Natural Pragmatism Meets Human Obstructionism POLITICS HISTORY CULTURE

Red Journalism. Rouge of Ire and Tirade. Is it Only Rosacea.

2012-01-20T16:25:00.000-05:00

Rosacea. Sounds so, well, rosy. Instead it is a skin condition. It needs to become a household word. What's in your mirror? With awareness, would reporters ask about it, before concluding that le rouge au podium is anger, frustration, guilt, etc. It has a long history, with efforts to treat/cure. See http://finance.optimum.net/optonline/?GUID=19744569&Page=MEDIAVIEWER

In 2008, former President Clinton's comments, or a speech, were reported as a "tirade" -- an epithet supported, according to the news report, by his appearance as: red-faced. See Clinton tirade. Is this the same reporter I see before me? "Newt Gingrich has bright purple cheeks." Politics Up Close and Personal.

There was an additional reference to Newt responding with a red face today, home delivery edition of the NYT, but the scrubbers reached it and the online version (as often happens with the Times) removes anything that may be a pejorative in describing events, people, of the red ilk, is that so? There is a difference between our lawn version, and the screen later.

This is a plea for sanity among reporters. Redness of face with or without bumps may be rosacea, not a signal that a meltdown is in progress. If so, say so and let it go. Ire? Not necessarily. O Ye red-faced and purple-cheeked, you can help your own image by noting the condition and moving on. Rosacea. Also in the Times. The Times may ignore its own archives, but that is not a good model for reporting. See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/fashion/24SKIN.html?scp=1&sq=rosacea%20politics&st=cse

Dictionary of Politics. Political Flaneur. Stamper. And Fjaka.

2012-01-05T10:50:00.003-05:00

Dictionary of Politics.
The Role of the Stamper.
The Political Flaneur. And, then, Fjaka.
.
When facts are ambiguous, who is the Decider? The Super PAC

Creation, Sonderborg Castle Chapel, Denmark. Ambiguity..

Summary: The voter is a blank flan, awaiting information, facts, from which to make decisions in his or her interest. The flaneur strolls by, observing, making choices, taking in more information, reassessing. However, with the arrival of the SuperPAC culture, the neuro-ads, the voter is stamped early with positions to assume, before facts are out. The next step is levitating above all of it: the state of fjaka.

Q. But what if the facts are ambiguous, asks the flaneur? What conclusion shall I draw?

A. The Stamper. I will tell you, because you are now my flaneur, my political (religious?) flaneur, and I have pre-stamped you as mine own.

A. Flan, Flaneur
B. Die Stamp
C. Political Flan, Political Flaneur: Stamped Voter, Voteur
D. Ultimate recourse: Fjaka
...............................................................................................................
.

A. FLAN, FLANEUR

Flan (phlan, umlaut) n. [Old French flaan, Middle English flawn, ML(Muddled Latin?) flado, fladonis, etc.; to be distinguished from flato, flatulence.

.
1. A blank; a prepared piece of metal awaiting the die stamp so it can become a coin;
.
2. Tart! a temptation, to be filled with fruits, savories, custardies; or, as in Spain, custard dessert with burnt sugar syrup;
.
3. Space of time, during which the time-passer awaits with quiet receptivity and observation whatever the senses may float past, reaching for none, appreciating all, perhaps with a slight turn of the head, followed by a lowering of eyelids and a gently raising of them after, while the next unplanned image enters the consciousness, then the image wafts elsewhere
.
4. Flanday, day of mental levitation, needed for ongoing health of flaneurs, during which nothing whatever is purposefully thought, done or expressed, i.e. Flanday, a movable individual day in the absence of culture-wide Sabbath.
.

Flaneur (phla umlaut space ner umlaut accent aigu) n. [from French flaner, to stroll, Old Norse flana (see flaunt)

1. One who strolls idly, perhaps along boulevards or other places of human social and economic commerce, sans objectif.
.
2. See flanerie [from the French fol (fol for crazy?)] idle strolling
.........................................................................................

B. DIE STAMP, STAMPER

1. An engraved die, used to stamp an image or form onto a blank metal sheet, such as for coinage or medals. See http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/die-stamping.html
.
2. A Super PAC used to impress an image, belief, dogma position or plank onto a voter, with or without the voter's knowledge or consent, i.e. neuro ads, subliminal ads.
..........................................................................................
.

C. POLITICAL FLAN: VOTEUR.

Political Flan. The Vote, Voteur.

.
1. A ballot-stroke, resulting from a blank voter having been subjected to the Die Stamp Super PAC, impressing positions based upon
.
a) emotion-theft before information is in, and
.
b) merit-free sales-pumping neuro-ads directed at the voter's subliminal volition;
.
and by bottomless money dumpers over an intense activity period overwhelming all media bites.
.
2. Sales opportunity. For sale! Tart! A temptation to money dumpers, to hurl the money to snare the Vote in all viewing periods; a depression waiting to be filled;
.
3. A time period ("voting") during which the ballot is stroked as per Voteur, in the manner set forth below.
.

Voteur.

1. Ballot-stroker, One, usually a good-faith voter, who has been reduced from active, intentional perusals, to the Daze of Days by the Die Stamp Super PAC.
.

Voteur, sold out and bound.

2. One who has been sold and who has given up, except for PBS, on objective, fact-documented analysis and debate, to the extent that the resulting voteur is
.
a) numbed by the absence of discussion of merit, or
.
b) unable to absorb fact, or discern balanced fact from the spun segment offered;
.
This condition results from the original highjacking of emotion, causing the Voteur to fear losing face if his or her earlier emotion-grabbed position is found wanting;
.
c) One now becomes quite fol, unable to determine his or her interest apart from the ads, such condition caused by removal of mobility rungs such as education, employment, healthcare and infrastructure enabling means of sustenance and intelligent analysis, such that the voteur will stroke the ballot in disgust and dazedly leave the booth, going home with untreated ills to the same cold and beans.
.
3. Time period post-stroke, in which all the voteur can do is be relieved that his or her part is over, and not wanting to see what he or she was kept from learning about the candidate thusly stroked.
..................................................................

D. FJAKA: A STATE OF MIND.

FJAKUNI.

Levitate above the fray. Those who do that. Reward none of them.

1. Suppose that the flaneur or the political flaneur, overall, really wants simply to be okay; not what other people have. See http://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video;_ylt=AsicukHoacRmM7d_KUK7oOCbvZx4?p=I+just+want+to+be+ok&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-701. Skip your agendas, controls on other people's lives and choices.

