Category Archives: Governance

THE BELIEFS OF LEADERSHIP

There are lessons to be learned from the reactions of his opponents to the campaign and election of Donald Trump. Those same opponents seem deaf to them… and blind. As history often provides, the lessons will be made clearer, oddly enough, as the lens of time becomes thicker, longer and, in fact, cooler. Are these lessons so earth-shattering? Well, yes, probably.

Some nation is going to lead all nations, like it or not. Since its founding, in a sense, the United States has been that nation. Why? Much derives from the sacrifices of George Washington, a quite spiritual man. Unlike all the kings of history, Washington finished his second term as president and went back to his farm. He could have been president for life; he could have dictated who the next president would be. Instead, he surrendered a power the extent of which he may not have realized. In many ways he was the key man, launching our ship of state with faith in the inherent goodness of the people of America… and little else.

That “goodness” was primarily Judeo-Christian, filtered through all of Europe and the British Isles. Whether steady attendees at churches or not, most “Americans” were Christian – an inconvenient truth. When Franklin answered that the Constitutional Convention had delivered a “…republic, if you can keep it(.)” he expressed his recognition of the need for a morally straight citizenry in order for a representative democracy to function and survive.

Only morally raised children would grow up to live in honesty. Only a moral people would demand and sustain a legal structure of honest jurisprudence, honest, enforceable contracts, written and verbal, and honest money, trusted by every seller and buyer. Only an honest people would allow, even encourage, the least among us to excel, grow and succeed. Our many flaws grew from wrong beliefs and our regret is justified. But, our basic honesty and the strength of our institutions enabled us to change flawed beliefs.

Which is not to say that changing all beliefs is a good thing – our forbears were right about most of it.

Those of us old farts who have worried about the upset changes of the 1960’s, are being proven right, too. That was a decade that saw socialism become a “solution” through the “Great Society,” and indulgence of every youthful abandon begin the erosion of moral institutions, education as a moral institution, and every sort of drug and sexual thrill gain “rights.”
These changes are bearing their fruits… and nuts.

Daily we are challenged over every institution’s role as modern politicians – liberal ones, anyway, and fearful non-liberals – bow to every new idea about how individuals are not responsible for building their own lives and economics. Unfortunately, in a whirlpool of new “rights,” the lives of those citizens who don’t agree with or don’t care about the new licentiousness, the power of government has been turned against the majority of those who give it power in the first place. What are the new beliefs?

A growing minority believe that every form of sexual expression is as valid as all the others. These same believe that resistance to the disappearance of procreative sacredness is the equivalent of Hitler’s incomprehensible pathologies. This same group decries all rules of personal behavior not invented by them, and they are quick to hate while castigating haters. What sort of leaders will they be? With no social norming at work, will nations, in their view, become irrelevant, too?

The ungoverned seem quick to demand that “government” destroy the lives and rights of the traditionalist majority, and there are sufficient psychologists and lawyers to twist their ideas into effective arguments against… whatever. Screams for diversity – whatever that is – turn into screams of rage when diversity of beliefs is placed before them. Technology cannot mask that divide, nor, apparently, can elections. Majority rule is hateful until the disenchanted are in a majority position, however briefly. Since it will be brief, court rulings are sought to make their beliefs permanent policy.

Drugs are becoming mainstream, which might have some positive value if they calmed the hateful. They don’t, evidently. Drugs are a subject for belief and not necessarily truth, or reality. Besides, there are tax revenues to be realized, the purest calcimine that ever touched a brush. Soon we’ll be crime-free. Let’s hope the lights come on and the water flows on that day.

CABINETS AND BUREAUS

President Barack Obama holds a Cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Jan. 31, 2012. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson)
It’s not easy… changing the course of the ship of state, that is. Building a Great Pyramid, that’s easy. Transitioning from communism to capitalism – not so much. Worse, every move a newly elected president must make is nit-picked, criticized, undermined, called fascist and/or racist by the dominant media.

The real threat of the incoming Trump administration is that the new president may keep even some of his campaign promises. How dare he?

Those of us who were willing to overlook Trump’s several lacks of finesse and glibness, thought we could discern his visceral messages that mattered, “MTM’s.” One MTM is stopping illegal immigration. Viscerally, Americans recognize that inviting millions of very different people into our midst – people with different cultures, beliefs and languages who neither wish to adopt our culture and language nor are forced to for personal or economic survival, MAKES NO SENSE. What folly such a policy would be. What a treason it would represent.

