there has been an increasing interest felt in our land to have the Thanksgiving held on the same day, in all the States; it now needs National recognition and authoritive fixation, only, to become permanently, an American custom and institution" -- this document sets apart the last Thursday of November "as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise."

According to an April 1, 1864, letter from John Nicolay, one of President Lincoln's secretaries, this document was written by Secretary of State William Seward, and the original was in his handwriting ... on October 3, 1863, fellow Cabinet member Gideon Welles recorded in his diary that he complimented Seward on his work ... a year later, the manuscript was sold to benefit Union troops.

*Proclamation text and other info taken from Abraham Lincoln Online --sja

End Of Innocence ...

2009-11-17T19:42:00.000-08:00

Unpredictable winds of change were swirling that sunny November day in 1963 as America's most glimmering flame of promise and hope was suddenly and unexpectedly extinguished ... sounds of gunshots echoed across Dealey Plaza, then round the world sending waves of shock and sorrow throughout the hearts of a stunned nation ... those who witnessed the terrible events of that day will never forget the moment they heard the unthinkable ... "President Kennedy is dead!" ... words forever seared into our national consciousness ... President John Fitzgerald Kennedy (1917-1963) was killed by an assassin's bullet as his motorcade wound through the streets of Dallas, Texas - he had barely completed his first one thousand days in office ... our noble hero was gone ... our hope became uncertainty ... our joy turned to sadness and grief ... our hearts forever broken ... it was the end of innocence.

John Kennedy was the youngest man ever elected President of the United States - he was also the youngest to die ... of Irish descent, he was born in Brookline, Massachusetts, May 29, 1917 ... after graduating from Harvard in 1940, he entered the U.S. Navy ... in 1943, while commanding a PT boat (PT-109) in the Pacific Theater during World War II, his boat was rammed and sunk by a Japanese destroyer ... Kennedy, despite grave injuries, led the survivors through perilous waters to safety ... for his bravery, he was awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Medal.

Back from the war, John Kennedy became a Democratic Congressman from the Boston area, advancing in 1953 to the Senate ... he married Jacqueline Lee Bouvier on September 12, 1953 ... in 1955, while recuperating from back surgery, he wrote Profiles in Courage, which won the Pulitzer Prize in history ... in 1956, Kennedy nearly gained the Democratic nomination for Vice President, and four years later was a first-ballot nominee for President ... winning by a narrow margin in the popular vote, Kennedy was the first Roman Catholic to become President of the United States.

Kennedy's Inaugural Address offered this memorable injunction -- "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country" -- as President, he took vigorous action in the cause of equal rights, calling for new civil rights legislation ... his vision of America extended to the quality of the national culture and the central role of the arts in a vital society ... he wished America to resume it's old mission as the first nation dedicated to the revolution of human rights ... with the Alliance for Progress and the Peace Corps, he brought American idealism to the aid of developing nations ... before his untimely death, he laid plans for a massive assault on persisting pockets of privation and poverty.

As with any great leader, John Kennedy also had flaws and failures ... his most glaring occurring in April 1961 ... known as the Bay of Pigs Invasion, Kennedy permitted a group of armed and trained Cuban exiles to invade their homeland in an attempt to overthrow the regime of Fidel Castro ... this event became a disaster and an embarrassment for the young President ... soon thereafter, the Soviet Union renewed it's campaign against West Berlin ... however, Kennedy also displayed unfaltering creativity, courage and resolve, and decisively responded to the Soviets by reinforcing the Berlin garrison, and increased American military strength, including new efforts in outer space ... confronted by this reaction, Moscow, after the erection of the Berlin Wall, relaxed it's pressure in central Europe.

President Kennedy's most shining hour came in October 1962 ... discovered by air reconnaissance, the Russians were seeking to install nuclear missiles in Cuba just 90 miles from the coast of Florida ... enforced by a naval blockade, Kennedy imposed a quarantine on all offensive weapons bound for Cuba ... while the world trembled on the brink of nuclear war, the Soviets, under the direction of Nikita Khrushchev, backed down and agreed to take the missiles away, total global annihilation of all humankind had been averted ... Kennedy then contended that both sides had a vital interest in stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons and slowing the arms race - a contention which led to the test ban treaty of 1963 ... the months that followed the Cuban Missile Crisis showed significant progress toward his goal of "a world of law and free choice, banishing the world of war and coercion." ... his administration saw the beginning of new hope for both equal rights of Americans and the peace of the entire world, but dark days lurked just beyond the horizon.