2. Enough mayhem in the media and candidate scrums leads, in some cases, to the State of Fjaka. Fjaka. A state of body, a state of mind. See Fjaka -- Between Times August 6, 2009, at the Croatian World Network, http://www.croatia.org/crown/articles/9842/1/Fjaka---Between-Times.html

Fjakuni, state of fjaka, Lazise, Lake Garda, Italy

While in a state of fjaka, often after lunch in the sunshine, say, on the Mediterranean, or other time of year with perhaps an oppressive humidity, a body just doesn't feel like doing anything. Is that so? An emptied vessel we become -- "obsessed by a nothing." "Dolce far niente". "Carefree idleness." Why react to anything, even if disturbed, ask the Fjakuni. Blissful state, beyond our control, devoutly to be wished, but refuses to come on demand. A mix of all possible descriptions of the listlessness of the time frame, "self-doping." Immobile, in a drowse, numbed, lethargy, nice stupor, halfway to nowhere or is that too precise?

Fjakuni need no justification, in their slumbery cocoons. Wildlife and pets are great fjakuni. Look at your cat. Between functions. Not asking for notice. Outside time.

Fjakuni feet. Lazise, Lake Garda

Rapes and Assaults Rewarded? Ex Situ Development Centers.

2011-12-14T18:17:00.006-05:00

Pregnancy Ex Situ. A Compromise.
Response to Sexual Assaults and Rapes.

Foetus Collection Centers to Restore Balance.

With Sexual Force now Rewarded,
Consider an alternative to In Situ Pregnancy.
Development Ex Situ.
.

Life Interrupted. Culpable? When. Whose. *

News: The rate of sexual assault and rape inflicted on women is nearly one in five women. See http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/health/nearly-1-in-5-women-in-us-survey-report-sexual-assault.html?scp=1&sq=sexual%20assault%20rape%20women&st=cse. Definitions: In situ: means in the place. Ex situ: means outside the place. At issue is the cultural norm, the twisted religious norm, that a woman is less than a full person, is that so? Who, how and when to re examine. Re-examining old texts is not enough, becuase that has been done - see KNGDV, the omitted term from earliest Hebrew. Translations are tainted by culture, and perpetuates. Find nphsh for all breathing creatures, not special to humans. Etc. Bottom line: no ideological interpretation is airtight. Let us all breathe.

Better yet: a Haiku, on the topic at hand. Who is responsible for our moral decisions.

Life's consistencies.

Free market. Don't regulate

People's Beds and Bods.

.............................................................................................

.
1. News discussion Question:

Do rapists and assaulters do more than a mere "act" that the law may or may not punish. Instead, do they do far more: turn the woman into less than a person, by denying her the right to make her own moral decision afterward. Example: not to bear a fertilized egg to term.

If there is a moral penalty to her decision, whatever it is, is not the deity quite capable of exacting it?
Is it a perverse reward for a rapist or other forcer to see the forced seed fruiting, the ongoing removal of the body in whom it is installed, powerless.
Removal of the mitosing cell cluster to a happy home at the Center is the solution, for those opposed to interrupting that mitosis..

2. Resolution that is also a job creator. Pregnancy Ex Situ. Development Ex Situ/ Arrange for the development outside. No abortion, just a change in residence.

Moral decision-makers. Capable. Trustworthy.
.
3. Debate talking points.
.
Theology-dogma is a human construct; that is why there are no many views on what the words mean. Even Eve had birth control. She had two babes close together or so, then after one was killed, she chose to have another. She was never forced to bear.

There was not even marriage in Eden. No contract, no obligations. Go check.

Suggestion: Again. pregnancy ex situ. Development ex situ. To be paid for by the implanter.
.
4. Anticipated New development - BMW Rallies
.
Trompe News Flash. The Populist Group, Body Mine: Women (BMW) are om process of identifying buildings that can be habilitated for the purpose of Development Ex Situ Centers.

This is an issue only for the 99 Percent. The 1 Percent never have to address the issue in public.

Support is clear. This establishment of Ex Situ Development Centers is supported by the ABCD, the Activities Behind Closed Doors, see http://posejuxta.blogspot.com/2011/05/abcd-activity-behind-closed-doors.htmlGroups promoting child support for zygotes, if these are defined as fully human, also support the measure. See http://posejuxta.blogspot.com/2010/05/child-support-for-zygotes-morulas-and.html

.
In a polarized propaganda era, compromises are necessary.
..............................................................
.
* Egg unegged. Sadly from the shell into the frying pan. Same principle as the subserving of any life to that of another. Nphsh. All the same. A balancing of rights.

.

Amygdala-Fear Economics. Invoke Fear and Reason Stops

2011-11-20T18:12:00.005-05:00

SuperCommittee Logjam.

Predictable Amygdala-Fear Response

Stimulate primordial level fear of survival, and then facts will not matter.

The amygdala: brain center of emotion, memory, agression. Fear. Trigger it, and watch all gears of analysis stop. See how incendiary even cartoons can be, when they target the amygdala response, see http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/opinion/sunday/why-are-political-cartoons-incendiary.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=amygdala&st=cse

Today we consider the SuperCommittee in logjam. It is predictable because of the framing in advance, so that artificially induced fear-reaction about action supplants analysis.

Enter the fake requirement of pledges, that betray constituents; fear-mongering fed to voters as to committee members and party supporters, if they show flexibility in analysis; fear of going against party for fear of losing funding; and watch the inability of the brain's amygdala to do other than react when those fears are invoked. Mere threat wins. Is there any means to gain the upper hand over reaction.

Trigger the amygdala. Affront and fear. Thinking stops.

The functions of good government get lost. We are supposed to be an advanced culture. Shall we return to the fir flaithemon, the rulers' truth, of pre-Christian Irish High Kings?
.
See http://www.yourirish.com/history/ancient/high-kings/ A High King convened the oenach, or popular assembly. He collected taxes, built public works, managed external relations, saw to defense and emergency laws, law enforcement and legal judgments. Why can't we?
.
Now, defensiveness against each other is the norm.

To what degree is that thanks to media and political fear drummed into matters where people otherwise could adjust, but those at the top refuse to let them, lest those at the top lose their position of power. And all freezes over.

Need to defend? Who, against what, and how did that idea get out that our enemy is each other. Is it now sabotaging even the party (which?) laying out fear as the people persuader du jour.

A defensive posture prevents thinking.

Watch it. Fear bypasses the thinking brain, and sends out an emotional alarm that triggers reaction, not "thinking." Does it take 20 minutes to an hour to de-compress after the fear response? While flooding is happening, expect nothing to dissipate it. Joseph LeDoux at NYU, neuroscientist, proposes that we stop ignoring or downplaying; or exploiting in secret; of the emotional sides of our brains; the functioning of the amygdala. See http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ledoux/ledoux_p1.html. Make the emotional effect acceptable in discussing what is happening, overt, not covert, because it will control anyway. If we analyze it before it takes hold, can we control it when someone invokes it.

When fear is invoked, the thinking brain goes into full stop for a period of time; and is easily re-instated when the stimulus for the fear is set afire again, even by suggestion. A loss of personal control. personal loss in the face of threat: what is more powerful?

The posture of mutuality:

Before allowing fear to take over, can we teach ourselves a posture of mutuality, an invitation to step back, and even enter into non-defensive postures while we check the sources, the validity of threat.

