Political Responsibility

I put forth an idea on the internet that politicians should be required to write a 500 word essay every time they cast a vote.  I was asked to explain it more fully, but the format was not friendly to drawn out conversations, thus I am writing this blog about it.

It is a very simple concept, every elected official must write a 500 word essay for ever vote they cast, or in the case of executives every bill they sign or veto.  They must write it themselves and this duty is not to be passed on to their staff.  In it they just have to explain to the people the rhyme and reason for their action.  Example, “I voted against/vetoed the popular VA benefits bill because someone from the other party attached an amendment to outlaw abortion or eliminate food stamps.”  It does not have to be overly complex and I think our elected officials owe us a 500 word essay.

Now for this idea to be effective, after they have finished and submitted the essay it must be posted publicly.  I say it must be posted on a website that will include their entire history and once each essay is posted, they cannot touch it.  Now do I suddenly expect this to improve the quality of politicians, of course not!  Will they suddenly become more honest?  Well the smart ones will, because the more lies you stack on top of each other, the more likely it will collapse like a house of cards.

So what do I hope to gain from this? Well our “leaders” have forgotten one of the most basic concepts of leadership, they do not LEAD!  They cater to this and that special interest group; lobbyists carry more weight than voters!  If they need to pass an unpopular bill, explain to us why the fuck it is needed.  When it comes time for another election that action (and all others) can be defended or attacked.  It all comes down to accountability for actions.  For some odd reason elected officials seem to believe they are exempt from any responsibility.  I cannot accept that and no people should allow their elected officials such a privilege.  It is because of this that their elitist attitude is completely out of control!  They only time they care about the people is when an election is just around the corner or it is a good chance for a photo opportunity.  Even then we are treated like objects.  They forget one tiny fact, we are their fucking bosses!  

How to enforce this mandate? With no mercy!  Every essay that they do not post they will be fined 10% of their total net worth, multimillion dollar fines for some and in the thousands for others.  If they have others write their essay, a felony and 5 years in prison with violent offenders for every essay they did not write!  Show them no pity, they show us none.

How hard is it to write a 500 word essay? This essay is 520 words and took less than 30 minutes while eating and reading twitter.

The Reality of the US debt

Disclaimer: Now I realize that people really feel that anytime you relate something to Nazi Germany, you have a weak argument.  When you think about someone like Glen Beck, who seems to have Nazi tourettes, I understand the concern.  This is not about Nazi Germany; it is not a comparison of the present administration to Nazi Germany.  It is a discussion of the results of excessive debt on a society.

I fear I must give a little history lesson so this is not taken out of context.  It is okay, since I tend to be long winded anyways.  In 1918 Germany lost World War One and in 1919 the Treaty of Versailles was signed.  A significant part of the treaty was that Germany had to pay reparations to the Allied Powers.  In short Germany had to pay the entire cost of the war to the winners.  This placed a very large burden upon the German people.  As long as times were good in the world, the burden was bearable.  Times were however not good and despite having the most modern democracy on the planet Germany needed the help of the USA to be able to prevent it from becoming a third world country (at least in concept, that term did not exist until after WW2).  Prior to the help of the USA runaway inflation existed and the middle class lost their entire savings just to feed themselves.  It was in this environment that the Nazi party was born.  It started as a handful of people that would just bitch about the government at their local beer hall.  My point is, when the economy is bad radical groups are born and they can thrive depending on the amount of time that such an environment exists.

The German people are dedicated to their country and take pride in their national heritage (sound familiar?).  So when the traditional parties were unable to provide relief for the masses, the people turned to different radical groups (Nazis and Communists being the main two) for relief.  When people are hungry, they are willing to give up their freedom to have bread on the table!  In 1923 (if I remember correctly) Hitler tried to start a revolution in Germany with his Beer Hall Putsch. It failed and he went to prison.  It was during this time that he wrote Mein Kampf.  It was also during this time that the USA got involved in Germany’s economy and helped to prop it up.  After Hitler got out of prison he became patient and was determined to conquer Germany through the ballot box.  1923 to 1929 was the time of plenty (thanks to loose credit), the Nazis had ups and downs, but never gained enough numbers to be a serious threat.  Then in 1929 the economy collapsed and Hitler became more and more powerful as the economy want further and further down the drain.  By the time 1934 came around Hitler was able to proclaim himself of Fuhrer (leader) of Germany.

