Public servants and their lies

To begin with, the very nature of service, signifies that the person so serving, is actually serving the person or the public in a manner in which they are truthful, diligent, and competent; for anything less than that, is a form of service but not really good service.  Those that are our public servants are meant to serve the public in a manner in which their actions are always aboveboard and for the greater good; for if not that, then their service is at best conflicted, and at worse, corrupt.

When a given individual lies, or is deceitful, such can be subject to civil or criminal penalties, depending upon the circumstances and what has occurred.  For instance, being deceitful in order to procure governmental aid is considered to be a crime, and lying such as in committing perjury, is also a crime.  People are put in jail all of the time for essentially lying or being deceitful; in addition, lying or being deceitful can often mean the loss of one’s employment.  So, for an absolute certainty those in the general public that lie duly suffer the penalties, thereof.

On the other hand, there are our public servants, of which, by virtue of the public lacking full transparency and disclosure of the deals, communications, and negotiations so done, perhaps unwittingly permits the opening of deliberate misdirection and deceit by those public servants; in which when that general public is lacking in the ability or the means for robust investigation by independent sources as to what is really going on, thereby places those in the general public in a position in which they have to trust that their public servants are actually performing their duties in a conscientious and fair manner, but not actually knowing whether or not this is true.  Further to the point, when public servants are seemingly permitted to deceive the public through their lack of full disclosure, including personal conflicts, or by their distortion of real events, to conform, for instance, with the narrative that those in high positions impress upon them to follow, this all serves to obfuscate what is actually occurring -- creating thereof that pathway of lies and deceits by those public servants which are subsequently sold as being true, when they actually are not.

Additionally, there should never be a construct in which those on the outside, such as the general public, have to duly suffer for their crimes, lies, and deceits; whereas, more times than not, those that are public servants, are typically never held accountable for the same, and almost never personally held to suffer for their crimes, which often are far more damaging to the public and the country that they are supposed to serve, than the acts of just one individual person. 

When public servants are seemingly permitted carte blanche to do whatever that they feel is necessary or advantageous for the agenda that actuates them, of which by doing so they do not disclose their conflicts of interest, or their deceptions, and of which these public servants also have an implied immunity from those that would have the ability to prosecute them, then the general public has been betrayed by those that been placed in that responsible position to represent them.

The argument could be made and should be made, that those public servants that betray the public interests for their own selfish or self-serving interests, or in obedience to that unelected power that unduly influences them, that they should be held accountable for their damage to their country and their fellow countrymen -- which is a far more insidious bad act, by virtue of their misapplication of vested authority.

The more laws the more crimes so accused of

The United States of America is a nation of laws, which on the surface, would appear to be a very good thing.  After all, living in a nation, in which there is “rule of law” typically means that the citizens of such a nation, are protected from arbitrary law so enforced as well as cruel and unusual punishment, inflicted.  Yet, in just about everyway the United States is, especially for those that are its poorest and its most vulnerable, a nation that exerts an incredible amount of power against the defenseless and un-championed, which basically eviscerates the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” as well as ignoring completely one’s right to a “speedy trial”, by replacing these with onerous bail amounts, which thereby places those that are without monetary resources and connections, in a state of incarceration, pending a “trial,” which more often than not is superseded by a coerced plea bargain.

Those that are the prosecutors as well as the District Attorneys throughout America, are supposed to represent the people’s interest, and perhaps in some ways, they do.  What they far too often fail to do is actually to be fair, to seek the whole truth, and to see that justice is served; preferring instead to assert their power and proclivities in a manner in which they are able to achieve the result that they so desire, which simply put, is convictions, while caring not a whit about anything else.

Far too often prosecutors and their enablers “cheat the system,” by first of all, taking what are pretty much cut and dry cases and adding charge upon charge, so an assault upon one’s girlfriend, for instance, becomes not just one assault charge, but then there also is added a separate charge such as “assault by strangulation,” along with child endangerment, kidnapping, disturbance of the peace, and so on and so forth.  Another strategy so used, is to take something in which the circumstances distinctly point to a manslaughter case, such as in a vehicle accident, in which the accused has not been reckless; yet, the accused is subsequently charged with vehicle homicide.  In short, when many charges are “tacked on” to a particular crime, this is known as horizontal overcharging, and when a charge is taken to a higher and more onerous level, this is known as vertical overcharging; of which many prosecutors are prone to one or the other or both.

The main problem with all of these charges being added on or of the charges being upgraded to a higher and more severe penalty, is that in a nation in which negotiation, is part and parcel of the justice system, this basically gives the prosecution, which is already an expert in the law as well as being an insider of the justice system, far more ammunition than the defendant will ever have, and when such a defendant is also impoverished, ill-educated and lacking the means to bail out, then the prosecutor clearly has an awesome amount of power to get the result that the prosecution so desires, which thus occurs time and time again.

Regrettably, because the justice system in America would grind to a halt if there was no plea bargaining involved, the logic behind the adding of and the vertical increasing of charges, is so that the prosecution can more easily come to a resolution with the defendant and thereby move on to the next case and then the next.  This so signifies, that those prosecution agents that do not pad charges, are more often going to be faced with the unenviable task of somehow taking more of their cases to court, for without the bargaining chip of reducing charges or eliminating most of the charges, then the options so of, are few, and more actual trials subsequently will occur.

The Commander in Chief is pretty much a paper tiger

The President of the United States, who is statutorily limited to no more than two terms, or eight years, is per Constitutional law, the Commander in Chief of the armed forces; of that there is no issue, but recognize this, that unlike a given monarch or a dictator, the President of the United States, because of term limits, is functionally only going to be in charge of those armed forces for a relatively short period of time; as opposed to generals, who though seemingly under the President’s command, can literally serve for decades.  Further to the point, the United States is a global empire, with a defense budget, which is absolutely gargantuan, so to believe that somehow, the President, is in effect, the Commander in Chief, in any real meaningful sense, is disingenuous.

