Friday, March 21, 2008
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Everyone Is Entitled To My Opinion...
" I assumed that everything must yield to me, that the entire universe had to flatter my whims, and that I had the right to satisfy at will." ~Aline et Valcour
I can look back and reminisce on countless examples in which this was my mentality. How often have I always been right? I was so certain that I had all the answers on any particular subject you could offer up to me. I have seen in my own arrogance what it is like to always be right. It's a staggering feat of my own hubris. Anyone who would disagree with me was obviously an idiot and uninformed on the subject. Yet that would not make me above ponitificating to the uneducated. Nomatter how ill informed or how risible the case against my mosiac of opinions might have been. It must have been painfully obvious even to the most daft of observers how much my ego drove my words.
The author of the quote above was referring to his youth. I can look back to my adolescance and see that this was rampant characteristic. However I cannot say that I have risen above this human condition quite as of yet. However I would still regard myself as in my youth. Attempting to enjoy the benefits and mitigate the downfalls of the mantle of youth as it were. However I attempt to reform this whimsical disposition so often associated with youth, I harbor a fear. What if this carries on beyond my youth?
I can find a recent example that embodies this fear. He is older and with reasonable success. He is well liked among the group of us that are deemed his peers. Yet from day one I noticed that nomatter what story anyone told, he had one better. Nomatter what conversations are going on, he has never met an arguement he didn't like.His opinions are always right, even if it's evident he's not that well read up on the subject. When he talks to his peers, he is posturing and even his demeanor is one of a pontiff. I see some of the others don't even bother to engage in any sort of a meaningful discussion with him. Sadly, that is what we are all there for. Yet as well liked as he is, he's not given any kind of a role from the group to embark in.
For every example in my life that I can fall back on with a negative connotation, I can say there are good examples as well. People who have the grace to gently and eloquently make their points clear as day, when they are compelled to make them. People are never always right, always pugnaciously running about convincing the rest of us...or themselves. That is the example I want to emulate. I want an honest discussion to find my ego left checked in at the door. I don't ever want to know everything. I've seen what happens to people who know everything and it leaves a great deal to be desired. My only worry is that I might become complacent and allow myself into this comfortable delusion that my opinions are correct by virtue of my having them.
I can look back and reminisce on countless examples in which this was my mentality. How often have I always been right? I was so certain that I had all the answers on any particular subject you could offer up to me. I have seen in my own arrogance what it is like to always be right. It's a staggering feat of my own hubris. Anyone who would disagree with me was obviously an idiot and uninformed on the subject. Yet that would not make me above ponitificating to the uneducated. Nomatter how ill informed or how risible the case against my mosiac of opinions might have been. It must have been painfully obvious even to the most daft of observers how much my ego drove my words.
The author of the quote above was referring to his youth. I can look back to my adolescance and see that this was rampant characteristic. However I cannot say that I have risen above this human condition quite as of yet. However I would still regard myself as in my youth. Attempting to enjoy the benefits and mitigate the downfalls of the mantle of youth as it were. However I attempt to reform this whimsical disposition so often associated with youth, I harbor a fear. What if this carries on beyond my youth?
I can find a recent example that embodies this fear. He is older and with reasonable success. He is well liked among the group of us that are deemed his peers. Yet from day one I noticed that nomatter what story anyone told, he had one better. Nomatter what conversations are going on, he has never met an arguement he didn't like.His opinions are always right, even if it's evident he's not that well read up on the subject. When he talks to his peers, he is posturing and even his demeanor is one of a pontiff. I see some of the others don't even bother to engage in any sort of a meaningful discussion with him. Sadly, that is what we are all there for. Yet as well liked as he is, he's not given any kind of a role from the group to embark in.
For every example in my life that I can fall back on with a negative connotation, I can say there are good examples as well. People who have the grace to gently and eloquently make their points clear as day, when they are compelled to make them. People are never always right, always pugnaciously running about convincing the rest of us...or themselves. That is the example I want to emulate. I want an honest discussion to find my ego left checked in at the door. I don't ever want to know everything. I've seen what happens to people who know everything and it leaves a great deal to be desired. My only worry is that I might become complacent and allow myself into this comfortable delusion that my opinions are correct by virtue of my having them.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
A Chicken in Every Pot!
Lawmakers Reach Deal on Tax Rebates
By ANDREW TAYLOR,
AP
Posted: 2008-01-24 17:06:24
Filed Under: Recession Watch, Taxes
WASHINGTON (Jan. 24) - Congressional leaders announced a deal with the White House Thursday on an economic stimulus package that would give most tax filers refunds of $600 to $1,200, and more if they have children.
Etaxilation: The joy you receive when you receive tax money back from the government. A short euphoria often ending with the realization that it was your money in the first place.