End History Lesson...

So what does the rise of Hitler have to do with the German debt?  Those reparation payments placed a burden on Germany, one the people and government were not able to handle.  Taxes went to pay France, Belgium and the UK for the costs and damage of the Great War.  There was nothing left to support the infrastructure that gave the German people that lifestyle they had grown accustomed to.  When the economy was bad the government cannibalized the German monetary unit (the Mark).  Now that is a little simple, since Germany was on the gold standard, but when they shipped all the gold to France to pay the reparations there was none left to support the Mark.  That is what caused the runaway inflation, making imports expensive.  This also helped make Germany an attractive investment for US investors in the 20s, since that meant costs were cheap.  Germany was truly like China was years ago.  Germany was a place to get high returns, since it could manufacture items cheaply and flood markets because of this. 

Germany was able to bounce back during the early/mid 20s, because the economy in the rest of the world was good.  The Weimar Republic was able to survive and even prosper, but internally it suffered from gridlock.  No single party was ever strong enough to run the country without the support of one or many of the fringe parties.  Because of this the radicals were never able to be crushed by the government.  How could you crush them when you never knew if you might need them...

It was the reparation payments that Germany had to make that placed such a heavy burden upon the German government and thus the German people.  People can talk about how Hitler also played the shame card over the loss during World War One.  It is true he did do that, but during good economic times the audience for such an argument would be much smaller than during bad times.  The audience that Hitler had was larger because of the economy and other issues only helped to cement his control upon the people.

Germany suffered massive problems when the debt was 80% of the GDP and democracy collapsed when debt was 250% of the GDP.  Reparations during this time accounted for over half of the government budget.  Think about it, over half of the tax income of the government went outside the borders and supported foreign governments and some wonder how someone like Hitler was able to come to power? 

So how in the hell do I compare this to the USA’s debt?

First let me remind you that the USA’s credit rating has dropped twice during the Obama years.  The lower your credit rating the more interest you have to pay to finance your debt.  So it costs you more money just to carry your debt, even before you pay it back!  Do you realize that right now 50% of the US budget is financed not by tax revenues but is deficit?  The total taxes paid by all Americans, to all governments (Fed, State and local) is almost 33% of our GDP!  The US deficit is almost equal to the income of all State governments combined!  So if you double your state income tax, your state sales tax and state corporate taxes, then you can balance the budget.  The only problem with that idea is that it will kill the economy.  Corporations will run overseas and people will buy fewer goods, so tax income will drop.  This will force governments to raise taxes even further.  I say governments because states and local governments will not be able to make enough cuts to cover expenses, so they will also raise taxes.  Even if things stabilize, how strong will the economy be if you are paying combined taxes totaling 2/3 of your income?  

One must remember that the credit rating will continue to drop and this will add to the cost of borrowing money, which will only add to the budget problems the government faces!  Think of Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Italy and even UK and France.

Now what will happen when an environment like this is happening or threatens to happen?  Extremist groups will become more normal.  People will cast blame on minorities for the ills that affect society.  The most likely targets will be Muslims, African Americans, Asian Americans, Latinos and Jews; most likely in that order.  Or maybe the Occupy Wall Street types will get their way and the ones that will be held to blame are bankers, bakers and candle stick makers.  I know, sarcasm, but you get my point.  People will not be thinking rationally and will just want to see someone burn to take responsibility for the position that they are in.  This is mob mentality, human psychology; it is a weakness that is in all of us!  It is NOT a rational thought process.  It is scapegoating.   

You may think I am insane to suggest that any dictatorship could take power in the USA.  You can even point to the fact that times were tougher during the 1930s, than they are today.  That is true, for now.  Franklin D Roosevelt had an advantage that our present government does not have; his debt was not over 100% of the GDP.  He had the room to spend money and run up the debt.  He only pushed the debt over 100% after the US entered World War Two!  The fact is that the USA has never run a debt over 100% during peacetime, until now.  Now you can say that the USA is at war, against terrorism, in Afghanistan; whatever.  The fact is that World War Two the entire country was mobilized to fight the Nazi war machine, which is not the case today.  Since we entered Afghanistan and Iraq the costs associated with these actions were put on credit cards, without even a plan put forth on how to pay the bill!