In point of fact, it would be truer to state, that Presidents, whether a Democrat or a Republican, come and go, but those that run the military-industrial-technology complex, seemingly keep on serving, continuously, irrespective of whether a Democrat or a Republican is elected as President.  One would think, that upon election, that a given President, might want to change who and who not were the generals that the President would like to see serve under that Presidency; something more in line with the fact that the President seldom keeps any former cabinet members from the previous party’s administration, but typically appoints their own; yet with a few exceptions, here and there, pretty much generals keep on keeping on, regardless of who the Commander in Chief is.

All this basically signifies that despite the title of Commander in Chief, the military-industrial-technology complex, bows to no President, but rather trains that President in the way that things actually are, as compared to perhaps how things were meant to be.  So then, when pliant mass media outlets talk about this President’s war or that President’s war, they are not being forthright, for they know that such wars, engagements, battles, and strikes against foreign enemies and targets are actually determined by that military-industrial-complex without any meaningful input or much debate from the Commander in Chief.

Again, logic tells us that any outsider, such as a President, has absolutely no hope of impressing their demands upon any institution, let alone the biggest and mightiest institution, if that outsider, does not control all the underlings of significance that are necessitated in order to therefore have their specific demands and desires so met.  The President is essentially working with career military officers, who know for a certainty that the President simply does not have the working knowledge, let alone the insider secret knowledge, to impact or even to influence much of anything that these generals are involved with.  This basically means that the wars and engagements that this nation involves itself in, come almost exclusively from the military-industrial-technology complex, for Congress ceded its power to “declare war” decades ago to that same complex, and hence the President for all intents and purposes, is reduced to the simple role of being the Chief Cheerleader.

Those that wonder why America insists upon being a global empire and thereby putting its nose into everybody else’s business time and time again, are barking up the wrong tree when they blame the President for such; as opposed to blaming the military-industrial-technology complex, though that is an unelected power that answers not to the people.

Imagine your life suddenly without credit cards

Credit cards are so ubiquitous in today’s society, enough so, that most people don’t really comprehend that credit cards and therefore credit card debt is still a relatively new phenomena, which has become normalized in the present era.  Americans’ “love” or need their credit cards so much, that as reported by valuepenguin.com, “…the average balance for consumers is $5,315,” and that “Americans owe $807 billion” in total, on that debt.  Additionally, for a significant amount of consumers, they would find it difficult to manage their day-to-day finances without their credit cards, because they are so needed in order to make common purchases such as for groceries, restaurants, gasoline, as well as general shopping needs, in which they essentially borrow money now, in order to pay it back later.

So then, for many Americans, the sudden removal of all credit cards from their repertoire of credit card balances, would functionally create a situation in which they would have to therefore find some other source of getting money, reliably, in order to hold them over paycheck to paycheck, such as through “payday loans”, pawn shops, and the like.  This thus signifies that credit cards for a significant swath of Americans are pretty much a requirement, and to therefore have no usage of them, would create serious havoc and financial distress for them; despite the fact, that many credit cards issuers charge a princely sum in regards to the interest on that credit card debt, as well as fairly hefty penalties and late fees for failure to adhere properly to the terms of that credit card issuer. Basically, it could be said, that many Americans don’t have a problem with the paying of these fees and interest charges, as long as they are able to buy what they need “now”, which supersedes their concern about the cost for doing so, at some later point in time.

Then, there are those others that have credit card debt, but they steadily pay off that debt in full each and every month, so rather than credit cards being seen for them as an expense in regards to fees and interest charges, they don’t need to worry about that, since they pay such off in full each month, thereby actually benefiting by the “float” between the time that they bought their goods as compared to when they have to actually pay, along with the salient fact, that a lot of those consumers are in addition receiving financial benefits from their credit card issuer, such as “cashback” and the like.  For these consumers, pretty much, all the advantages that they receive, of which, there are some real good benefits, come essentially from those other consumers that don’t pay off their accounts in full while also suffering from penalties and fees.  The bottom line is that when credit cards were first issued those cards only went to the most credit worthy consumers, but consumers such as that, who are diligent and timely in their payments, aren’t the type of customer those financial institutions can make any real money from; rather, those that issue credit cards prefer instead to have a strong mix of consumers that they can shear like a sheep, over and over again.  This then, is the salient reason, that credit card companies and the credit card business are pretty much here to stay; and the only real reason why any credit card company would suddenly take away one’s credit has everything to do with their confidence in their ability to keep on shearing.

“To amass military power without regard to our economic capacity would be to defend ourselves against one kind of disaster by inviting another.”

In President Eisenhower’s 1953 State of the Union address, he stated, the quotation seen above.  Recognize, as well, that Eisenhower was both the former Supreme Allied Commander during World War II, in addition to being an esteemed five-star general; so then, for an absolute certainty he understood the military at its deepest possible level, which signified that his words absolutely were germane as well as being absolutely relevant.  Yet, here we stand, decades upon decades later, and the military-industrial-technology complex has never had more monies allocated to it, despite the fact that America has not had a Congressional declared war since World War II.  It would be one thing, if America had subsequently become a country in which every single citizen lived above the poverty level, in safe neighborhoods, with good public educational systems, and adequate healthcare, but that isn’t the case, at all.  Indeed, America runs incredibly high national government deficits, of which, the military-industrial-technology complex has clearly been allocated billions upon billions of dollars, that have essentially been siphoned away from the necessary infrastructure and the needs of its own citizenry in order to feather the beds of those of that complex, at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable of Americans.

The disaster that Eisenhower warned us of, is upon us, of which this is the salient reason why America trails so many of its contemporaries in regards to a fair and more equitable distribution of income and wealth; along with America consistently ranking no better than mediocre in testing scores of its high school students, which is further compounded by the rather inconvenient fact, that America’s functional illiteracy rate is embarrassingly high.  So too, the good health and life expectancy of the citizens in America -- which is the exact same nation that represents the breadbasket of the world, is extremely disappointing in comparison to other western nations.  Further, America in comparison to those other western nations, suffers from significantly higher rates of violent crime as well as incarceration. 