Body language communicates. Can we even let our arms fall to our sides, palms forward, as we listen. That is the opposite of battle position, and highly vulnerable. But it allows in perceptions, not just reactions. Who has research on how our conscious assuming of body postures and tone of voice can convey attack, defense, or openness. Is it a propaganda tactic to force the defensive posture on one's own constituents, knowing they will be helpless to vet while in its midst. Fear invoking is the best way to avoid merit discusison.

What is needed for reconciliation and problem-solving, where both sides can live with the result.

Occupy's Mantra: Schools, Structures, Jobs, Health. OWS and a Silent Communication

2011-10-27T12:21:00.008-04:00

Occupy: Mantra.
Opportunity Ladder: Reinstall Rungs

OWS Message. Opportunity Requires
Schools, Structures, Jobs, Health.

Clear message: Schools, Structures, Jobs, Health.

How to Communicate That Effectively? Child's Play.

Use the Syrians' Spark of Creativity

Mantra to counter Washington Gridlock Fungus. The 99% Schools, Structuress, Jobs, Health Tap.

Occupy has a vital message for our culture, government, religions. There can be no stability, and productivity for everyone is handicapped, where people have need of schools, structures, jobs and health. Getting those things out of recalcitrant or oppressive governments and traditions is a struggle that usually is dominated by noise and force, bringing on responsive noise and force.

Update: The Dance! Enlist the Muse!

Even in Syria, where the struggle is against oppressive government and truncated opportunity for betterment and individuality, the creative is moving in. Where each side mustered such force against the other, see now an alternative to a physical killing response to massive tank and firepower suppression. Protesters are engaging in dance, yes, dance, in the face of government oppression; and tossing out painted pingpong balls; and broadcasting fake demonstrations the government can't find. See http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/20/world/middleeast/in-uprising-syrians-find-spark-of-creativity.html?ref=todayspaper1. Silence, or group expressive motion with or without music, has a place in demonstrations. Sudden, unexpected silence gets more attention than decibels.

For Occupy Wall Street, OWS, wherever the movement emerges after evictions from the beginning parks, we propose first this verbal message in four words.

Schools
Structures
Jobs
Health.

Do the posters, do the shouts, but intersperse with some humor, some changes of pace that the opposing side cannot counter.

1. Send the message silently. Tap out four taps. Have a sign-language person teach those words in signing. Fold arms and tap out four taps with little fingers.

2. And, as is now being done in Syria, the Syrians' Spark of Creativity, do it by dance. Do it by silent or musical Mantra Conga: a line, one-two-three-kick. http://www.ehow.com/how_2067099_start-conga-line.html;

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=conga+line&mid=321B676A129BB0E59D3F321B676A129BB0E59D3F&view=detail&FORM=VIRE1

.
3. Members of Congress can use the silent communication: the silent forefinger tap, 1-2-3 (rest), 1-2-3 (rest) during speeches by Hatter John, MitchMouse or Eric the Hare.

4. Variations, with the humor of the Syrians as model: Put OWS moles in Fox studio audiences or guest appearances. The silent tap, even a conga tap is encouraged. Mole cameramen have been schooled to pan the camera to such tappings, and will be offered alternate employments thereafter.

.
5. See also Occupy's Songbook, for Marchers, for discreet sound accompaniments: http://joyofequivocating.blogspot.com/#!/2011/11/occupy-songbook-we-are-occupy-y-y.html

.......................................................................................
.
* As long as the 1-2-3-4 rhythm becomes associated like Pavlov (see conditioning theory at http://www.learning-theories.com/classical-conditioning-pavlov.html) with the mantra schools-structures-jobs-health rhythm in any form, in any act-out, the 99% Prevails against the Gridlock Fungus.

Fox loves fungus.

Our favorite: Like Mary Poppins, Occupy in Time, Occupy in Time, Everybody Occupy in Time, One Two Three Kick.

Deity Monologues. Directive Big Religion Industry Falls. Tribute to Mary Daly. Directive Big Religion. Vet Texts.

2011-09-27T12:27:00.007-04:00

The Deity Monologues.
Directive Big Religion Industry Falls
.
Cultural Overlay Exposed.
A Tribute to Mary Daly
.

Saith the Deity: The Directive Big Religion Industry
is More Dangerous to My Creation than Big Government.
.
Is that so?
.

Theological "Trinity": No, Just a Natural Hexagon. Trillium on the Trail. Here, Metacomet in Spring.

The Big Religion Industry Met Its Match in Mary Daly

Mary Daly died in 2010. See her obituary at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/education/07daly.html. Mary Daly has been called a gyno-theologian. See New York Times magazine 12/26/2010 at p.14, article by Sara Corbett.

"She [Mary Daly] didn't blame men individually for the woes of modern life - violence, pollution, inequity -- but collectively, institutionally, they were at fault. She held their power against them. She had names for what she was fighting. 'Phallocracy, penocracy, jockocracy, cockocracy-- call it whatever,' *** "

see article. Rage and vision, the need to shake free of patriarchy, the "sexual caste system." Extreme? Yes. Appropriately? Yes. She studied theology at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland, went to Rome to see the "old men in crimson dresses" with black-garbed nuns shuffling to the altar rail like "a string of lowly ants to a picnic". That article must still be online: Yes! See http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/12/26/magazine/2010lives.html#view=mary_daly

She is somehow behind every "explosion of thought" that takes a woman by surprise, I think. So, these little monologues. Caveat: Read fast. Once delivered, these Monologues will be buried in Desert Jars

to save them from destruction by the Institutions. Summary: The World's Big Problem is Directive Big Religion. Who is behind Directive Big Religion? The guys. Anybody's Big Religion.

Beware the cultural overlay smothering original religious precepts that, left in the persona of the teacher, the prophet, can be wonderful. In the persona of the culture, they are a machete.. Your directive Big Religions skew my messages, if indeed I am sending any, and only I know, saith the Deity. How to discern? Revert to Roots, find the oldest texts, what did they mean, and if that cannot be determined, live with ambiguity. Vet your institutional agendas tainting origins.
......................................................................

Backdrop: Banner --
Who filled in the Hebrew non-vowels to persuade you of something the Hebrews may not have intended at all?

.
The Deity steps to the podium, the audience of Big Institutions hushes. The Deity (at the podium with a Power Point presentation) lets the Image of the Deity hover.
.............................................
.
Deity's Voice.

1. Welcome, all you Institutions.

[Power Point display shows list: Clergy Who Do Not Think. False prophets. Well-meaning folk. Moneymakers. Powermongers. The Curious, the Bored. The Literalists. The Symbol-Addicted.]

2. This is your opportunity to factcheck your political, religious or marketing dogma against my own views of what I intended and did; if I did intend or did. All is indeed ambiguous, as is the human condition. The essential point, is live with it. Why is that so hard?

Accordingly, I will present a series of monologues. These divine ramblings will be put in a book to be located in The Book, in the West's version, after Revelation; and in the East, simply distributed to whomever will receive.