You may think I am insane, but I see two groups with competing visions for the USA.  One wants to create a utopia, which to me resembles Brave New World.  The other wants to use our own war machine to secure resources.  These are only the groups that are on the radar, can you imagine the ones that are waiting in the wings?  The fact is that Americans will not willingly accept a lower lifestyle.  We may even be willing to pay the cost in blood to maintain our lifestyle.  The problem is that the world cannot sustain growth at a pace that will enable us to be able to dig ourselves out of debt. That is unless we take something from our neighbors on this rock in space or we have to find another place to gather resources in space.  The only problem with the second half of that theory is that NASA has suffered from budget cuts.  If we do not push our future into space, we will run out of resources on the Earth.

Back on subject: The debt sky rockets and the economy tanks.  What do you think will happen when people have had enough?  We are connected less to the land than ever before and much more reliant upon the economic system that is in place.  We cannot just drop out of society and live off the land.  There are no unclaimed areas for us to run to and make a new life.  Fredrick Jackson Turner was a historian in the late 1800s who wrote a paper called: The Significance of the Frontier in American History.  His basic argument was that as long as there was free land in the USA it was able to siphon off anger that would have otherwise been directed at the government.  When pressure got too great in the states, people would overflow into the territories.  Before 1900 there was no more free land to be had, no way for the anger to be siphoned away from those in power. Today we can say one thing for sure, there is no place on this planet that you can just pack up and move to, hoping to survive anyways.  

Over the past 100 years population demographics have drifted from the south to the north, from the east to the west.  Even in our time areas that were considered safe now have the nation’s highest unemployment: Nevada 11.8%, Rhode Island 10.5%, California 10.2%, New Jersey 9.8%, North Carolina 9.6%, Michigan 9.3%, Mississippi 9.2%, South Carolina 9.1% and Georgia 9.0%.  These are just the states that are 9.0% or higher during August 2012.  Notice many of the states listed above would have been though boom areas a decade ago.  This also does not include the people who are under employed or just gave up looking for a job.  Some analysts say you can easily double the unemployment rate to include all groups.  The bureau of labor statistics said unemployment dropped to 7.8%, think about that.  That means 23 million Americans are unemployed.  If analysts are correct that means 46 million Americans are unemployed, under employed or have given up looking for work.  That means almost 1 in 6 Americans are just waiting to be so pissed off that they will accept anything that will improve their present situation!  That is a large force for someone to mobilize!

Now let me put my parable back into perspective.  What sort of inflation did Germany go through?  In 1921 the exchange rate was 64 Marks to the Dollar and near the end of 1923 it was 4,200,000,000,000 to the dollar. Unemployment in 1928 (when the German people were not interested in Hitler) was 8.4%, as Hitler gained power in 1930 it had grown to 15.3% and by the time he became chancellor it was over 30%.  “Yet the USA did not fall apart during the Great Depression!” you remind me.  The highest the unemployment rate has been in the USA was about 22% during the Great Depression.  It was also during this time that immigration came almost to a standstill because more people were emigrating, with one of the most popular locals being the USSR.  Now remember what I stated above, FDR did not have as heavy of a debt burden as the USA has today!  

Please do not tell me how much more civilized we are today and we as a people would never fall for a two bit want to be dictator. Do you really want me to start comparing the stability of the culture that “the greatest generation” lived in to our present time?  I am not saying that they had a perfect society, but I do think it is safe to say we are not as “civilized” as they were.

Now my favorite argument is, “well we can just default on the debt.”  Really?  The biggest holder of US debt is government related institutions, to the amount of 6.3 trillion!  China then has 1.1 trillion, other investors and savings bonds another 1.1 trillion (mostly in the USA), Japan another 1 trillion, pension funds 850 billion, mutual funds 650 billion, state and local governments 480 billion, UK 430 billion, insurance companies 250 billion.  Do you get the point?  If we default, not only will we hurt our own economy internally, but we will also alienate many strong allies.  Plus in 2012 interest on the debt is only 6% of the overall budget, so we would not save much money.  The 1.1 trillion that China holds is nothing but a drop in the bucket, well maybe a cup or two.  

The fact is that the cards have been dealt and one thing that we cannot afford to do Is try to bluff and win this hand!  If a real plan is not put forth bluffing would be pure suicide for us as a people and the majority of the world which relies on the strength of our economy.  It is the fact that the dollar is the world’s reserve currency which enables us to write blank checks and get away with carrying so much debt.