America seems to live by the motto of “might is right,” which while being good business for the military-industrial-technology complex, does nothing of substance to help to ameliorate, let alone eliminate poverty from this nation.  While there is absolutely no doubt that America’s military power and prowess is second to none; what has not occurred is what should have occurred, which is America should lead the world in being the greatest nation that the world has ever seen in regards to the standard of living of all of its citizens, which it clearly does not successfully represent.

Every armament so made and subsequently utilized is an armament that is in essence, used for a destructive and not a constructive purpose.   No civilization of merit could conceivably be built up by exclusively destructive acts, for clearly what is needed instead is well planned out constructive acts to be performed, in order for that civilization to thereupon have a fair opportunity to grow and to improve itself.    In America, it seems to be that those that run it, prefer for America to be a feared nation, as opposed to it being a fair and just nation.  Those, though, that reject justice and fairness, for might, as if such is right, are doomed to ultimately reap the bitter fruits of such a short-sighted and misguided philosophy.

The continual betrayal of the 14th and 15th Amendments

Upon the conclusion of the War Between the States, the 13th-15th Amendments were ratified; of which the 13th Amendment abolished slavery, the 14th Amendment defined citizenship, therefore permitting those that were previously enslaved to become citizens, and the 15th Amendment codified the enfranchisement of blacks, previously denied the power and privilege of voting.  This subsequent change was profound, for those blacks so living in the Southern States, were many in numbers, and those franchised numbers meant for the first time that blacks actually got local, county, State, and Federal representation, and of which the first black so elected to the House of Representatives was Hiram Rhodes Revels in 1870; yet, only 32 years later, George H. White became the last black congressman in that body; until Oscar DePriest in 1928, was elected, but not to a Southern congressional district, but instead to a district, dominated by blacks in Chicago. 

So, in effect, though the Civil War ostensibly freed blacks, and gave blacks both citizenship as well as voting rights; the Southern white infrastructure, though defeated, ultimately were able to snatch back everything that they had lost in the Civil War and basically returned the black man to a condition of abject peonage, in those re-constituted Southern States, and it was not until 1971, when the District of Columbia was allowed Congressional representation, that any black man from the South was part, once again, of the House of Representatives, through the special election of Walter Fauntroy, of which Representative Fauntroy was a non-voting delegate to that body.

This thus signifies that the blood, sweat, and tears so devoted in good measure so as to defeat those that seceded from this Union of States, with these rebels also drawing first blood in that Civil War, that cost the lives of so many, were, in essence, never put out of business, but only temporarily did they have to cede some of their power, which they ultimately claimed with a vengeance, right back.  So what of those of color, that were clearly not represented in this national government, as well as local, State, and county governments for decades upon decades, and of which, the racial gerrymandering within States, as now in effect in the present day, still diminishes their fair representation?

This country is supposed to be a country of meritocracy, justice, fairness, and opportunity, yet it has historically closed the door upon all those that do not match the color of those that are the power brokers of it, and even when those of color are able to get some sort of representation, it appears that that representation is always to be a subset of their actual franchised or should-be franchised numbers.  This is indicative of a systemic problem which has not been robustly resolved through Constitutional Amendments or even through strong Civil Rights laws, but remains until this day, an ever-present thorn in the side of those that are still on the receiving end of suffering through this perpetual raw deal.

All that said, at least American governance deserves some credit for attempting to be a "melting pot" of different creeds, nationalities and opinions; but alas attempting is not the same thing as accomplishing, and any governance that fails to live by the spirit of the law, is that governance which has betrayed its liberty and justice for all.

“The soul that is within me no man can degrade”

The above quotation comes from the inestimable Frederick Douglass and is as apropos now as it was back when it was first stated.  The dilemma that we have is that so many of us living in this material world, are unable to disassociate ourselves from our five senses, alongside of our ego that pretty much acts as if it is captain of the ship; but that mindset isn't correct, as that which is physical is not eternal, and that which we so often treat as being permanent actually is not.  In reality, we are our soul, and that soul, is eternal, unchanging, and perfect.  All the human errors that we make, as well as the good that we do, are part and parcel of the adventure that incarnating into human form onto this earth, so provides; but that which limits and hinders us in this world, does not exist in our soul, it never has and it never will.

We are born into this world to take on the identity that we agreed to incarnate in, and once brought into this dimension, we while being masters of our own thoughts, our decisions, as well as the deeds so done, are not though able to ever make this world bend to our desires, for we have not the power, and never will.  Once here, we have to play by the rules that this planet represents, fair or foul, and within this dimension, all sorts of things are going to happen, of which we are merely the players within a grand play.  This does not indicate that what we do or say, here, does not matter, for it most certainly does; but rather that what so happens here, affects not our soul, but rather the aura of what we believe that we so represent and of which we are ultimately the ones solely responsible in the re-aligning of ourselves to the universal law of Godliness, or if we insist, to exist instead in a void, outside of pure blissfulness.

While we should shed tears for injustices so done, of which humanity spends and exerts far too much energy in such negativity; it is wise to also recognize, what Frederick Douglass know for a certainty, that no other human being or institution of this world, can take away or degrade our soul, for our soul is God, and God is immutable, unchangeable, and perfection.   Those that believe, that Christ crucified, was indicative of a game in which Christ was the loser; know not what they are talking about.  That which is eternal, cannot ever be vanquished; Christ's visible resurrection was proof of that; and those that get so caught up in worldly affairs so as to believe that there is no other existence beyond what they can see in the mirror, are delusional, for the physical is never the master of the eternal.

This world is a proving ground, so provided for each one of us, to demonstrate in action, as to whether our existence here, helped to make society better for our efforts, or not.  Those that have failed in that task, have not degraded their soul, but they have stepped away from that which is the necessary part for their needed advancement, and that, thereof, is the challenge that all must eventually successfully pass.