PP display. All is ambiguous. Always was, always will be.
PP display. The lesson of Eden is: There is always ambiguity, plus a serpent in every Eden, and that's life. Live with it. Live with ambiguity and with the serpent itself.

3. So, in your program is a list of suggested online sources for vetting any words you like; so you can free yourselves of Theological Fishnets. At the close of the last Monologue, I will address you all again. A Postlude.

Basic tools: Go here to vet any puzzling term. What do you find?

http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html/ (see? no "Anti-Christ" in the KJV,King James Version, the one we use, see http://www.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=anti+christ&t=KJV). So ask: Who was first to coin the term, literally for personal profit; why, where?

Start at http://martinlutherstove.blogspot.com/2008/10/looking-for-antichrist-who-does-it-and.html

4. Other sources for vetting on your own, skip the Big Figurehead, head bigger than your TV

The Deity dons a special Robe, and ambles back and forth on the stage a while before stepping forward:

............................................................................

Deity Monologue I.

Institutions Deviate from Intent

.
Creator Voice Says:
Lecture-Tone

.

Promise. A Promise for me and mine, however. Not you, Or is it just a rainbow?

.
Crisis time!
Why can't you people get along?
People, where's your authorization
To add Words and required practices and say it's Me.
The Word, as men have written, tweaked it,
How's that institution attributed to me?
All I wanted was a tiller for the garden.
He needed a guide so I provided. That's all.
No marriage, no vows, no worship, just till the place.
Yeesh.
.
Even an intended straight dictation didn't stay that way,
Is that so?
Texts have a history. See http://www.scribd.com/doc/36006748/The-History-of-the-Quranic-Text-From-Revelation-to-Compilation
East: Ninth Century was a good one for the tweakings.

Can't you all live with ambiguity?
Why not leave it inconsistent?
Room for interp.
West: Visions and Dreams. Patmos awry.
Apocalypse! http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/
Who said all that? Not I.
Bk of Rev = Good ad for Mary Jane. Lucy in the Sky.
Ask Why?
Fear makes the cash box ring.
Makes people follow. Hierarchy of needs thing.
Abraham again. Maslow now. Management.
East-West, Right-Wrong, Living awry.
I said, Don't be afraid.
That didn't go far.
I said what I said or didn't say. You pick.
.
Since when are translations and transliterations
Unflawed by human ears, eyes, hands.
In the beginning and on the mountains,
Nobody who heard, could write. Fine.
.
Enter interpretation. Choices of words, their own narrative of it.
And they did. Like any eyewitnesses - doubt them. Doubt.
Soon memory conforms to the narrative.
And people die.
And ideas die.
Pass-through for stuff interpreted their way.
The NChSh. Many angles there. Depends on the vowels.
Ambiguity. Built in. Why fight it?
Hey. Find gaps? Inconsistency?
Your problem if you can't live with ambiguity.
Or won't let others live with it.
You make a problem of gaps, not me.

And if you let other people fill in my gaps, that's their words, not mine.
And your problem.
Don't mix us up.
I did the doing, they did the interpreting,
Then retrofitting to fit what they wanted

...................................................
.

Deity Monologue II:

On Living with Ambiguity. A Good Idea.

.
Creator Voice Says:
Cajoling tone.

Why can't you like me just as I am?
I am the God who made Newts to scoot.
Some do, some don't. Some's just flawed.

Newt, generic concept, running

It's for you to root. Or uproot.
Wisdom and I are going out to lunch.
.
The doubters. Now, they are always on target.
They told the literalists that
Nobody told her where the bad tree was.
Which one it was. Life? Knowledge? Where is the center anyway?
Come, dearie, it's all right. Have a bite.
Quoth the NChSh.
.
And the one who never told her, the Fraud Extraordinaire,
Kept the directions to himself, he did.
Watched and waited while she bit. Then wanted his
Once it was safe.
Worse than the NChSh!
.
How could messages get so twisted?
Lots of answers proposed, none clear. Fine.
Each helpful, if not dispositive.
Get feet on amateur Hebrew ground at FN1
Hebrew? No vowels.
Whch wrd s mnt.
Lf wth n vwls.
Wh ppl dvt lvs t schlrshp.
.
Who filled in your vowels, to persuade you of something?
A divine enchanter Eliyah 5172
So Eve was right: Serpent did a job on her.
Nobody believed.
Blame, blame.
And Newt blames and changes enemies along with wives.
Run, Callista, run
Before you are turned into a bear.

...................................................................

.
Deity Monologue III

There will always be a Serpent in your Eden
Live with it.

.
Creator Voice Says:
This is the eternal truth. No Eden is without its serpent.
Scripture4all
.
But you people try to cast them out. Even I could not do that.
I can tweak the feet, but not get rid of the evil that still gets around.
Watch Newt try,
The name standing for all who would Absolute the World.
What is the serpent du jour
The one thing that if we got rid of, we'd be happy? fools.
.
Newt Alert! The Serpent is UnDoc-ed Immigrants!
Dock 'em.
Put 'em in the dock, says Newt.

Newt, generic concept, Perspective.

Cast them out.
Who let them in? Who profited from them?
The Deity didn't seal the borders, so the Deity did!
He's in charge. He allowed aliens in there.
Who are you to try to bar the door. Can't work.
Point! Point! More aliens! There and There!
.
Better to throw out the Deity, me, for malfeasance.
Who needs your institutions.
Live with what you got, minimize hurt all around.
.
Newt's Proofs will not be stilled.
Foreigners! Furriners!
There in Eden!
.

................................

Deity Monologue IV

Rev your research.

Texts. Trace them. Who added, chose what.

Newt says serpent means aliens.
Serpent himself is an alien, etymologically speaking.
Deserves to be tossed. No dreams allowed here. Hear?
Strong's Hebrew word 5176.
Names of Non-Israelis.
Go one up to 5176-5175 hssss
.
No, says Israel. The serpent is any Enemy of Israel,
Especially Palestine.
And we know that because the serpent
Went out of Eden to Palestine's fair city!
Look up Strong's Hebrew 5904 -
So that's where the snake's progeny went!
Add 5904=5892+5175 hssss
Find actual places, then, to now
Ir-Nachash or Ir-Nahash
Studylight "City of a Serpent"
Palestine's Fair City Deir Nahhas
No, no, no!
It now is in Israel, o ye borders,
Lod, Lydda, southeast of Tel Aviv now.
.
Lod. OMG.
That puts the fair city in Israel and not Palestine now!
More ambiguity!
Let the talks resume, please!
Wiki on Lod
Israel's fair city
Where girls are so ---
Abarim discussed Judah
Need a new argument.
Keep going. Keep going.
.
Arab side says, serpent is Israel
Because the serpent's mouth is the root of Israeli names.
Strong's H6372 and H6310. Go look
More ambiguity. Can't stand it!
Take 6372=6310+5175 hssss
"Piynchac pee-nekh-aws' "
Serpent's mouth.
Pinechas. Phinehas.
Three Israelites were named this.
Also Phineas T. Bluster
Phineas T. Barnum
And Phineas, son of Pretty Woman.
And Phineas T. Newt.
Not pretty.