Well this is another case of Wag the Dog:
The Recession was bound to happen because the Government stimulated a false business cycle through the Federal Reserve. It artificially lowered interest rates, printed up hundreds of billions of dollars every quarter and pushed mandatory lending programs. Sub Prime Lenders lent more because if they didn't their competition would. Now the market is liquidating the bad credit and a lot of bad loans. Meanwhile they're gonna send out a few checks to help soften the initial shock of a massive and deep recession that's gonna be prolonged by the monetary policy.
Oh by the way, the dollar fell 9% in one day a few weeks ago? How many of you know why the dollar has fallen? Can anyone tell me Why the dollar is worth 95% less than it was 100 years ago?Amazing how you work so hard for this currency and how you're never taught how it all works in a Government Run Education System. So now even though you're getting this money, the nominal value is going to continue to be pointless. You have less purchasing power. That's why your groceries go up, gas goes up, because the dollar is worth less and less.
By ANDREW TAYLOR,
AP
Posted: 2008-01-24 17:06:24
Filed Under: Recession Watch, Taxes
WASHINGTON (Jan. 24) - Congressional leaders announced a deal with the White House Thursday on an economic stimulus package that would give most tax filers refunds of $600 to $1,200, and more if they have children.
Etaxilation: The joy you receive when you receive tax money back from the government. A short euphoria often ending with the realization that it was your money in the first place.
Well this is another case of Wag the Dog:
The Recession was bound to happen because the Government stimulated a false business cycle through the Federal Reserve. It artificially lowered interest rates, printed up hundreds of billions of dollars every quarter and pushed mandatory lending programs. Sub Prime Lenders lent more because if they didn't their competition would. Now the market is liquidating the bad credit and a lot of bad loans. Meanwhile they're gonna send out a few checks to help soften the initial shock of a massive and deep recession that's gonna be prolonged by the monetary policy.
Oh by the way, the dollar fell 9% in one day a few weeks ago? How many of you know why the dollar has fallen? Can anyone tell me Why the dollar is worth 95% less than it was 100 years ago?Amazing how you work so hard for this currency and how you're never taught how it all works in a Government Run Education System. So now even though you're getting this money, the nominal value is going to continue to be pointless. You have less purchasing power. That's why your groceries go up, gas goes up, because the dollar is worth less and less.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Monday, December 24, 2007
The Bigger the stone, the smaller the person...
I was reading the blog of an intelligent author whom I have great respect for. This statement stuck out:
"Many libertarians are basically conservatives who are either gay or druggies or people who generally find the conservative moral agenda too restrictive. " Dinesh D'souza
You can read the article here:
http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2007/12/21/how-atheists-celebrate-christmas/
I will defer to the Great Sir William Blake. " To generalize is to be an idiot."
As a Christian Libertarian, I find the idea of Lording over anyone's morality dreadfully uninteresting. It was the Pharisees who felt their sins were better than everyone elses. Christ ate and drank with the sinners. He told them sin no more, and deterred the stoning of sinners. God gives you the right to choose what you do. Your rights are not endowed by the state.
Dinesh's preoccupation with Hitchens and Atheists at large is reminiscent of identity politics and does nothing to humbly further the love of God through prayer and example.
"Carry each other's burdens and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ" Galatians 6:2
"Many libertarians are basically conservatives who are either gay or druggies or people who generally find the conservative moral agenda too restrictive. " Dinesh D'souza
You can read the article here:
http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2007/12/21/how-atheists-celebrate-christmas/
I will defer to the Great Sir William Blake. " To generalize is to be an idiot."
As a Christian Libertarian, I find the idea of Lording over anyone's morality dreadfully uninteresting. It was the Pharisees who felt their sins were better than everyone elses. Christ ate and drank with the sinners. He told them sin no more, and deterred the stoning of sinners. God gives you the right to choose what you do. Your rights are not endowed by the state.
Dinesh's preoccupation with Hitchens and Atheists at large is reminiscent of identity politics and does nothing to humbly further the love of God through prayer and example.
"Carry each other's burdens and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ" Galatians 6:2
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Tariffs, Tyrant, Emancipator, you can have them all!
I saw a discussion in which a few people were arguing over The Civil War. Naturally someone asserted the war was about slavery and anyone who questioned that was mistaken. Here is my reply:
American Civil War?
I am unware of a war inwhich any political group attempted to overthrow the regime for control of the centralized government. I have heard of a war between the States, to prevent southern independence.
The American Revolution was fought on taxes of 3%.