We are transitioning from an administration whose intention it was to change, literally, the color of America. Mr. Obama is governed by a number of hatreds, among which are hatred of colonialism, hatred of white “supremacy” and hatred of capitalism. One might also discern a hatred of the Constitution in there, somewhere. What an odd person for Americans to elect.

Mr. Trump has been sounding like he may not be as concerned about the illegal entrants already here as are we who voted for his promised change. Let’s monitor what happens to the border control he also promised, very carefully. No matter how “big” we think we are in the U. S., having escaped full-scale attacks or invasion – so far – our culture is under assault, largely from confused domestic enemies who find it satisfying to hate America’s imperfections while celebrating the imperfections of others. It’s perverse. For too long we have relinquished power, including power over education, to those who hate the premises of America. Importing people of vastly different ethics – particularly Muslims – whose belief structures are antithetical to our constitution, is pretty stupid policy.

Another big MTM is about re-energizing the American manufacturing and jobs engine. Can a president actually do this? Maybe. Like most of Washington – a construct of creative bullshit – (sorry, sort-of) “managing” the economy is mostly wishes and hope. Tax cuts can surely help as lower taxes will, for a while, encourage the PRIVATE economy to make good domestic decisions and investments. Production, productivity and employment should improve. But Trump’s choices for Treasury and Chairman of The Council of Economic Advisors (White House) are from Goldman Sachs, a mendacious Wall Street behemoth, and this exposes a serious flaw in Trump’s economic courage.

Between the Federal Reserve (neither federal nor a reserve) and the Wall Street financial manipulators like Goldman Sachs, the United States has been led into astronomical debt. Trump, and all of us, need to recognize that just as every dollar of taxes is a loss of citizens’ freedom, every dollar of federal debt is a loss of national sovereignty… and loss of flexibility to manage our own domestic, foreign and military affairs. What’s a president – or a people – to do when they are stuck in a box of perpetual servility to banks?

One of the changes, perhaps the most significant of changes, that Americans tried to bring about in November, 2016, is the upside-down relationship between our supposedly sovereign nation and these blood-sucking banks. For shame. Trump has already proven to be deaf to our outcry and he’s not even in office yet. Usually newly elected presidents don’t start giving us the finger until around April first. So, many people’s concerns about Trump’s impact on – or proximity to – conservatism have some validity. We’ll see.

Finally, naming Rex Tillerson to head the State Department. Feelings are mixed, obviously, but there are positives. On the face of it there is an element of putting oligarchs in public charge of “the world.” Trump’s a business mogul and must believe that only business moguls are smart enough to manage big systems like the U. S. government. For everyone who has gained the impression that businessmen are inherently dishonest – as popular media consistently portray – giving one political power is the worst possible outcome. “They’re all crooks!”

Even worse, Tillerson is in the OIL business, helping to scourge the earth while stealing money from everyone. Woe is us. Some perspective is required.

Exxon-Mobil is certainly huge, deals in global commodities and must negotiate with virtually every country in order to maintain stable supplies and stable markets. Well, it’s time Americans admit – or recognize – that most of what foreign policy comprises is maintaining and defending global commerce, free access to the seas and stable markets and prices. It is rarely a pretty business, but undeniably vital.

And, it’s not simply oil. Oil is the current (for a hundred years) leading commodity against which almost every other commodity (corn, wheat, soybeans, beef, pork, gold, uranium and… on and on) is valued. The U. S. dollar is how oil is valued and oil is how the dollar is propped up in the face of unbelievable debt. There may be more sense behind having this particular mogul in charge at State than first appears. Exxon-Mobil is pretty-well run, after all.