Liberals everywhere say
Serpent is the exploiter, the red
The color of inside the hissser's mouth
Strong's H5153 says it all.
Saith the prognosticator:
See 5153=5175's denominative
The red throat.
Coppery. Hard. Brassy.
Run!
Say the redthroats, the brassy ones.
Take your silly sharing opportunity ideas and
Run, run as fast as you can
And let us hoard and shut your schools
So people won't learn to think.
Hire Neurofocus, the force,
The induced fear, the fake ridicule tool,
The propaganda.
The true Serpent.
.
....................................................................................

POSTLUDE

The Deity continues: There you have it. My ramble as the Originator on what has happened to my alleged Words.

On my way here, I knew the timing was right for this convocation because I heard people asking, Is Obama the Anti-Christ?

What? There is no such Word for Antichrist or Anti-Christ or Anti Christ in My Words.

Who is slipping in an agenda with loaded terminology and dogma here? Your country won't let people use hallucinogens but you Worship Revelation, its true manifestation, and that's the truth.

Hartford Courant prefers Race over candidate Policy. Who is the antichrist? The media skewing realities?

I admit that the general idea of this recurrent Armageddon; and who is or will be responsible; has recurred for two thousand years and nobody ever saw it happen. Nonetheless, you raise it when you money interests are threatened What?

Yet, despite all "relationship with a deity" or other good purposes of religion, it focuses on some trumped-up (what can the ad-men call it? )Antichrist as relevant to politics is now in there, again, and again and again, I guess it will be prediction news until It happens (stifles yawn). See http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/26/opinion/why-the-antichrist-matters-in-politics.html?scp=1&sq=obama%20antichrist&st=cse

My interest is in getting some cooperation in voluntary divestment of religious excess, to dismantle many of you. The chances? Not great, thus the jars will hide these texts from those who seek to destroy them. I expect opposition, like in Moneyball, changing how baseball is analyzed. Vested interests oppose. Change is hard. The hard workers don't always get rewarded. So? Quit complaining.

Particularly as to Revelation, each religion's version of such, whoever said that Revelation was no more than an ad for Mary Jane, or Lucy in the Sky? AntiChrist? Ye gods. Get a life. Go back to the gist of teachings, people. Not the fear-mongers. Gullibility gene amok. Follow the money. As to Eastern religions of the Book, this is not in-depth at this point because you are newer to the Scene and analysis is not complete.
.
That said, I suggest that you address your forms of Revelation and Inspiration against original texts, not one deli-layer of interpretation on another, with fear, there it is again (nothing like a little fear to make you malleable) as the mustard.

.
For the West, you will note many opportunities for slips and slides. Hebrew has no vowels, for example. And Vowels can make or break a word. Is every Ideology tainated by arbitrary, culture-serving, agenda-filled Gap-Fillers? Power creators creating for themselves and their institutions. For the East, let the women drive, for God's sake. Bottom line is, don't force your view of somebody's dream of punishments on other folks. Or you will indeed make your own End Times real. Skip Tea. Take T for time out. Beware the cultural overlay imposed by candidates, or used by them to lure others into the fold.

Until then, don't lose your sense of humor. You here, Newt?

Have a fig, Newt.
Newt tries to be cute.
A little red snake cousin
Got legs to run with, scoots.

Run, newt, run.
.

.....................................................
* Eliyah. Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon. See http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html/
.
** NChSh - see Hebrew word at Parallel Hebrew Old Testament at http://www.hebrewoldtestament.com/B01C003.htm; and as nchsh at Scripture4all at http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen3.pdf

IThe Yard AntiChrist

Do you believe it? Or is it just a ginkgo.

Pragmatism of Balance: Open Pyramid Shape for Legislation, Religion, Culture. The Open Pyramid

2011-08-14T13:05:00.006-04:00

Balance in Legislation and Religion.
What Shape Lasts
.
Three Dimensional; Shock Absorbing;
Open but Firm Foundation, Equal Structures Leading Bottom to Apex

The Pyramid. Draw one. Square base. Draw lines from each corner of the base, to a point at the top. Make four sides, each its own triangle. Now, that is firm. Each line has its place with the others. Stretch one out beyond the others, and it becomes unstable. Now: Keep it open, or shut it?

.
.

The Open Pyramid. Shape of Lasting Stability. The ultimate feeder.

What are the basic elements of a lasting ideology. What conceptual shape would support legislation, religious orientation, politics and culture in a way that survives the next election, the next ideological fad, multiplicity.
.
Look away from the two-dimensional, the linear. the immediate agenda goal. Look again at the pyramid, and how that three-dimensional concept actually supports a lasting structure, a rationale to undergird any human endeavor . However it is used, the pyramid is a symbol of balance, stability with room to swing, calibration, equilibrium. rest.

The desert pyramid, however, the solid, unmoving, intransigent, built-by-slaves type, holds a) dead bodies; or b) the equivalent, the botoxed tanning-bedded implanted, tunneling their hoardings underground, off-surface.
The open pyramid, however, supports many comings and goings, depending on needs; keep enough seed on the floor but keeping it always full with open access to all of it all the time, invites the squirrels. There will always be squirrels around to manage to sit in the middle, that's human nature; so only put enough in so if they arrive and you aren't there to lecture them, and chase, they don't get much and have to leave. Let the hoarders do their hoarding elsewhere, but anybody who wants to come here can. We find the big flocky birds stay away anyway. No attraction to eating here. Put one of those big caws on the end here, and all tips.

.
There it is: the ultimate bird feeder. A simple screen, in a simple wooden square frame, cheap chains of equal length meeting to suspend it at the top. Room for all. Squirrels? Sure. So allow them in by not putting in all the feed at once. Swing, everybody gets a share. Keep it close to the porch so you can lecture -- appropriate regulation is appropriate. Have the tools handy and noisy.

Reclaim and recycle a venerable symbols for balance in moving forward with basic institutions: political, religious, economic, cultural. The Pyramid. For family, think of a non-nuclear concept.

.
.

1. The Open Pyramid and Balance in Politics.
.
Take jobs, for example. No, create them. The President seeks balance in policy, not the overwhelming "win" to one side or the other, but a way to meet many needs. What are the chances?

Images. A secular balance is often visualized as a scale, holding even, evidence weighed carefully; lady justice perhaps with a blindfold. Note the fellow at the bottom of Lady Justice in Bern, Switzerland, trying to get his thumb on the scale so he gets the advantage. That is like the squirrel. Needs regulation. A balanced policy image takes thought but also precautions against squirrels. Too often, however, the interloping tilter is portrayed as a foreigner -- look at the peaky hat. Is that a turban? What medieval role (every culture needs a scapegoat) is that? An ethnicity? A non-Swiss-sanctioned outlander or mole Religion?
.