The Federal Government was receiving most of its income through tariffs. The south was exporting 3/4 of its agriculture. It was protectionist mercantilism, infant industry policies. 3 congressmen and 2 senators from the south voted for the 1824 tariff. Northern states voted overwhelming in favor. Henry Clay led the way to raise it again by 50% in 1828, "The Tariff of Abominations." South Carolina,in a petition stated it was "A system of robbery and plunder. So that corrupt politicians could buy partisans and power." VA,NC, AL joined SC in opposing the tariff. MA, Oh, RH,IN NY issued resolutions in favor of the tariff. Essentially the south was paying more on the tax and it was hurting the economies of their trading partners which in turned hurt their income a second way.Meanwhile the manufacturing economy of the north was profiting.1832 SC issued an Ordinance of Notification. Perfectly legal prior to 1865 I might add. (OH Nullified the Bank of the United States) SC Nullification Ordinance:Authorized seizure of property from tariff collectors to importers, duties repaid w/ interest. Tax collectors were thrown in jail. No jail could be used to inprison anyone for failing to pay the tax. State allocated 200,000.00 for firearms incase they were needed to combat the tax collectors.The tariff was eventually lowered from themid 1830s at its lowest until 1857.
Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis highlighted the Tariff Issue in both their inaugural addresses. By 1860 the voting population of the North was 3 times the size of the voting population of the South. The Republican Party made political gains in 1857-1858 by pushing for protectionist legislation. The Morrill Tariff in the 1859-60 house of representatives.1 southern representative voted for it, out of 105 from TN. Lincoln,a lifelong Mercantilist and Henry Clay Fan,campaigned on Protectionism for the Republican Nomination.("Battle Ground" State of PA,heart of steel industry, campaigned on protectionism.)Giant billboards and campaign posters for Lincoln/Hamlin read "Protection for Home Industry."
Lincoln prior to inaguaration in 1861 stated in Pittsburg Penn that nothing was more important to Congressional Representatives than the Morrill Tariff which hadn't become law yet. Lincoln stated: "Anything that can be grown or Manufactured here in the United States should have zero competition from abroad." Lincoln statements over and over in the inaugural address make it clear he has no qualms with slavery. That to interfere with slavery would be unconstitutional. He supported a constitutional amendment to prohibit the federal government from interfere with slavery by using Seward to get it through the committee of 13 in the senate. He also got through that would have nullified the Northern States Nullification on the slave fugitive law. This was all within the couple weeks of his administration. He was accommodating 100%, even to the constitutional level. However on the Tariff Lincoln said, "In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere."(He's talking about the Morrill Tariff which had just passed which doubled the tariff in 1860.)
Why The Southern Confederacy would pay Tariffs to a foreign government is beyond me. Two weeks after Fort Sumter,a blockade was placed on southern ports. He did so, without declaring war. So much for the Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Papers #28, "The state governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the liberty by the national authority."
I personally would like to defer to honest Abe on this one. "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is the most valuable, a most sacred right- a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is the right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much territory as they inhabit." Abraham Lincoln 1848. (aww I like to imagine this is before the insanity set in from the decades of Syphilis effecting his mind.)
What about John Quincey Adams on the 50th Anniversary of the Constitution?
"The indissoluble link of union between the people of the several states of this confederated nation is, after all, not in the right but in the heart. If the day should ever come, may heaven avert it, when the affections of the people of these States shall be alienated from each other; when the fraternal spirit shall give way to cold indifference, or collision of interests shall fester into hatred, the bands of political associations will not long hold together parties no longer attracted by the magnetism of conciliated interests and kindly sympathies; and far better will it be for the people of the disunited states to part in friendship from each other, than to be held by constraint."
Ulysses S Grant, Union General: "If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side." He was a slaveholder until after the 13th amendment was ratified.... after the war.
Lincoln was a racist, you can read your speeches for himself. The "Whiteman's Priviso" of the Whig and later Republican Party made it clear why they were against expanding slavery. The man unilaterally suspended habeas corpus. Ordered the military to shut down specific northern newspapers. Arrested thousands of political opponents and declared criticisms of his policies treason. Hired a secret police force, created an incentivized program for informants if convictions were obtained. Had no regard for civilians or pows.Confiscated firearms in the border states. Censored telegraph communications.
All to preserve the union geographically, while violently destroying the union in every philosophical way possible. Like rape, or domestic violence, might clearly equals right. Enter the American Empire.
P.S. I am not white, southern or a racist.
American Civil War?
I am unware of a war inwhich any political group attempted to overthrow the regime for control of the centralized government. I have heard of a war between the States, to prevent southern independence.
The American Revolution was fought on taxes of 3%.