Ten Days of Penitence

comeyDonald Trump defeated his Republican primary rivals by breaking the Cardinal rule: don’t speak ill of another Republican. Primary voters responded enthusiastically because they had been saying many of those same “ill” things themselves since 2012. His strongest, most resonant point for those months was illegal immigration – something his opponents would not or could not address. He won the nomination “bigly.”
To its credit, the Republican Party apparatus, unlike defeated primary candidates, refused to try any shenanigans at the Convention and smoothed the nominating process in Cleveland and began the thankless task of uniting its fractious camps behind the nominee. Failing to read the American people as Trump evidently has, some of those camps are STILL so upset as to continue balancing on the pinhead of principle that prevents them from supporting Mr. Trump. To their loss.
Democrats, on the other hand, are the team that appeals to the basest of motives as they demand fealty from females if for no other reason. They believe that it is Hillary’s TURN at the cookie jar of the West Wing. Unlike Obama, whose purloined cookies are comprised of illegal immigrants in a gross attempt to change the color of the U. S. more quickly, and purposeful foreign policies that reduce WHITE America’s power and influence (plus some grotesque pro-Islam / anti-Christian actions he still pretends are not taking place), Mrs. Clinton has not and, perhaps, can not define policies much different than his in a cynical effort to garner votes from all those who swooned over “Hope and Change.”
None of it will matter much now, in the Ten Days of Penitence leading up to Election Day. Hillary’s decades of dishonesty have tripped-up her campaign at the turn entering the straight-away. If only Trump, himself, were purer, we could breathe easier, but the tentacles of lying are tightening around Mrs. Clinton, Huma Abedin and many of her key campaign aides. Trump supporters are thanking God for James Comey, who had been damned by those same 3 months ago. Clinton’s people are condemning him now who blessed him at that earlier time. Some are written directly into the Book of Life; some directly into Death; then there are the undecideds.
It is clear to all, one would expect, that should Hillary win in spite of investigations, that Comey will be in danger thereafter. Just as clearly, she wouldn’t be making any reforms in Justice, State, Treasury OR ANY OTHER DEPARTMENT in the directions of honesty, legality, Constitutionality or transparency. Her whole public presence is based on deception.
Those with eyes to see should recognize that a Trump victory will herald a substantial change in personnel and policies in virtually EVERY department – something surely needed if the Constitution is to survive.

CANDIDATES AWAKE!

legislateEvery couple of years purportedly rational humans scurry about seeking votes. To acquire same, they promise new levels of honesty, integrity and transparency and half of them (or more, where unopposed) get elected to do the peoples’ business. Almost immediately our erstwhile reformers and crusaders begin to justify legislation that extends for hundreds of pages, covering hundreds of matters – some quite disparate. For Clinton voters, that means they are not all related to the subject matter of the legislation’s title. It is possible, although improbable, that every new restriction in the legislation is pure, wholesome, beneficial to all and free of the taint of quids, pros and quos. Therefore, Prudence Leadbetter (pronounced: Lead Better) and I recommend the following to all solons and candidates:

YOUR FRIEND, BILL JUDGEMENT

For all you Representatives, and you others who hope to gain power in 2016, you will find it much easier to fulfill America’s heritage if you follow a few simple rules of judging legislation so as to minimize the potential damage to our economy and society, and so as to enhance the Freedom that makes us strong. Our new friend, Bill Judgement, will show you how:

Bill Judgement #1: Is this proposal more than 1,000 WORDS long? Chances are there’s something wrong with it or hidden in it that does not fulfill the Spirit of the Constitution or the true purposes of American freedom. The 27 Amendments to the Constitution, are each a lot shorter than that!

Bill Judgement #2: Does the effect of the proposal TAKE FREEDOM AWAY from sovereign citizens? In other words, are you about to force some people to give up their inherent rights in order to buy favor from some other people? Then don’t do it – no matter how good the title sounds!

Bill Judgement #3: Does the legislation as proposed, include stuff that doesn’t have anything to do with the purpose of the original bill? For example: Does a bill to “reform” health care include a federal takeover of student (consumer) lending? Then don’t vote for it: it’s partly fraudulent!

Bill Judgement #4: Does the bill, or any part of it, effectively PUNISH citizens or legitimate businesses for doing something legal that some people don’t like? Then don’t do that!

Bill Judgement #5: Does the bill include some hidden gifties for special friends of legislature-people? Then suck in your gut and say NO to it. Until we have a real, cash surplus, you heroes should be able to keep your hands out of the cookie jar – and then, only after taxes have been cut.

Bill Judgement #6: Are there special sections of the proposal that provide some kind of pay-off to other Members in order to secure their votes? Sounds like a crappy way to do the people’s businesses. Steer clear of it. If the merits of the bill are that questionable, it doesn’t deserve any honest person’s support!

Bill Judgement #7: Will the net result of proposed legislation create more tax-PAYERS? That is, will it enable or cause the PRIVATE-SECTOR to grow and flourish? Then support it fully. If it does the opposite, or, worse, expands government and the number of net tax-TAKERS, just say NO, NO, NO!