The Commander in Chief is pretty much a paper tiger

The President of the United States, who is statutorily limited to no more than two terms, or eight years, is per Constitutional law, the Commander in Chief of the armed forces; of that there is no issue, but recognize this, that unlike a given monarch or a dictator, the President of the United States, because of term limits, is functionally only going to be in charge of those armed forces for a relatively short period of time; as opposed to generals, who though seemingly under the President’s command, can literally serve for decades.  Further to the point, the United States is a global empire, with a defense budget, which is absolutely gargantuan, so to believe that somehow, the President, is in effect, the Commander in Chief, in any real meaningful sense, is disingenuous.

In point of fact, it would be truer to state, that Presidents, whether a Democrat or a Republican, come and go, but those that run the military-industrial-technology complex, seemingly keep on serving, continuously, irrespective of whether a Democrat or a Republican is elected as President.  One would think, that upon election, that a given President, might want to change who and who not were the generals that the President would like to see serve under that Presidency; something more in line with the fact that the President seldom keeps any former cabinet members from the previous party’s administration, but typically appoints their own; yet with a few exceptions, here and there, pretty much generals keep on keeping on, regardless of who the Commander in Chief is.

All this basically signifies that despite the title of Commander in Chief, the military-industrial-technology complex, bows to no President, but rather trains that President in the way that things actually are, as compared to perhaps how things were meant to be.  So then, when pliant mass media outlets talk about this President’s war or that President’s war, they are not being forthright, for they know that such wars, engagements, battles, and strikes against foreign enemies and targets are actually determined by that military-industrial-complex without any meaningful input or much debate from the Commander in Chief.

Again, logic tells us that any outsider, such as a President, has absolutely no hope of impressing their demands upon any institution, let alone the biggest and mightiest institution, if that outsider, does not control all the underlings of significance that are necessitated in order to therefore have their specific demands and desires so met.  The President is essentially working with career military officers, who know for a certainty that the President simply does not have the working knowledge, let alone the insider secret knowledge, to impact or even to influence much of anything that these generals are involved with.  This basically means that the wars and engagements that this nation involves itself in, come almost exclusively from the military-industrial-technology complex, for Congress ceded its power to “declare war” decades ago to that same complex, and hence the President for all intents and purposes, is reduced to the simple role of being the Chief Cheerleader.

Those that wonder why America insists upon being a global empire and thereby putting its nose into everybody else’s business time and time again, are barking up the wrong tree when they blame the President for such; as opposed to blaming the military-industrial-technology complex, though that is an unelected power that answers not to the people.

Your best necessitates harmony with the attributes of God

We are instructed throughout our life from all sorts of people and institutions, to do our best; but seldom discussed is the foundation that needs to be so created, so that each one of us, can actually perform at our absolute best.  After all, if the foundation is wrong, of which, it is, for instance, ever shifting, as if built upon sand, then our performances are going to not only be uneven and unbalanced, but they are ultimately not going to be our best, even when we are “so-called” giving it our best.  All those that truly want to achieve great accomplishments, must know for a certainty, that first we must not only master the basics so of, but we also need to have good core principles, that we stand securely upon, of which, these principles are not only correct, but strong and sturdy enough, that such can steadily withstand the strong and violent winds of adversity, jealousy, and hate.

In society, there are plenty of clever people, but mere cleverness is not often actually of any real benefit for humankind; so too, there are plenty of studious and smart people, but those that have learned well, do not by definition, necessarily know how to properly apply that knowledge for the overall good of society.  The very first thing to understand is that we are all in this together, and therefore any mindset that requires for its success some degree of exploitation of the other, is not going to be correct, for if in our getting ahead, we have to take advantage of the other, this is ethically wrong.  Further to the point, all those that put their ambitions ahead of morality and ethics, through their actions, directly or indirectly, are absolutely blind to being their best, for that pathway that they are on is clearly crooked, and is thereby not straight.

When we look for guidance through our intuition, prayer, worship, study, or reflection, it is important to comprehend fully that those that truly wish to be at their best, must be in harmony with the attributes of God; which are known by characteristics, such as selflessness, giving, patience, determination, forgiveness, fairness, temperance, prudence, and faith.  Ideally, we want to take on the aura of all those attributes that are most admirable as well as being necessary in order to help thereby to build and to create valued friendships, good neighborhoods, and to bring out the best in ourselves, as well as to contribute to doing so in others.

Most people wish for good things, but wishing is never the same thing as doing.  Additionally, those that wish for this or that, but have not taken the necessary and fundamental steps so needed to develop the core good characteristics to consistently be their best, are not going to find the lasting success that they so are wishing for.  First things come first, and this thus means that each one of us, needs to firstly recognize that all that which is not in harmony with God’s attributes is harmful not only for our own development, but for others, as well.  So then, make it your point to be that which you were always meant to be, by having the discipline and determination to be a true child of God, by being in harmony with that which knows right from wrong, and then, do your best to do right, always.

“…the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them, and the social conditions that cripple them…”

Back in 1959, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. expressed his viewpoint that any religion, let alone its government, that permits or does nothing to ameliorate or to correct the conditions that damns, cripples, and strangles the common man, is a religion which is moribund, and by implication, a government that has lost its justification, its integrity and its purpose.  Yet, decades later, while on the one hand, we can see that some meaningful progress has indeed been made, it must also be noted, that the same slums, and the same poor economic and social conditions are still eviscerating the opportunity and advancement of far too many Americans to the degree that their situation is well-nigh hopeless; and that is not the way that it should be, especially in consideration that America has all of the resources so needed to do the right thing, but not the will power or the follow through to actually accomplish such.

Every American deserves a fair chance to become something of merit, and the best way for that to occur is to see to it, that each American is provided with a good education, proper healthcare, safe housing, and nutritional food.   That is the minimum structure so needed to help out those that lack those very accouterments at the present time.  Further to the point, in order to have good citizens, each citizen needs to feel that they are an integral part and parcel of the great fabric that makes up this country, of which, part of achieving that goal comes down to the salient fact that all people that labor need to be properly compensated with a living wage; for all those that don’t make a living wage are thereby placed in the unenviable position of being both vulnerable as well as unstable in regards to their livelihood and their adequate existence.