Balance. Lady Justice, Bern. Holds scale, jokers at her feet tipping the scales, , backside well protected

CYA has its beginnings here. See her in armor, our Bern Lady Justice, with butt-cover. Must be a lawyer.
.
Another view of balance is the equilibrium of a dancer or tightrope walker, making solo progress on a fine point or line, and not falling, at least not then. The only point is to get from Point A to Point B and hustle ahead of time to see that the line is kept firm just for you. That is the victory of the negative, the exclusive; the absence of fall for that one alone, until some hand or distraction tilts, tips, and the tumble comes. That weight-holding balance, teetering, does not last. Bar escape back to A, or acess to B, and the teeterer indeed falls. Instability is built in, and dependence on the structure to serve your goals, devil take anybody else, where one teeters. Tweet it.
.
.
2. Security and the Pyramid.
.
Scramble for the top of the solid pyramid, and you may be King of the Mountain for a day. Or get a head start on your accumulation by inheritance. Race, when it comes to getting to the top, matters. Did your family have the opportunity to accumulate, learn how to manage, experiment profitably with what they earned over the last 200 years or whatever? Blacks couldn't. All they made went to the whites. Does that make a difference? Are you secure yet? Are you in a gated community? To keep out the dirty rascals?

A pyramid idea does not deny the need for accumulation of wealth, a fine tool for healthy capitalism, as Adam Smith noted, see http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/pdf/ess_adamsmithorigin.pdf.

The idea of the open pyramid is the built-in pass-through. But look at hoarders of it, or those who invest for themselves alone, to give to their children as an entitlement so they can avoid hourly work. Do children only reflect well in disposition of parents' wealth to the first or second generation, and after that, it is freeload time, like the logical result of the unendingly full bird feeder?). Hoard or expend for power and not common good, undermines us all. King of the Castle. Go, dirty rascals. Tip that one off. Eventually it happens. Andrew Carnegie knew the solution: the tax-method of pass-through. To encourage passing on the wealth, and wean off lazy dependents, tax at death only what is left in the control of the decedent when the decedent decedes. He has to have arranged for it to be out of his control at death.

A Koch Brother

.
So: The secure place on the open pyramid is not at the apex -- all the goodies are below, at the base. Stay at the top and you get none. Join the feast, but have other feeding sources handy. Squirrels come.

Other feeding sources are encouraged by the open pyramid: A healthy open pyramid feeder sustains, so that opportunity can be sought on a full stomach. But only just so full. Sustain, not wallow all day. The regulators are needed against the squirrels.

Is the pyramid a ponzi scheme? Take out a dollar. The pyramid is there -- perhaps the Masonic, or definitely the Masonic idea, but there to be contemplated even by those who do not know the Masonic. The Eye is the regulator, is that so? Against the squirrels.

That is a solid pyramid there, one that lasts (practically) forever, and with the dead bodies and musty treasure, helping noone else, deep inside. That pyramid may chip and wear, but it does not fall; it wears away, collapses on the edges, or at weak spots, but other stones hold it up. And it requires the Eye of the Regulator. Masons, see http://www.msana.com/eyeinpyramid.asp, will say, no, no, the Eye is the Almighty or something else. All in the eye of the beholder.

We say the hidden message, hidden even from everyday Masons, is the Eye of the Regulator. Prove us wrong. A rhetorical dead end.
.
.
3. The pyramidal balance as an ideology or analogy.

Opponents of use of a pyramid analogy, the open pyramid in particular, will be loud. In extremist religious terms, the pyramid is satanic or something:

The pyramid is demonic to some: ideology for some is based on certain literal translations, or bad translations without context or form criticism; that demands for the gullible that interpretation, for some. See Satan on our Dollar. Do a search: find "Luciferian intent" and all sorts of apocalyptic textual extrapolations from literal this and that (no vetting).
Some might even believe, as at The Nephilim Built the Pyramids, that giants, offspring of fallen angels, impregnated women and that race built the pyramids. Vet that one. Vet it all. See if that interpretation is grounded. See http://www.hebrewoldtestament.com or http://scripture4all.org/

Secret societies have raised suspicions about the pyramid and its "magical" properties:

Good works by people with secret Order backgrounds, Masonic symbolism, for example, that use the pyramid, are also rejected by some. Taint. The good work cannot be a good work because the worker was not good, meaning like us.

Satanist fears.
.
The extreme views of a few do not require that we end the benefit of examining the pyramid for secular and governmental purposes. Sufficiency for all, equal opportunity ladders in reach, an apex that has "give" and allows swing without tilt.

Use of illustrations is a means of communication, not a plot.

No. This is communications in a plural society, illustrations, not knee-jerk. We are looking at the multi-cultural, multi-mindset context that opposed by partisanship (seeks supremacy) of today. But the idea can be modified to fit the traditional scales:

Evangelical-conservative religion's alternative:
If the concept of a pyramid brings to mind satanic eyes, think of the balance concept as each side of the scales, where it takes at least three lines to hold the bowl-tray level.
Thus, if a bowl-tray is to be stable with only rich and poor, then the thing tips. Add infrastructure, access to opportunity, and the bowl-tray become even more stable. But each must have its proportional length, or the thing tips again.

4. If balance itself can be an ideology, then what is balanced.

Look at the drawing of a pyramid, all those lines and sides extending upward from a flat base, in a pluralist society. Idea.

Wisdom is the base. Does it make a difference if the base is choice and responsibility of the individual; or ideology, where the individual is not responsible, just follow the ideology.

The four lines starting at different points on the base, that meet and lean on one another at the top.

Line 1. The linear approach, toward a path, "increase". Accumulation, even if it harms others. Goal directed.

Line 2. The creator approach, making more in new ways, toward fullness, without harming others. A web.

Line 3. The service approach, outward seeing, action toward common good

Line 4. The self approach, inward seeing, action toward one's own benefit

Linear, web, common good, self. Resting on analysis and wisdom. Meeting at the top: a way of keeping one from getting too long, or shortened too much by the others.

Now: how do religions and political parties measure. Are the four sides given play. What stability can be predicted if anyone side is targeted for removal. Does it follow that wisdom requires all four in order to be a wise pyramid. Pursuing one line or the other removes it from its base -- that point at the top where all lean on the others.

So what? Nothing. The idea just came. What of the sides that are not seen. It is impossible to see all sides of a pyramid at once. That is true also in life. Some things are unknown at the same time as the rest.

5. Who is putting this idea across, in a highly partisan environment

A secular common sense balance is sought by President Obama and others looking to meet many needs, without vanquishing anyone. That concept is in the pyramid - several lines reaching up from a common base, each must be in proportion or the entire base tilts.

Change: Recalibrates as needed. Hartford.

The ideologue for political balance is - Obama. Hello, Rosa. You are there, too; and Caroline who weighed her own balance and decided to support from the sides. Fine. This was Hartford.