Bill Judgement #8: Does this bill take away PRIVATE PROPERTY from tax payers? Or maybe so restrict their use of their own property as to destroy its value? Then don’t vote for that until YOU can articulate why the basis of American Freedom must be taken away from those folks!

Bill Judgement #9: Does the new law include increases in taxes? Until some of the exorbitant waste and favoritism inside government is CUT by the amount you propose to raise, VOTE NO, NO, NO! To maintain the organized theft inside the government while taxing citizens more is to deny your oath of office, for shame.

TRUTH – On the Road

hiway2hell[Part A] TRUTH IN PAVING
Truths with hard, empirical evidence are best, since all concerned see, or know, the same information, the same fact(s). Laws may be enforced based on empirical evidence. Consider directions, or geometric dimensions. They are often expressed as related to right or left hands. Roads are an example: they have length and width, width described as the left side and right side of the road. As soon as more than one person desired to travel on a road, some sort of custom, and later, law, was needed to prevent collisions.
TWO SIDES TO EVERY TRUTH
Since it was – and is – absolutely true that the road had a left and right half – or sides – then a law that directed travelers or drivers to “keep to the right,” as they were facing, prevented collisions to every traveler’s benefit. Truth is a good basis for laws.
Nowhere are people who have lost their right hands excused from obeying the “right-hand” law. The loss of a hand doesn’t change the truth.
DIRECTIONAL OPPRESSION
Now, let’s imagine some travelers, or drivers, feeling oppressed by the right-hand restriction. These are they who feel compelled to drive in a different lane than the right-hand one. This leads them to drive on the left side, which poses serious risks to themselves and others. Mature, elected leaders, never at loss for a pander, rather than tell those differently-compelled drivers that they must drive on the right, instead tell cities, towns and states to hurry up and create a third lane down the middle so that the differently-compelled can drive in a lane that’s not the right-hand lane.
THREE DIRECTIONS… FOUR
No sooner is the third lane completed, striped and the road landscaped, but a problem crops up with other differently-compelled drivers going the other way, who also want to drive in the center lane. No problem to political types: everyone will simply cough up the taxes to build a fourth lane to accommodate both directions of differently-compelled drivers. Problem solved… maybe.
PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE TRUTH BEHIND THE CURTAIN
Unfortunately, many differently-compelled drivers can’t set aside the urge to drive on the left side, and actually feel discriminated against to be forced to use the middle lane(s). Politicians feel their pain right away. A new law is created that requires all right-hand-adhering drivers to make way whenever some differently-compelled driver feels compelled to use the left lane. Old-law-abiding drivers are given the option to drive in the middle lanes or, if they think it’s safer, to pull off the road and wait until a differently-compelled driver goes by. It interferes with all the non-differently-compelled drivers’ travel, but, none of the differently-compelled drivers feel oppressed any longer. That is legally important above all other concerns – even truth.
A TRUTH TO FIT EVERYONE
Eventually, though, non-differently-compelled drivers find that when traffic builds up, it saves a lot of time to take the center lanes or even the left lane. Police pull them over because they look like Non- Differently-Compelled drivers, and not like differently-compelled ones. Amazingly, every driver pulled over for driving on the wrong side of the street turns out to feel compelled to drive in other than the right lanes!
Oppression is either more widespread than originally known, or it’s contagious. Traffic cops would now be in a tough spot since the oppressed, non-oppressed and temporarily-oppressed all look alike. Perhaps the oppressed could wear different hats… or something.