Let me take a short break and explain this concept so everyone understands.  Think of someone famous traveling through a country or state, this person stays at nice hotels, eats out every night.  When it comes time to pay for the services rendered they write a check.  On that check they draw something cute or put a positive comment on it about the service they received. Now so you will understand, the bank will not return the cleared check to you after deposit it.  So you do not deposit this check, instead you frame it, put it on your wall to show everyone that this person was here and what they thought of your business.  It is a blank check, since the amount on the check does not matter, it is never cashed!  As long as this can be kept up they will not have to pay for anything.  Eventually however this famous person will run out of places to stop at, they will return to places they have already visited and those checks will start to be cashed.  Even if they continue to find new locations to go to, the significance of their notes on the check will start to decline and the business will want the money over the bragging rights of the visit.  Basically this cannot be continued indefinitely without expecting people to start cashing these checks.

So what happens when another economy is strong enough to compete with the US Dollar?  Nations will drop the dollar like a hot potato!  Then all of a sudden the inflation that Germany went through becomes plausible.  This will increase the cost of imports, making many of the cheap products we have learned to rely on suddenly luxury goods.  Why do you think China is trying to strengthen its internal economy?  It knows if the dollar collapses the economy of China will suffer, but if they are not reliant on the US economy they can watch us self destruct.  Then we would become the source of cheap products for China.  Why do you think they continue to carry the US debt?  Why do you think they keep their own currency undervalued?   They know they are still addicted to the US economy and cannot afford to wean themselves off of it.  If we ever lose this position of power, they will be able to strike us where it hurts, in the wallet.

So what are we going to do?  What is going to happen?  I can only hope that my darkest fears are just that, my darkest fears.  I know what I will personally do if I am facing a potential dictatorship.  I will quote two famous Latin American revolutionaries, “I would rather die on my feet than live a lifetime on my knees.”  I am just not too good at taking orders from the kind of society we live in today, a totalitarian government will just make me go postal!

My apologies for drifting, we must realize the issues we face are very complex.  Any effort to explain what we are going through is easily destroyed if you do not accept the fact that there are many more factors that must be taken into account.  I accept the complexity of the issues we deal with.  I do not claim to understand them completely.  I only know that I understand them enough that it scares the shit out of me.  The most important thing to know and understand, where the point of no return is; at what point will the debt reach a breaking point that we cannot dig ourselves out of?  That I do not believe anyone truly knows the answer to.  I would like to think the American people are strong, intelligent and innovative enough to pull themselves out of anything, but I know that is not true.  There is a point where the momentum of the debt will continue to carry on and we will not be able to stop it.  It is at this point that my fears of a right, left or some new kind of dictatorship could pop up in the USA.  Already we see the Democrats attacking the Constitution, trying to turn us into subjects from citizens.  The GOP is not much better since they do not want to face the fact that society changes and they are stuck in first gear.  Do not even get me started on Libertarians and other third parties.

As I/we face the future, I can only think of the ancient Chinese proverb/curse, “May you live in interesting times.”  You know what, despite all the challenges we are going through as a people and the risk of falling short... I would not change this for the world, or all the tea in China :P

Thank you, I hope I did not bore anyone too much.  I did not realize exactly what I was biting off to chew until I started to bury myself in it. 

2nd Amendment

It has been two years since I last wrote anything, my apologies.  I have been very busy with school and work.  I make no excuses when real life takes away from the Internet, since it would be pathetic if I avoided real life for an online existence.  With that intro, I will not talk about someone that lost touch with reality (Aurora).  Yet what they did is threatening to have ramifications on us all as a nation!  I am talking about the call for gun control in the wake of the Aurora shooting.

Before I attack the position of gun control advocates I must clarify my understanding of the Constitution and the Second Amendment.  As someone who has a history degree, I believe we must understand the intentions of the Founding Fathers when they wrote the Constitution.  The USA was a young country and the Articles of Confederation were not doing their job in a way that empowered the country.  So there was a battle in the direction that the country needed to head.  That battle is one that still is going on today, State vs Federal power/rights.  Yet with the Articles of Confederation the Federal Government was basically impotent.  So right or wrong a group (The Federalist) attempted to increase the power at the Federal level and replace the Articles of Confederation with a different document that would enable the country to grow and become powerful.  The intentions of the Federalist are questioned to this day (just as State rights are still an issue), but we must remember how and why the country was born.