The Federal Government was receiving most of its income through tariffs. The south was exporting 3/4 of its agriculture. It was protectionist mercantilism, infant industry policies. 3 congressmen and 2 senators from the south voted for the 1824 tariff. Northern states voted overwhelming in favor. Henry Clay led the way to raise it again by 50% in 1828, "The Tariff of Abominations." South Carolina,in a petition stated it was "A system of robbery and plunder. So that corrupt politicians could buy partisans and power." VA,NC, AL joined SC in opposing the tariff. MA, Oh, RH,IN NY issued resolutions in favor of the tariff. Essentially the south was paying more on the tax and it was hurting the economies of their trading partners which in turned hurt their income a second way.Meanwhile the manufacturing economy of the north was profiting.1832 SC issued an Ordinance of Notification. Perfectly legal prior to 1865 I might add. (OH Nullified the Bank of the United States) SC Nullification Ordinance:Authorized seizure of property from tariff collectors to importers, duties repaid w/ interest. Tax collectors were thrown in jail. No jail could be used to inprison anyone for failing to pay the tax. State allocated 200,000.00 for firearms incase they were needed to combat the tax collectors.The tariff was eventually lowered from themid 1830s at its lowest until 1857.
Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis highlighted the Tariff Issue in both their inaugural addresses. By 1860 the voting population of the North was 3 times the size of the voting population of the South. The Republican Party made political gains in 1857-1858 by pushing for protectionist legislation. The Morrill Tariff in the 1859-60 house of representatives.1 southern representative voted for it, out of 105 from TN. Lincoln,a lifelong Mercantilist and Henry Clay Fan,campaigned on Protectionism for the Republican Nomination.("Battle Ground" State of PA,heart of steel industry, campaigned on protectionism.)Giant billboards and campaign posters for Lincoln/Hamlin read "Protection for Home Industry."
Lincoln prior to inaguaration in 1861 stated in Pittsburg Penn that nothing was more important to Congressional Representatives than the Morrill Tariff which hadn't become law yet. Lincoln stated: "Anything that can be grown or Manufactured here in the United States should have zero competition from abroad." Lincoln statements over and over in the inaugural address make it clear he has no qualms with slavery. That to interfere with slavery would be unconstitutional. He supported a constitutional amendment to prohibit the federal government from interfere with slavery by using Seward to get it through the committee of 13 in the senate. He also got through that would have nullified the Northern States Nullification on the slave fugitive law. This was all within the couple weeks of his administration. He was accommodating 100%, even to the constitutional level. However on the Tariff Lincoln said, "In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere."(He's talking about the Morrill Tariff which had just passed which doubled the tariff in 1860.)
Why The Southern Confederacy would pay Tariffs to a foreign government is beyond me. Two weeks after Fort Sumter,a blockade was placed on southern ports. He did so, without declaring war. So much for the Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Papers #28, "The state governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the liberty by the national authority."
I personally would like to defer to honest Abe on this one. "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is the most valuable, a most sacred right- a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is the right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much territory as they inhabit." Abraham Lincoln 1848. (aww I like to imagine this is before the insanity set in from the decades of Syphilis effecting his mind.)
What about John Quincey Adams on the 50th Anniversary of the Constitution?
"The indissoluble link of union between the people of the several states of this confederated nation is, after all, not in the right but in the heart. If the day should ever come, may heaven avert it, when the affections of the people of these States shall be alienated from each other; when the fraternal spirit shall give way to cold indifference, or collision of interests shall fester into hatred, the bands of political associations will not long hold together parties no longer attracted by the magnetism of conciliated interests and kindly sympathies; and far better will it be for the people of the disunited states to part in friendship from each other, than to be held by constraint."
Ulysses S Grant, Union General: "If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side." He was a slaveholder until after the 13th amendment was ratified.... after the war.
Lincoln was a racist, you can read your speeches for himself. The "Whiteman's Priviso" of the Whig and later Republican Party made it clear why they were against expanding slavery. The man unilaterally suspended habeas corpus. Ordered the military to shut down specific northern newspapers. Arrested thousands of political opponents and declared criticisms of his policies treason. Hired a secret police force, created an incentivized program for informants if convictions were obtained. Had no regard for civilians or pows.Confiscated firearms in the border states. Censored telegraph communications.
All to preserve the union geographically, while violently destroying the union in every philosophical way possible. Like rape, or domestic violence, might clearly equals right. Enter the American Empire.
P.S. I am not white, southern or a racist.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Announcing The Initial Post...
It is my hope that this will be the start of a lifelong endeavour to observe and express my views on a regular basis. Ushering in a collection of thoughts and views. Recording the changes and development of principles. Allowing hindsight to whisper in with subtle reflections for future reference. For in the spirit of Heraclitus we must remember:
"Good character is not formed in a week or a month. It is created little by little, day by day. Protracted and patient effort is needed to develop good character. "
"Good character is not formed in a week or a month. It is created little by little, day by day. Protracted and patient effort is needed to develop good character. "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)