I will always remember the moment, when as a small boy, Walter Cronkite "the most trusted man in America" announced that President Kennedy had been shot while in Dallas, Texas ... then minutes later, Cronkite, his familiar voice breaking delivered the dreadful news to the anxious throngs that our President was dead ... the entire country languished in stunned silence and disbelief ... the President of the United States of America ... the most powerful nation on earth ... the leader of the free world ... gunned down in broad daylight ... like an animal ... in the middle of a public street before the gaping eyes of the entire world.

During the ensuing days, as America sat in a state of darkness and mourning, and as our slain prince was carried to his final resting place, many images and impressions were indelibly etched into my young psyche ... images of the President being struck by the assassin's bullets ... Jacqueline climbing onto the trunk of the presidential limousine in an effort to retrieve bits and pieces of her husband's skull which had been blown away by the gunshot ... her pink dress drenched with his blood from her attempts to protect him from further harm and conceal his grave injuries ... Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson being sworn in as thirty-sixth President of the United States while standing beside Jacqueline Kennedy aboard Air Force One - which also contained her husband's body ... Jack Ruby gunning down Kennedy's alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald on live TV as he was being led from Dallas Police Headquarters en route to the county jail ... and a host of others.

Finally, the seemingly endless days involving the pageantry surrounding the fallen President's state funeral, which was patterned after that of Abraham Lincoln, came to a close ... the entire procession from the White House, to the Capitol, to St. Matthew's Cathedral, to Arlington National Cemetery was six miles ... an estimated one million people lined the route ... diplomats and heads of state from around the globe were in attendance, along with Kennedy's family members and close friends, all of whom stood with blank and empty expressions on their haggard faces ... the clopping of the horses' hooves striking the pavement as they proudly drew the caisson bearing the President's bier, haunting cries of bagpipes wailing in the distance and the steady cadence of muffled drum rolls which accompanied the cortege were particularly poignant and memorable ... perhaps the most heartrending moment took place on the steps outside St. Matthew's Cathedral as Jackie leaned over and whispered to little John-John ... who then smart and crisp ... proudly saluted his father's departing coffin ... the President was finally laid to rest at Arlington National Cemetery, and at the end of the burial service, a soldier handed Jacqueline a lighted taper with which she lit the John F. Kennedy Eternal Flame ... the presidential memorial was inspired by the eternal flame at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, which she and her husband had seen during a visit to France in 1961, and/or took inspiration from The Candle in the Wind of Arthurian legend and the Broadway play "Camelot."

Scarce are words yet to be uttered as to this tragic and unspeakable act that graved a deep and painful scar on the furrowed brow of American history ... it matters not whether you agreed with Kennedy's political philosophies or religious beliefs ... it matters not whether you personally liked the man or the Kennedy family ... John Fitzgerald Kennedy was first and foremost a human being ... no human being deserves to be openly ambushed and slaughtered in such an inhuman manner ... John Kennedy, along with his brother Robert Francis (Bobby) Kennedy (1925-1968), who was also killed by an assassin's bullet on June 5, 1968 while campaigning for the Democratic nomination for President, both gave the ultimate sacrifice in service to their country ... it matters not whether you loved them or hated them, both deserve the utmost in honor and respect ... I often wonder what great accomplishments could have been made had Joseph and Rose's ennoble son - Jackie's beloved husband - Arabella, Caroline, John Jr. and Patrick's dear father - and America's most shining ray of hope and promise for a brighter future had not been swiftly robbed of his life ... other equally abominable and immoral acts have taken place since the disgraceful, public execution of our young prince - sadly, these acts are now often looked upon as being commonplace ... but the killing of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was the beginning of the end of innocence.