There are far too many Americans that are impoverished, and none of this will improve, if the conditions that create this impoverishment are not fundamentally corrected to deal with what is all so visible, for anyone that cares enough to see it.  America has proven again and again that it can achieve incredible goals with remarkable speed, when it puts its head to the grindstone, is funded properly, and works with purpose to achieve those goals.  The fact that poverty and poor infrastructure is so systemic in America, is a true reflection that those that are the decision makers in this country, do not care to address what should be addressed in a meaningful manner.

One can measure and value a nation in any number of different ways, of which, one fair way, is how that country treats its poorest and most vulnerable of its citizens, for that, then, reflects fairly the soul of that nation.  In that regard, America should properly receive a failing grade, made all the more telling by the inconvenient fact that despite all of its resources and all of its strengths, it still has the same slums, and the poor economic and social conditions, that existed decades upon decades ago, with absolutely no prospect that any of this will change for the better, ever.

The hypocrisy of this a nation of immigrants

There are times, depending to a significant degree, on who is or who is not controlling the narrative, that some American are most vociferous in their belief, that this nation, the United States of America, is not now and never has been a nation of immigrants.  This is a lie, because those that founded what became the United States of America, were primarily Europeans that immigrated to this land, of which, this land, was not their own. Additionally, those people brought here against their will, as in enslavement, are themselves, immigrants, as well.  

Somewhat disappointingly, a lot of the desire to protect our borders from illegal immigration and the like, has more than a hint of hypocrisy to it; for there seems to be a belief, that it was fine for certain people to immigrate here, but that was back then, but this is now, and therefore there should be steps that must be adhered to for those now desiring to immigrate here, and illegal immigration is therefore both wrong and inimical to the integrity of the United States.

As true as that might be, and in understanding that there are sensible reasons why any country, should and needs to have sensible immigration policies to adhere to, what seems to be missing from the discussion is that if America really believes that what it so represents is the best form of governance in the world, which is thereby second to none; then one would logically think that America would thereby highly desire to see more immigration to this land, in order to take in all those that want to be part of the American experience as well as this land of opportunity, so as to therefore strengthen the fabric of this country, as opposed to locking them out.

There are a lot of reasons why some people are so bent on being against immigration, of which, a lot of that resentment, really comes down to the fact that people mistakenly believe that the more people that immigrate here, that aren’t the “right” people, then the less goods and benefits that there will be available for those that are already here.  If that was true, that would make sense; in fact, if more immigration meant less jobs for those that were born here, that would also make sense; but the reality of the situation is that humankind’s limits are limited only by its imagination, work ethic, and ingenuity.

Further to the point, it takes a whole lot of gall, for those that have been fortunate enough to be born here and to thereby become citizens by the simple virtue of that birthplace to somehow forget that their ancestors immigrated from a foreign land, for this then, is hypocrisy.  America is a very large nation in the sense of landmass, and while its population is fairly large, it pales in comparison to both China and India, so there is definitely plenty of room to grow; and it should also be acknowledged that America still represents the breadbasket of the world, along with having the strongest university system in the world, as well. Finally, there would be less illegal immigration to this country, if the policies put in place by governmental officials was far more accommodating and well-nigh encouraging for those desiring legal immigration by therefore increasing substantially the amount as well as the complexion of those so being permitted to immigrate here.  That then, would be consistent with a nation of immigrants, and would do justice to those immigrants that put forth the noble effort to build this nation into what it is today.

America has way too many low-wage paying jobs

According to brookings.edu “….53 million Americans between the ages of 18 to 64—accounting for 44% of all workers—qualify as “low-wage.” Their median hourly wages are $10.22.”  The sheer number of Americans that have low-wage jobs, is the very reason why the government needs to do far more to provide material assistance to those low-wage workers, along with making it a top priority to see that the minimum wage for employed workers is raised substantially for them, and as soon as possible.  The fact that there are so many low-wage workers in America with incomes that clearly don’t represent a living wage, is indicative that labor unions are no longer a material factor in America, and in absence of vibrant and effective labor unions, the national government has itself a duty to step in and see to it, that those that work, should receive compensation which is commensurate with a living wage.

The fact of the matter is that a significant swath of Americans is lacking in the power to negotiate the wages that they are going to be paid, and in absence of any meaningful regulations that will provide such to those that need it, they thus find themselves falling ever further behind, by virtue of the fact that the minimum wage over the years has neither kept in step with inflation, or productivity growth. In this same time, it is quite obvious that the superrich have themselves gotten ever richer, which is the direct consequence of taxing policies which are ineffective, as well as the fact that the government favors the elite, over the regular people; which probably has a lot to do with those that have lots and lots of money having both power and influence to boss their way, so as to get what they want.

When FDR was President, a new deal was legislated into place, which was very influential in the creation of the vibrant American middle class and of providing the safety net so needed for those that were the least and most vulnerable.  Decades later, America is still the wealthiest nation that the world has ever known, which signifies that America should be embarrassed and ashamed that it has such a huge portion of its population that is ill educated, ill fed, with poor healthcare, and are living in environments that aren’t healthy or all that safe. Because of this massive American wealth disparity which increases by the day, those that have it all have never had it any better; as contrasted to all those that have nothing, and are provided with a deal so rotten, that their dilapidated infrastructure provides them with no reasonable chance to extricate themselves from a very poor situation.

If this really is a government, of, for, and by the people; then it is high time for that government to utilize effectively its power to help level the playing field, so that those that are at the short end of the stick, at least get a little something of value from the American dream -- rather than those that have more than enough wealth for generations upon generations to come, getting ever more, at the expense of all those that have never even been provided with a fair chance or a stable base to build their own foundation upon.

“For your own protection” and other lies

One could say that semantics absolutely matter, and they seem to really matter when we hear things that are being done to us or for us, “for our own protection.”  It would be one thing, if that statement was actually true, in which a good Samaritan, for instance, interjected their self into a situation in which they actually protected us from some harm, of which, that does occasionally occur.  However, for the most part, when we hear things that are being done to us “for our own protection,” that typically is code for our freedom being taken away or our being denied something that we really want.