The fact is that English Kings were oppressive over their minions.  This oppression was less in England than in various colonies around the world.  Within colonies the power of the King was almost absolute.  We are all familiar with the call, "No taxation without representation."  This is because the King increased taxes to pay the debt incurred from his wars around the globe with France.  There is much more, if taxes were the main issue our Amendments would be in a different order.  The English Crown had a very long history of using its power to limit the threat of the masses in two key ways.  The first was by locking up radicals, limiting Free Speech.  The second was by not allowing serfs to own weapons (Right to Bear Arms).  Those who owned weapons owed a direct duty to the sovereign.  This cycle of oppression had kept the English Crown in power for 710 years prior to the US Revolution.

The Founding Fathers were actually a divided lot.  Thus you have the Federalist vs the Anti Federalist, during the debates.  There were also many minor factions within each group.  In the end they realized that free flow of ideas and though was required to prevent tyranny.  So we have our First Amendment, speech, religion, press and assembly (short version).  Remember that this was also a time of religious oppression and the first settlers at Plymouth Rock were religious outcasts from England.  In short they wanted to respect the rights of the individual and their ability to live a happy life free from oppression. 

This promise is not enough unless you put teeth into it.  That is where the Second Amendment comes into play.   "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed."  This insured that states would be able to have militias to protect themselves from Federal tyranny.  It also guaranteed the people's right to bear arms (weapons).  It does not guarantee the militia's right to bear arms, the militia served the state.  Yes the militia is made up of people, but since the militia is a military force it is obvious that they would bear arms!  The reason the people had to have the right to bear arms was that the history of the English Crown in preventing the possession of weapons by the masses.  The Founding Fathers realized that the best defense against tyranny was an armed populace.  No matter the problems caused by said populace that was a lesser evil than that caused by tyranny.

Doubt the accuracy of my assessment?  Serfs were only armed when they were put in service of the King and then the arms were always less than those of those who served the King directly.  This is common practice throughout history on this planet.  In Japan the people were forbidden to own a sword, which was reserved for the Samurai.  The shots that started the US Revolution were the Battles of Concord and Lexington.  The purpose of the English excursion?  To confiscate/destroy weapons and limit the ability of the Colonist to resist English Law/oppression.

The Second Amendment, with the threat of an armed populace is the cornerstone of the Constitution!  The foundation is Free Speech.  It is the threat of armed citizenry that makes it difficult for a potential tyrant to gain absolute control over the masses.  This is paranoia, but it is so ingrained in our culture that no President, no matter how much power they wielded ever thought about touching the Second Amendment.  The outcry of the people would be absolute.  Right or wrong, we as a people do not trust our leaders that much.

Now gun control advocates say that the Founding Fathers would have thought twice if they saw the firepower that exists in today firearms, plus the degree of violence that we perpetuate on each other in society.  I disagree and I will give you some historical examples.  First there is the famous duel between sitting Vice President Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton.  Hamilton was one of the main influences amongst the Federalist and Burr fought in the Continental Army.  There is also the famous physical confrontation between Griswold and Lyon during a session of Congress.  Violence, even among the elite was commonplace.  In 1850 Henry Foote pulled a pistol and pointed it at Thomas Benton on the Senate floor.  Finally in 1856 Preston Brooks severely beat Charles Sumner with a cane.  Does this sound like a people that abhorred violence?  I am sorry but our culture is based in violence.  The Founding Fathers were the well to do of society and they put their lives and livelihood at risk for freedom.  I believe they knew the risk it entailed, along with arming the populace to prevent tyranny. 

"Well times and technology have changed.  Those were muskets and now much more firepower is very easily accessible."  Your point is?  Yes times and technology have changed drastically.  However I do not hear people saying we need to limit free speech.  Two hundred years ago we did not have radio, television or the Internet.  Times and technology do change, where is the outcry to limit free speech?  Just because technology has changed at a rapid pace does not mean that human nature has changed as quickly.  Our mentality is still lagging decades, if not centuries behind technology.  The good and bad of that fact means we have not outgrown the Constitution and how it protects us from ourselves.  There is a reason that much of what the Founding Fathers wrote still strikes a chord over 200 years later, because we are not so different.  Maybe one day we can sit down as a people and say, "this can be changed, that can be updated."  Today however, with how polarized our society is, I do not believe we are there.