"He didn't even have the satisfaction of being killed for civil rights .... it had to be some silly little Communist" --Jacqueline Kennedy ... on hearing that a leftist had been arrested for her husband's murder.

To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven:

I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be forever: nothing can be put to it, nor anything taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before Him.... Ecclesiastes 3 ...

*Biographical information supplied by the U.S National Archives --sja

The Forgotten Days ...

2009-11-12T09:06:00.001-08:00

A young man strolling along a garbage-strewn street one cold and windy day came upon a homeless man sitting in a wheelchair near the entrance to a crowded cafe ... a tattered American flag crudely attached to his chair and a plastic bucket with the words "homeless veteran - help please!" wedged between his crippled knees compelled the passerby to drop a few dollars inside ... "God bless you young man" said the grateful veteran with forced smile, ragged clothes, unkempt beard and hair, and tired, empty eyes ... the curious lad unsure of a proper reply then exclaimed "Sir, I bet you've experienced some horrible things in your day" ... deep furrows tightened on the veteran soldier's leathery brow as he hesitantly replied "Yes, I certainly have ... but nobody wants to hear that stuff ... nobody really cares" ... feeling obligated to listen, the young man urged him go ahead ... so the man cleared his throat and began:

"Well I've seen men, women and children die in the cruelest of ways ... shot, stabbed, butchered, lynched and burned alive ... others blown apart, tortured or raped--innocent babies too ... I've heard screams in the night as they suffered and died ... I've seen scores lank and frail from hunger and thirst, having no shelter or place to hide, naked and shivering from cold and from fright ... I've seen dead bodies discarded beneath bridges and alongside of the road ... helpless children abused by the heartless ... the aged, the sick and the powerless sitting abandoned, hopeless and alone ... and I too have experienced pain, hunger and cold while enduring countless nights outside, lonely, sad and afraid ... I've seen hatred, indifference and wickedness swelling in the hearts of man ... yes, I reckon I've seen many shameful and inhuman things" ... then asked the young man, now speechless and dismayed "that's terrible Sir, on what faraway battlefield did you see all those horrible things?" ... the old warrior slowly shook his head then said, "oh no son ... you don't understand ... most of it happened right here on our own homeland!"

One day a year on Veteran's Day, we honor those distinguished souls who have bravely and selflessly served our country ... let us not forget about them during the other 364 days ... according to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, an estimated 130,000 to 200,000 veterans are homeless on any given night in this great country, with twice that many experiencing homelessness over the course of a year, comprising 25% of all homeless people in America ... many factors affect all homelessness such as shortages of affordable housing, livable income and access to health care ... veterans are impacted to a further degree from lingering effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and substance abuse, compounded by a lack of family and social support networks ... the Department of Veterans Affairs has made some progress in helping our veterans, but it is far from being enough ... there are steps we can all take to make sure veterans are adequately taken care of -- determine the needs in your community -- involve others -- participate in local homeless coalitions -- send a financial donation -- and contact your elected officials.

By all means, if you encounter a homeless veteran who needs a helping hand, please give it ... do whatever is necessary within your means to assist these precious people ... express your appreciation for their sacrifice and dedicated service, let them know that you are genuinely concerned about their welfare, and that you respect and support them ... if there were but one needy or homeless veteran left on our streets without adequate shelter, food, clothing or medical care... that is one too many ... it's a shame and a disgrace for any loyal veteran to endure such demeaning treatment from the nation they helped to protect and preserve ... we hear this plea nearly every day ... "God bless America" ... well God has blessed America ... I wonder what goes through the mind of God when he sees a homeless veteran, young or old sitting near a busy thoroughfare ... flag proudly waving in the chilly air ... ragged clothes ... unkempt beard and hair ... forced smile and tired, empty stare ... with no place to go ... asking passersby for help ... hungry, tired and confused ... in the midst of a land as blessed as America?

"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God" --Matthew 5:9

It's genuinely disgraceful that America would handily fork over billions of dollars to greedy, rich sponges on Wall Street while her brave and honorable war veterans line Main Street begging for a piece of bread! ... --sja