That is to say, for example, people use credit cards every single day, of which, a lot of times, the process of using such is seamless but there are also those other times when our credit card has been put on hold or frozen by the issuer and therefore that credit card is precluded from being used for a given transaction, in which, we as consumers, actually really needed that particular credit card charge to go through, right then and there.  Those that are bold enough or angry enough, to call up their credit card company about such a charge being declined, invariably find after going through the seemingly endless process of verifying who they are, that their credit card charge was denied “for their own protection,” which absolutely makes no sense when the person so calling is holding the very credit card with their name on it.  In truth, when credit card companies tell us that they have declined our credit card for our own protection, they are typically being disingenuous, for they aren’t actually protecting us, they are, in fact, protecting themselves; of which, typically, that particular credit card transaction has been flagged by some algorithm as being suspicious or fraudulent and because these credit card companies don’t want to be caught “holding the bag” of those charges so being made, they therefore declined what has been flagged as fraudulent or suspicious, for their safety comes before our convenience.

So too, those that are authority figures, such as parents or law enforcement officers, have a habit of saying that whatever is happening in which our freedom is being taken away from us, that this is “for our own protection;” but in reality, oftentimes these words are just used as an excuse to control us for the authoritarian figures’ benefit, and seldom for our own. In reality, most people know for a certainty when they need protection and when they do not, and more times than not, the times that we most critically need protection, there is no protection to be found; whereas, those times when we really don’t need protection, we often find ourselves overwhelmed by people that say they want to protect us and then proceed to do so in a manner in which we don’t really have a choice, which typically is not protection, but rather is the equivalency to constraint through coercion. 

In life, the least that we deserve is for people to say what they mean, and mean what they say, and most of those that claim that they want to protect us, really want to take our freedom away, in one form of another, which isn’t protection, at all.

The Martinsville Seven and government sanctioned lynching

In 1949, a white woman accused multiple black men of raping her at night, in Martinsville, Virginia, and of which, seven young black men, were subsequently put on trial, of which, no doubt, their "confessions" were an integral part of getting each of them convicted of rape, by an all-male and all-white jury.  All this occurred way before the day of DNA evidence and other typical forensic evidence that we would typically see in a rape trial of today.  The ultimate penalty for these seven young black men, was for each one of them to be executed by the state, through electrocution which was duly performed in 1953.  So then, in so many words, through the testimony of one white woman, essentially, seven black men were lynched by the state.

The actual events of the evening in question, may not ever be known for a certainty; what is certainly known, though, is that seven young black men were executed, which seems clearly to be a gross injustice, especially in consideration that a black woman, under similar circumstances, would not even get a hint of a trial of seven young white men so accused of raping her, and for a certainty none of those would ever be up for a possible death penalty, if somehow tried and convicted.  This signifies, what pretty much anybody of any reasonably sound mind, should know, that in America, back then, as well as America right now, that race plays an integral part in justice so served, and therefore justice is, in effect, not blind in American jurisprudence.

Further to the point, when law so being enforced, is clearly racist, and of which, this type of racism, can readily be proven, by simply looking at court records in detail, taking into account decisions so made by a jury consisting exclusively of the favored race, against the convictions so of, of the unfavored race, the only reasonable conclusion to reach is that those that are unfavored, are at a distinct material disadvantage to those that are favored.  Additionally, it would be one thing if such favoritism, consisted solely of better seats on a bus, better drinking fountains, better service at restaurants, and so on and so forth, but, in reality, that to a certain extent is just a symptom of a corrupt system, when taken into consideration the material fact, that those of color who are in the wrong place at the wrong time, or placed there by the authorities, licit or illicit, are in imminent danger of forfeiting their life, not only through extrajudicial justice which is one thing, but also through the facade of state sanctioned fair justice, which is an entirely different thing.

The state has the highest of duties to abide by Constitutional law, and seven black men being executed in cold blood, for the alleged rape of one white woman, is never going to be just.  Justice such as that, is the very reason why so many blacks were terrorized and lynched, back in the day, because those so serving that veneer of impartial court justice, were themselves, often racists of the highest order, who utilized the power of the state to effectively "lynch" those that needed to be taught a permanent lesson, so done, through the sanction of governmental law, grossly misapplied.

Neville Chamberlain: “Peace for our Time “

In 1938, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, had the unenviable task of somehow appeasing Hitler's Germany in such a way that a bloody European war would not be necessary between Germany with its allies, such as Italy, versus Great Britain with its allies, such as France.  At that point in time, Chamberlain was successful in getting Hitler to come to an agreement which appeared to be just what was needed to avert a war, which was the very purpose of his diplomacy.  Unfortunately, as history tells us, Hitler broke that treaty and his commitment to it, and eventually World War II, was the result.

History has not been kind to Chamberlain, who is often been portrayed as being manipulated and outplayed by Hitler, or just a plain fool.  Yet, history as written is always going to be 20:20, which isn't fair to the times as they happened, and in this particular case, does not seem to correctly understand that the very purpose of good diplomacy is to having a meeting of minds in which terrible catastrophes, such as war, are given the proper consideration and space so as to be avoided.  Those that try to achieve peace, even when they ultimately fail, have at least tried to do what they could to avert that which brings terrible destruction and death.

When Chamberlain met Hitler, he had an absolute obligation to at a minimum, delay such a war, and specifically to the best of his ability, to do what could be done to avert war, even at the cost of some degree of appeasement.  It must be said, that those that will not attempt to be peacemakers are not good diplomats, for humankind has too often shown a propensity to take the low road when it would be better for humankind to take the high road, and which, if that so means to give a little more to the other side in negotiations to avoid a terrible conflict, so be it.

So, Chamberlain did not achieve peace, but had he been dealing with somebody that was honorable, peace could well have been obtained; unfortunately, instead we got another World War, which somehow became known as the “good war”, though, war, is seldom, if ever, good.   Further to the point, to believe, somehow, that conflicts between nations should best be resolved with essentially the philosophy that “might makes right” is the very reason why so many nations are so prone to spending such gargantuan amounts of money on armaments and killing machines, as opposed to spending such money on things that would be beneficial and of material worth for the people, at large.  This is why it makes sense to try to make peace, and those that put forth the effort to do so, should be accorded respect.