Truth, Belief, Spirituality, Life, Death, Freedom

atomTHE BIG SIX.
It feels as though all the “old” ways are under assault at once. The arguments against what is and how it came to be, are endless. Overpopulation is an argument that’s so old it’s become new again. The reasons to limit – even reduce – population change with the winds of politics, but they’re certainly heating up again, now. Mankind has no clear basis for determining when population is “over,” or just larger, but there are plenty of worries… and theories – same things, sometimes.
TRUE SEX
Another, relatively new argument is about sexuality. The closer we can get to pure animalism the better, according to some. Animals, themselves, exercise better ethics about sex than do humans who want to act like animals. Even Federal and state governments are de-regulating sex, mostly by coercing straight people, who are the vast majority. Why it is a government problem is hard to compute.
Reconfiguring sex brings up issues like Freedom, Social Cohesion, Law, Justice and the Regulatory State. The social – and sexual – roles of males and females are shifting, and have been for a century, to the point they no longer have legal definition. Their denial is where legality matters. The original feminist rebellion, allegorized in the Garden of Eden story, is playing out to unintended results, all around us.
HOT TRUTH
Climate Change – measurable in less than half a lifetime – is a wonderfully heavy political tool for leftist, controlling types. Too many people on the planet is the source of it, of course, as we are the source for everything unpleasant, even, now, earthquakes and volcanoes. The chief agitators about climate change are the same who want to sunder sexuality, disrupt business, cut law free from its moorings and render education into government pigeon-holing.
COLD TRUTH
Religious institutions are being de-legitimized, despite Constitutional protection of religious freedom, but religion, itself – as in spirituality – is being lost at the same time, as if it were never more than decoration. The spirituality of life is dismissed as inconvenience, as millions of abortions are committed around the world, so strongly advocated by those who deny fatherhood and motherhood as oppressive.
Science, to socialist controllers, is the new religion. It’s technology, really, that provides cover for the erasing of tradition… and of spirit. Science somehow justifies top-down regulation; freedom, religious and otherwise, is its impediment.
FORMULA SIX
All areas of human testing, failure and success derive from the following elements of the formulae for Humanity:
1) Truth; 2) Belief; 3) Spirituality; 4) Life; 5) Death; and, 6) Freedom.
I have tried to identify another “root” or “end” to improve this sextet, but these encompass everything, I think. All other topics of debate, argument, war and peace, including those heated and cold, are “means” to these “ends.” My contention is that it is possible to devise governance that prevents the means from thwarting the ends for all… and for every individual, family, extended group or nation. So, in turn:
TRUTH is absolute, illimitable, pure. It bumps into beliefs – or the other way around – constantly, but it can’t be changed with a new truth (opinion) to take its place, and lies may stick to it only temporarily. Truth is the reason for experiment, discovery, curiosity and science, but it can’t be limited by any of those – it simply is.
TREWTH
Many of mankind’s troubles stem from attempts to define or re-define truth, as though different opinions represented differing sets of truths. Obviously that is impossible; there are only differing sets of beliefs or, corrosively, attitudes.
Truth may be described through evidence, but evidence, itself, requires constant, scientific (defined as examination and testing free of the pollution of beliefs) distillation. There are as many truths as there are atomic particles, all potentially discoverable, but true regardless. Humans are concerned with a tiny fraction of them.
PERSONAL TRUTH
Our greatest literature is about the revelation of truth, or about truths that conflict based on unequal beliefs about them. Often, unable to reveal absolute truth, literature will draw moral lessons from its obvious existence, even if imperfectly known, and present those as a form of proof of absolutes. Such are easily disregarded by skeptics, who insist that they are entitled to irrefutable proof of absolute truth if they are to respond to it in any way. Otherwise, their comfortable beliefs will suffice for this lifetime.
JUDGMENT
Legal battles are one forge for isolating absolute truth, hopefully stripped of all misunderstanding. Oddly, mere opposing “views” of what is true are the essence of “proof” that will convict or acquit a suspect. Recognizing that absolute proof of absolute truth is imperfectly achievable by humans, we invest judges and juries with the power to “rate” the quality of opposing views of truth, in order to convict or acquit. Neither outcome establishes “truth,” although one may come close. Whose opinion of what is true, is most plausible?
Even confessions must be proven, as individuals are known to admit to acts not performed for various reasons.
TRUTH IN POLITICS
Controlling types, politicians and others, find that controlling access to truth – thereby defining truth for the controlled – yields immense power. Science is their umbrella, and education, glorious, indoctrinating, “public” education, is their most effective tool.
The monopolistic ability to control the beliefs of most of the population, and therefore how that population grants power democratically, enables teachers – controlled through licensure and unionization – to define “truth” for their students. “Science,” then is more free to pursue the “truths” it wishes to discover and to ignore those it wishes to obscure – or, as happens, doesn’t believe in.
Truth controlled by politics is a dangerous, dangerous weapon.
TRUE LIES
The existence of truth spawns lies… some unintended. Lying, when on purpose, is purely human. There is no inherent requirement for lying that must be met to live well. Lying is easy in its simplest applications; many are harmless, even beneficial for the “ly-ee.”
“Do I look stupid?” The asker probably thinks he or she DOES look stupid in some situation, but usually receives an answer like, “Of course not!” Which might be a lie. “Do these clothes make me look fat?”
Of course not.
[Additional Truthiness to follow]