And the side of history is on the balancing side, not on the pushers of one line so that all else gets slanted. Is that so? Try it. Think back. Has the pyramidal balance as change idea failed? No. The testing is premature. Could he oversee the recalibration of the imbalances in Washington in two years? 2 1/2? No.

6. The time frame for recalibrating is a longer one than anyone wants.

Ask this instead: how is the aim. Aim for change and how do you get there? Not frontally.

It is impossible to change the balance of a scale when one side won't get its big thumb off; so the image of balance and the scale does not work. But the pyramid does, the Obama-style balancing image, room for all, but none overwhelms the others.

Change is recalibration. Without recalibration, autocrats secret funders take over. The pyramid idea of the calibration works. Analysis at the base, and wisdom in assessing facts; there is room for all four separate strands to stand tall and still meet at the top. Change from the domination of one at the expense of others. That takes time.

Moderation in language is another way of expressing balance. It is frustrating for the ones who want to see somebody get a whipping, but attacks would hold up the process, distract. Humiliations lead to retribution, calcification. See http://worldwar1worldwar2.blogspot.com/2011/08/language-of-war-communications-theory.html

5. Check it out.

Look at our political pyramid: Think of the embodiment of the four strands up, each needed for the whole, but in balance, not one overwhelming any other. Nowhere in history has that worked for long.

Accumulation strand - Republicans. Corporations as a genre. Accumulate, in the countinghouses in secret; accumulate. Whatever wins more accumulation is fine. Hoard, Perry. Pretend that "submit" as the Biblical idea (not ours, but she said it) is the same as "respect", when questioned about it. Michelle B. Play semantic games so you get what you want. Let anybody else's needs, or the nation's need, go fly.

There is room for those lines in that pyramid, but kept in proportion.

Safety net strand, infrastructure includes the human - Democrats. Put that in place so all have access to the tools for opportunity. Keep it lean enough so that it does not become a discretionary resting point, but keep it standing tall. Fair levels of taxes - ability, need, each a balance, with productivity the goal.

Creator strand - Make something new out of the old. Who are they? The artistic, the generative, some of each, plus Independents. The Arts. The inventors.

Self strand. - The Ayn Randists, in the secular world. If I can make you lose, you deserve to lose, loser. Religious groups whose ideology as developed by individuals fosters making money for them and some, while forcing conversions, bullying, even killing, and forcing ideologies on others. Crusades, Inquisitions, Northern Crusades in Europe, Cathar Crusades, indigenous slaughters, we are full of it. Now, where's my gun?

6. The strength of the accommodator.

The conciliator takes the long view, adds to legislation, a desirable, flexible dragon clause. If the dragon comes, then we will do this, or that. http://martinlutherstove.blogspot.com/2009/12/golden-mean-fleece-dragon-and-law-of.htm

When to take out the machete? Should the leader have one, to keep the barbarians at bay. Or wait? No clear answers. Recalibrate and recalibrate. Balance every step. Obama is doing well at that. Timing just right. Machete in its own way.

Katharine Lee Bates. America the Beautiful II. Revised. Hoarders' Chorus Responds, Alleluia

2011-08-02T10:34:00.004-04:00

America the Beautiful II

Inspired By the Original Words of Katharine Lee Bates

Revision by Conductor Mitch Mouse and the Ayn and Rand Singers

America the Beautiful II. Performed by Mitch Mouse, Conductor of the Revenue Protection Society, and the Ayn and Rand Singers

Katharine Lee Bates was Not Consulted for this America the Beautiful II.

Update 2012. Mitt Romney likes the original America the Beautiful, and uses it to woo Iowa. See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/us/politics/mitt-romney-waxes-poetic-as-he-woos-iowa-voters.html?scp=1&sq=Romney%20likes%20America%20the%20Beautiful&st=cse. Mitt Romney absolutely supports this song, in the original. So do I. But does he have some information about it that the rest of us do? See Katharine Lee Bates.

Katharine Lee Bates. Who was she? We are pleased.
Did They Realize? *

.......................................................................

America the Beautiful II, for Times of Economic Recession, Personal rights repression
.
America

O Beautiful for smog-filled skies,

For genetically altered grain.

For purple mountains' tops mined off,

No jobs on the toxic, fruitless plain.

America! America!

God meant your wealth for Me.

Not you, or you. Skip brotherhood.

Worship the dead-zone sea.

O Beautiful for pilgrim feet

Rigid, stern impassioned stress.

Exclude the nonconforming: out!

Our righteous norms we force.

America! America!

There's cash in every flaw.

Who cares for soul, for self-control,

My liberty your law.
.

O Beautiful for heroes proved

In liberating strife.

Mercy and tolerance touted high,
Profit supersedes breathing life.

America! America!

Watch us more dross refine.

Till pockets deep fill deeper still

Pray alchemy to gold divine.

O Beautiful for patriot dream.

I define what I want here.

Let cities rot, build jails that gleam,

Homes dimmed with human tears!

America! America!

Common good tried hard with thee.

But sustenance and help in need

Drowned in venality.
.

Cheers erupt from the right. But wait! There are only six people there. Everybody else just left. Mitch Mouse and the Ayn & Rand Singers never noticed. And who are the six? _______________________!

................................................................

.
* Katharine Lee Bates, 1859-1929, BA Wellesley College, Professor and Head of English Department there. She was a feminist, and her companion of 25 years was Katharine Coman. Theirs was a "romantic friendship," see http://www.gayheroes.com/bates.shtml; http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/legacy/v023/23.1bates.html

For Katharine Coman, see her overview as an economist and intellectual at http://www.jstor.org/pss/4228084

America the Beautiful III. Revision by the Out of Work Protest Chorus

2011-08-01T09:35:00.010-04:00

America the Beautiful III.
Version by The Out of Work
Protest Chorus

Katharine Lee Bates: inspiration

Who ate the goose?

Heard backstage:
(Rap snaps) -- Speech or music, name the tune:
Pick your when, and how and where.
Wrong time, place and manner? Zaps debate.
Maybe they don't want debate?
Jobs. Jobs. Who's got the jobs?
All they do now, is Skip Jobs.

(curtain rises)

AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL iii
DC
.

Oh, beautiful for humane cause
This land did once espouse.

Access to opportunity;
A common good here housed.

America, America, Gave pathways through these shores

To sustenance to those who sought; or those who fled from wars.

.
The young folks emigrated
.

Oh, beautiful for humane cause.
We rallied in times past.

At home, abroad, helped those in need.
Shared fruits of our life's path.

America, America? Fog lowers. Share? abhorred.

The Work for greater good, now hid. Pay's better if you hoard. * (DC al fine)

Oh, beautiful for humane cause.
Now Empire shuts the door.

It's Colonized we are again,
Ravaged here; with theirs offshore.

America, America.
The Gated 'gainst the "we."

Our Land was built on competition.
Is thee afraid of free? (Fine).

(Applause! Applause! Standing O!)