Perhaps, Neville Chamberlain deserves to be remembered the way that history has portrayed him, as a weak-willed credulous Prime Minister, lacking even in integrity.  It would be better though, to remember Chamberlain as a man that did what he could to bring peace, knowing that if he failed in doing so, that there would be a terrible world war; of which, it must be said, that all those that insist upon the correct answer to conflict always being the use of the sword, represents the very reason why wars continue to this very day.

The Department of Homeland Security and the coming police state

The United States of America, has extensive military departments, including a National Guard, and within each locality, there is also law enforcement, of which, the expressed purpose of all these agencies, together, is for the defense of America and for the protection of its citizens.  Yet, when the Department of Homeland Security was created in 2002, this signified a new chapter in citizen safety, for its very creation, implied that the citizens of the United States, needed to be secure.

The most basic problem with Homeland Security, really begins with its name.  That name, seems to denote that this country, has an important obligation to see that this nation is both secured as well as protected; which begs the question, as to why it took this nation over 200 years to determine, that this specific department was needed for the security and protection of its people.  So too, this presupposes that in order for the people to be fully secured, that they must do their patriotic duty and therefore sacrifice some of their freedoms and precious liberty in order for that security to be truly effective.

Life in America, currently consists of the fact that the population is being constantly monitored through all sorts of agencies and devices, of which some of this is of an individual's own making as in social media, internet activity, and by virtue of the use of  one's cell phone; and some of this is the constant accumulation of all of the actionable information so being provided to various governmental agencies as a requirement to receive social benefits, or of employment, or of housing, or of healthcare, and the like.  A lot of this monitoring of the population, is something that is not only often covert, but it is invasive, along with it also being opaque, and of which, these government agencies appear to be a law of their own, with nobody actually representing the people being in a position to thereby independently monitor those that are ostensibly protecting the citizens from some real and present danger.

It is not an especially difficult task to sell the story that homeland security is necessary in order to protect the population, especially when the narrative so being propagated, is confirmed by pliant mega-media companies, who benefit by toeing the governmental line, while receiving their own benefits, in return.  Additionally, many citizens are only too willing to do their part to help keep this country safe, and therefore they are obedient to the state, in their apparent credulous belief that this is always the right thing to do.  The problem, though, is that when one's own government, knows absolutely everything about its own citizenry, it is the shortest of steps for that government to become unnecessarily oppressive in its own right, especially when that governmental security agency has all of the tools to assert itself, in a targeted way against those citizens who appear to be difficult and unyielding.

Homeland security's true function is to convince the vast majority of the population that they should trade their freedom for the protection of the state, of which most of those people do not seem to realize that once traded, freedom is a very hard thing to ever get back; for make no mistake about it, the government has all of the force and a significant amount of the law on its side, which means that they are no longer the people's servant, but are and mean to be a repressive master.

How bad do you want to be good?

Nobody is going to be perfect, even if they are trying to be perfect, and really want to be perfect, they just aren't going to be perfect; for it isn't possible, not even for one day, to attain that perfection.    Still, we can accomplish pretty much the same goal by simply being good one to another, by demonstrating patience, concern, generosity, caring, fairness, justice, and compassion in our interactions with those that we collaborate with day-by-day.  The thing is though, knowing what is the right thing to do, and thereupon executing upon it, consistently, is something that most of us need to improve upon, for we often fall short of that noblest of goals.

Most of the trouble that we get ourselves into, really involves our not being able to have the strength of character to hold the line in being good, but rather we give into weakness by letting our pride or our ego or our bad behavior to just get the better of us and therefore to subsequently do bad, rather than good.  Further to the point, it isn't good enough to be good, twenty-three hours out of the day, if that other hour, is one in which we are absolutely horrible in our behavior, for those bad deeds so done, can wipe absolutely clean the slate of the good cheer that we previously so spread.

So then, in consideration that since we aren't going to be perfect, the next best thing to aim to accomplish is to make those decisions that are beneficial for us as well as for those that we interact with, which therefore collectively serves to fairly define us as human beings.  So too, since it is inevitable that each one of us is going to fall somewhat short of what we really need to so attain, the important thing is to not only keep dusting ourselves off when we fall down, but to make it our point, to do better, day-by-day, so that therefore when we get to that fork in the road, we definitively take the right turn, and vow therefore to never look back, again.

Further, it is fair to state, just knowing what is right and knowing what is wrong, does not make a person's character good; for it is in the actual practice of the discipline to consistently do the right thing, that defines whether someone is in reality, good.  In truth, those that are good, are the type of people that have the self-respect and wisdom to not negatively react to situations, that a lesser person, by their poor judgment, would typically fall victim to.  Those of good character are willing to make a personal sacrifice, if need be, in order to maintain their focus on doing the right thing, by therefore keeping their ego and poor judgment under their control.

Ultimately, we are only as good as what we actually do, for the choice of being good is ours to make; for as free will beings, the only real question is actually how bad do we want to be good. The answer to that question, will be result of our life, fairly weighed through the impartial scales of wise justice, and of which ultimately those scales will favor one side or the other.

Employment: Separate and so unequal

When it comes to the labor force in America, their collective power in absence of strong and robust unions, that do the right thing by all of their constituents, grows ever weaker by the day.  The most insidious of things that some employers do is essentially to create separate classes of workers, in which the favored class of laborers are full-time workers, with designated benefits, and some sort of secured employment.  For them, life appears to be really good.  However, for certain newly hired employees, or employees who are classified in jobs in which the skill level so needed is less, those same employers do not provide the same sort of benefits to these lesser employees, and additionally the job security so desired by them is nearly entirely absent.  What has effectively happened is that the employer has deliberately created two classes of employees, those that are privileged and those that are not; of which, the privileged employees when it comes to their salary and the like, are often aligned and beholden to their employer, and pretty much as long as they are kept satisfied, they don't really concern themselves about that other separate and unequal class of employees.