"So you think you can fight the government if they become tyrannical?  That is foolishness and suicide!  How do you expect to be able to stand up to tanks, jets and drones?  No matter what weapons you own!"  You are right of course, but some people would rather die free than live as slaves.  Which when you do not have freedom, you are little more than a slave.  Yet I do not expect anyone to accept such an idealistic statement.  So I will attempt to package a different response.  An armed insurrection is difficult to discredit and keep quiet.  I am not talking about a small group of militia nut jobs or rogue criminal elements that are easily dismissed.  I am talking about a segment of the population that chooses to stand up and fight.  This will create doubt in those who are serving the tyrannical government and are supposed to crush said insurrection.  Much the same thing happened during the Russian Revolution and the civil war that followed.  People doubted if they were truly serving the right cause when they were expected to kill their fellow countrymen.  This adds to the difficulty of a tyrant coming to power because of an armed populace.

On the other hand, if the people are disarmed and come under the grip of a tyrant you are left with only two options.  Civil disobedience (sorry it is joke and an entire blog in itself) and terrorism are the only choices for those desiring freedom.  The reason terrorism is the second choice is because it will rely on improvised munitions, which homemade explosives are the best example.  To use explosives in a way to promote your cause and avoid being captured/killed means you will set off bombs in various ways and at various targets.  Since there is no direct confrontation the tyrant can dismiss these actions as those of criminals and with no face attached to rebellion the masses are more likely to buy into it.  Plus we have to remember that such actions are not guaranteed to affect their planned targets in the ways desired and collateral damage will be much higher.  In short a bombing will look more like a cowards way out to the masses than the romantic ideal of a freedom fighter standing up against oppression.

"Well President --BLANK-- (insert the name of any President; past, present or future) can be trusted, they are good and honest person that would never abuse power or commit any wrong!"  Just for argument I will accept that you are right and that a better person has never been a leader.  They can avoid corruption, such an amazing leader we make them President for life and they live a long life.  Eventually, somewhere down the line someone will come into power that will not be so good and perfect.  This person that falls short maybe tempted to abuse the power in which they have been bestowed.  Without arms the masses are left with no means to resist and many people will die for no reason other than the fact that the masses accepted the oppression because they had no other option.

This brings me to the loss of life caused by mass shootings and other acts of violence.  The USA has a population of over 300 million and in 2011 less than 10,000 were murdered with firearms.  That means that less than one in every thirty thousand Americans is murdered with a firearm every year.  How many die from drug overdoses, car accidents, insufficient medical attention, drownings, and suicide?  Did you know that you are seven times as likely to die from diabetes in the USA than be murdered with a firearm?  That means diabetes is a greater killer than guns, it does not seem to make sense, but check the CDC website.  Where is the outcry to deal with all these ills of society that take more lives every year than guns?

Violence is tragic, but it will not be stopped by gun laws.  Criminals will always have access to firearms.  Do not let gun bans or promised laws fool you.  When a product is outlawed access does become more difficult, but that only increases the value of a product.  When there is a profit to be made from an illegal item an underground economy will pop up to fill that need.  This happened during alcohol prohibition during the 1920s and today with drug laws.  Do you want to add guns to this mix?  No longer will criminals be gaining access to guns designed for civilian purpose, they will get weapons with military specifications.  It is cheaper to buy a military AR-15 or AK-47 than it is one that has been modified for civilian use.  I know you do not believe me, so I will try to explain it.  Gun manufacturers do not build these weapons with civilians in mind, so these guns must be bought as military weapons and then modified in a way that prevents their return to military ability for civilian sale.  No, you cannot single these weapons out for a ban (as Clinton did).  The reason I give you is logical and personal at the same time.  Someone I discussed the Second Amendment with online let out a Freudian slip, "Can't we start by banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines?"  NO!  We cannot start anyplace!  Because I do not trust you in the least about where this will lead! 

To close this up, I will point out that we cannot mess with the Constitution and the rights of three hundred Americans because 10,000 people are murdered with firearms.  We have no guarantee that any additional laws would have been effective enough to save any of those lives.  Gun control advocates say, "If a single life is saved, it is worth getting rid of the Second Amendment."  Hell no!  I already said that the lives of 10,000 are not worth touching the Constitution and you are willing to trash it for a single life?  All those people that died fighting for and defending the Constitution and you want to give it up for a single life?  I am sorry but that has ZERO rational.  Because as I tried to point out; without the Second Amendment the only protection that there is for all the other Amendments is the good will of those in power.  The only Presidents that I would have trusted with that power I can count on one hand and none of them are living today!  Even though I say I trust them, I am unsure if I could have trusted the Congress that existed during their term or the Supreme Court Justices that served on the High Court at that time.  The present status quo must be preserved and not touched in anyway what so ever!

I think I am officially old now :(

In the past I wrote exclusively about political issues, this time I will try to mix it up a little with light hearted things, much like what I am going to say right now...

Yes I am concerned that I am officially old. I quit smoking more years ago than I can remember and a side effect was I gained 100 lbs before I noticed what was happening. I know that statement is hard to swallow. Yet it is true, as my lungs cleared up, I felt so much better that I never noticed the excess weight I was putting on. I am sure it also had a lot to do with the crap that I was eating at the work cafeteria. I always put off getting myself in shape, I always had an excuse. I was driving tractor trailer and just could not eat right, I was working full time, going to school full time and had no time to workout or even cook. Always great excuses, they convinced me of my inability to change my situation. Well I went to the doctor in October and I was 297 and I freaked! I had hit 300 before, but I was determined to not hit it again. Plus the fact that I had put on almost 30 pounds in the past year made me decide it is time to get serious and make a change.

Well since October of 2009 to today I have changed a lot of how I function. I am learning about foods, trying to eat right, stay away from crap that is just not good for you and today I think I made the ultimate sacrifice. I was looking at cereal, trying to decide what cereal I can eat that does not have high fructose corn syrup in it. I have been getting total, and will grab a bowl when I do not have time for something better. Well today I discovered Grape Nuts, have not opened the package and I am afraid to. Yet the fiber will do me good.

I am also doing almost 100 miles a week on my exercise bike, along with a reasonable deficit of calories on my intake, since mid October I have lost 49 lbs. Once I get down to 230 or 220 I plan to start a serious work out schedule to get myself back into the shape I was in 1998, before my life slowed down and my weight started to go up.

Grape Nuts thing still through me for a loop... time to cook some fish...

think...

Not being rich,
How can I understand a rich world.
Not being happy,
How can I depict a happy world.
Not having any dreams,
How can I possibly sell dreams.
If you lie, you usually get caught.

Welcome to my world

I am an educated thug. A junior high school drop out with a BA. An inner city punk, living in the middle of nowhere 25 years later. I have done more than my share of drugs, yet despise them and believe they should be legal. Someone with no faith in any mythical higher power, yet I would pick up my guns to protect someone's ability to practice their faith. I cannot be called a patriot, yet I love where I live. Basically I seem to be a master of contradictions with what I believe. I see myself as a mirror of society and the human race as a whole though. I am not the contradiction, the contradiction is our society as a whole!

I will be drawing attention to all of these things in what I write. I will be very blunt and severe in my judgments. I will most likely not allow responses on most of my writings. I do not care what pseudo intellectuals have to say. I only want to make people think, to contemplate everything they do and say. If we have an honest opinion of all the challenges that face us as a species, then maybe a solution that has a degree of sustainability will be achievable. Yet above all else, I will be calling people out for the bullshit that they believe/preach. Practice what you preach, because being a hypocrite is the unforgivable sin.

Why Suscitate? "To rouse; to excite; to call into life and action."
Why a-nihilism? People do tend to be a bit nihilistic by nature and a-nihilism is a play on words for annihilate, which is a reference to our violent nature as a species. I am no hippie who says all we need is love. I say we could probably progress better as a species if we accepted our violent nature and put limits on it rather than denied it. Also violence (war) has been a part of diplomacy ever since the first city states were formed.

Just to warn you, no issue is too taboo to embrace or attack. You have been warned. If you do not like what I have to say, then start your own blog and make it coherent! If the references you use to support your position are shit, just sit down and shut the fuck up. Because if you do not realize that Wikipedia is not a legitimate source, not only should you not vote, you probably should not breath. One more thing, I know my grammar is shit. Read above, jr high drop out. Obviously I did not get a BA in English.