So then, while there are all sorts of tricks of the trade of eliminating, breaking and eviscerating unions, certainly one of the more effective ones, is to divide and to conquer; in which thereby the employees that are considered to be of more material value, are treated differently, than those that are perceived to be more readily replaceable and therefore those privileged employees don't see the upside of being unionized.  That is why it is so important for unions, when they represent workers, to represent well all of the workers, as opposed to only some of them, because once certain employees decide that they don't need or don't desire union representation because they find that cooperation with the boss is the apparent better deal for them, the balance of the workforce is pretty much left high and dry -- without power and without representation.

The bottom line is that employers are very savvy about doing what is best for them and their pocketbook, and if that means treating some employees in a manner in which they are disposable, underpaid, and replaceable, they are going to have a strong tendency to do exactly that; especially when there is no pushback from their core employees.  The problem though for those that think they have it so good as an employee in the privileged class, is that employment needs as well as the changes in today's high-paced world are very fluid, and when it comes to the greed of employers, such is never satiated over the long term, but only in the short term, which means that all those employees that considered themselves to be "irreplaceable" today, may yet wake up to face a very rude day.

In short, when the employer has all of the power, and the labor force, has none, except for those that believe that they are essential; recognize this truth, that the most aggressive of employers see those that they employ as always being an expense, and therefore they are always looking for a way to lower those expenses, and they won't ever stop their relentless search to do that, because, for them, making more money always trumps a mere employee, every day of every week.

FDR's Economic Bill of Rights

In January of 1944, President Roosevelt's message to Congress on the state of the union, was a speech that many citizens in today's America are completely unaware of; and of which, the rights for the  economic improvement,  especially for the most vulnerable of American people, so expressed in this speech, have not even come close to ever coming to fruition  What the President so desired to see was that in recognition that America was the premier economic nation in the world, that therefore it was time to recognize and to validate that every American has the equal right to a good education, a decent home, adequate protection from economic fears, adequate medical care, freedom from unfair competition, freedom from domination by monopolies, and the right to earn enough income so as to obtain adequate food, clothing, and recreation for one's own household.

All of items in the above list should still be carefully looked at and studied, for the truth of the matter is, that not one of these economic rights, as propagated by the President, all the way back in 1944, not a single one of them has been fulfilled as of today; this over a period of time of over seventy-five years, and in fact, not a single one of these rights is even close to actually becoming part and parcel of the American experience, in this the richest nation that the world has ever known. 

The most important question to therefore ask, is why?  Why is it that America, with all of its riches, is still unable to fulfill these most sensible of economic rights, in this period of time, in which, America has been at the absolute top of its game, and yet has economically devolved into becoming a country of the haves that have it all, and the have nots, that have not a thing.  This is not the way that it should be, especially in consideration that the very purpose of having a national income tax in the first place -- which is progressive in nature -- is for the fair re-distribution to the people of the wealth so created. So too, the very point of estate taxes is to see that those that have had it all when so alive, are at the time of their physical death, compelled by governmental fiat to pass on a fair percentage of their wealth to those that are of the living, so that these seemingly forgotten citizens therefore have then their fair chance of opportunity.  Finally, the corporate titans that seem to run this country, should as a matter of course, be paying a much higher tax rate than the common man so does, rather than so often avoiding their responsible duties to that government which permits their perpetual artificial existence, in the first place.

The bottom line is that America really ought to stand for something of real merit, and what that should really be is an America which provides for each one of its citizens, a fair opportunity to be a home owner, to have a stable job, and basically to have all the accouterments that demonstrate that this nation really is the greatest nation that the world has ever known, by virtue of the fact, that even the least amongst us, has a place to call their own, good healthcare, money in their pocket, and the luxury of having the extra time to actually enjoy the best of America.

The age of majority

In the United States, the age of majority back in the 19th century was 21 years of age, and of which, those that were under the age of 21, were therefore effectively in the care of their parents, who thereby controlled their earnings, their income, and essentially their freedom.  It was not until the 21st century, that the age of majority for both male and female, was lowered to the age of 18, yet since that time, the United States for certain activities, such as in the buying of cigarettes, or in the drinking of alcohol, has raised the age back to 21, therefore providing what appears to be a situation, in which people at the age of 18, while being franchised to vote, as well as being subject to signing up for the military and therefore dying for their country in the service to it, somehow aren't considered worthy to legally smoke or drink, despite their majority age.

The age of majority is of critical importance for all those that desire the fruits of their labor, of which, not every parent so made, is a good parent for a given child, and hence some children are denied that which they fairly labored for by their parents who have the legal right to that labor, simply on the basis of their child's age, and not upon the content of that child's character or any fair consideration of the effort put forth to earn that money, by the person so making it.

The fact that the age of majority was lowered to the age of 18, should be something that is absolutely consistent throughout every avenue of those that have therefore become the age of majority; this is so needed so that there are not, in effect, two classes of adults -- which is a bastardization of what being an adult actually is, and makes for extremely poor law, along with it being absolutely inconsistent; for either the age of majority is 18 or it is 21, or some other age, but it should not be one age for this and another age for that.

Those that are adults often enjoy being in the catbird seat, and so, some of these are selfishly not all that interested in sharing power, or in ceding power; but rather they seem to prefer to spend inordinate amounts of time, writing about and talking about, how they need to protect our youth, or see to it that our youth are not subject to that which is inimical to them, which perhaps demonstrates the best of intentions, but such intentions often seem to serve a much more underhanded purpose, which is the turning back of the clock to those days when patriarchy was the iron law of the land.

People are defined by the decisions that they make, good or bad, and right or wrong, of which to believe that somehow, mere age, brings wisdom, is insulting to all those that have intelligence, sensibility, maturity, and discernment, but aren't old.  To believe, that somehow, father knows best, is belied by all the fathers that don't know best; and further to believe that the government of supposed do-gooders knows what is best is fundamentally flawed for their governmental actions seem to indicate the very opposite. Those that that have reached the age of majority are entitled to all of their rights, not some sort of subset to such, for true liberty deserves no less than 100% of it, or it isn't liberty.