Mitch Mouse , who had been sitting in the back, ducked for the door. Afraid. Very afraid.
..............................................................

* Trompe News. Dateline today. For immediate Release. America has a new pastime. The Hoard. The Big Hoard, the Big Offshore, has replaced Baseball as the National Game. Runs score only with each job or financial or tangible asset shipped overseas.

Farfar. Went through his country's depression. Didn't think it would happen here. Wrong, Farfar. Same reasons.

Farfar. He stayed home.

Debt Ceiling. Opportunity that Passed. The President's Signing Statement.

2011-07-27T09:07:00.002-04:00

PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENT:
The Opportunity for a signing statement that passed by.

Signing statement as tool/

If only the President had said, as his Predecessor often did: that elements of this law that he now signs will be disregarded byt him as violating his own view of the Constitution.

Could the President here have said ,"Staggered implementation, and a too-short effectiveness time frame,

constitute an unconstitutional questioning of the nation's debt obligation."

Trompe News. Dateline today. Wishful thinking By Dint.
.
The President signed into law today the legislation passed by the House and Congress raising the debt ceiling.
.
The law was signed, however, with the declaration by the President that the President has the power to set aside, not only all of the law as a veto, but parts of it: when those portions conflict with his interpretation of the Constitution.
.
This kind of signing statement was frequent in signings of former president(s) on other occasions, see http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/examples_of_the_presidents_signing_statements/
.
The President noted that a) the multiple-step implementation of the full raise amount and b) the short effectiveness date imposed, conflicted with the Constitution that provides that the debts of the United States shall not be questioned. The two-step dance constitutes such an unconstitutional questioning, see the 14th Amendment at Pre-Emptive Executive Order, http://joyofequivocating.blogspot.com/2011/07/debt-ceiling-raised-by-pre-emptive.html.

Aides reported that this process of the signing statement was selected by the President rather than the alternative, also available to him, the pre-emptive or self-destructing executive order. Such an executive order would take effect in the event that Congress did not do its duty before the deadline. Either choice permitted implementation in whole and not in part, no staggered step-trips. In light of various impasses, this step has been met with broad support.

FDR Meets Ayn Rand. Political Platforms Wrestle. Democratic Humanitarianism v The Procrustean Bed.

2011-07-08T04:40:00.002-04:00

Political Platforms Wrestle

I. Match: FDR and Ayn Rand

Topic: Humanitarianism in the Context of Democracy and its National Needs Long Term

The FDR Corner

FDR, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, is represented by his Four Freedoms Speech, addressing Congress January 6, 1941 See http://americ anrhetoric.com/speeches/fdrthefourfreedoms.htm:

1. Freedom of Expression
2. Freedom to Worship God One's Own Way
3. Freedom from Want
4. Freedom from Fear

Remember FDR? Here, later at Potsdam, with Winston and Josef. Swedish Air Force Museum, Linkoping. Fair use, small part of exhibit.

For Potsdam, where WWII peace terms were settled, see http://germanyroadways.blogspot.com/2006/09/potsdam-palaces-parks-wwii.html

The Ayn Rand Corner
.

Ayn Rand is represented by The Procrustean Bed, a method of problem-solving that takes precise measurements and applies. See http://www.bartleby.com/81/13673.html.

Procrustes: There was a wise story among the ancients: about Procrustes and his bed and rigid assessments in life. Ayn bought a thousand copies (Ayn like in Whine).

Let a long traveler pass by needing lodgings, and Procrustes (in some versions, a robber) would note the excess that could not be accommodated, and lop off the traveler's feet, or his head, to make him fit the Procrustean Bed. Problem solved. The traveler indeed had a bed to fit the new shortened length as required by the size of the frame, but was quite dead .Procrustean Bed. The Individual Against the Statistic.

Let a short traveler pass by needing lodgings, and Procrustes would not the need, and stretch that poor soul until he was the length of the Procrustean Bed. The need was accommodated, but the traveler quite dead. Procrustes had done his job. Stretch or lop the poor soul thus enmattressed. And all dead.Only the official measurement mattered. No wiggle room to accommodate individual context. The bed length at the time governed regardless.

Multiple Procrustean Beds for losers. See how many can be accommodated at one size, and how it is done. Sonderborg Castle, women's prison incarnation, Sweden

II. FDR Expands on Policy and Obligations, Same Speech

"As a nation we may take pride in the fact that we are soft-hearted; but we cannot afford to be soft-headed."

" ... [B]eware of that small group of selfish men who would clip the wings of the American eagle in order to feather their own nests."

Under discussion: Application of the Four Freedoms to the States, see http://hellofodderhellobuyer.blogspot.com/2010/07/fdrs-four-freedoms-applied-to-states.html

A. Basic requirements for the inner and abiding strength of our political and economic system

The basic things expected by our people of their political and economic systems are simple. They are:

Equality of opportunity for youth and for others.

Jobs for those who can work.

Security for those who need it.

The ending of special privilege for the few.

The preservation of civil liberties for all.

The enjoyment -- The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and constantly rising standard of living.

B. What is to be done

Bring more citizens under the coverage of old-age pensions and unemployment insurance.

Widen the opportunities for adequate medical care.

Plan a better system by which persons deserving or needing gainful employment may obtain it.

C. What is needed to get it done

Personal sacrifice, and I am assured of the willingness of almost all Americans to respond to that call; including.

payment of more money in taxes.

D. Further concepts, goals, assessments

Summary: Counter poisonous propaganda that destroys unity and promotes discord.

Seek a peace that fosters international generosity, true independence, world disarmament, freedoms of expression and religion, good business and security.

Policy: Promote a decent respect for the rights and dignity of all persons and nations, all over the world, the justice of morality.

Commitments: national defense, support for those resisting aggression, seeking freedom, and so keep war from our hemisphere,

III. Ayn Rand Expands on Policy and Obligations

Disclosure: Ms. Rand's heirs own and operate the Procrustean Bed Corporation

on which her model for humanitarianism is based

Deluxe Procrustean Bed, Sonderborg Castle, just off the throne room, Sweden

A. Basic requirements for the inner and abiding strength of our system

No demands shall be made on anyone on behalf of anyone else. Have a bed handy so that if someone asks for lodging for the night, you can provide it and make the person fit it. That will teach the traveler who is obviously an inferior planner for his own life, not to bother you again.

B. What is do be done

Go about your business and have that bed handy in case somebody talks mutuality or community or other pap for the common good. There is no common good. There is only what is good for me, now, in my view.

C. What is needed to get it done

All laws shall be rewritten in disappearing ink. No government intrusion into individual decisionmaking shall be permitted. I am my own Empire. Context and chance, rather than individual intrinsic merit, as influencing destiny? Nuts, says Rand the Younger, with his elite upbringing, his elite profession, his pale tint opening doors. I am who I am because I am Rand the Younger. My assets say that I am a superior being.

D. Further concepts

Now, can I sell you a bed? Do you live at a crossroads? This is just what you need.

Jante Law and Politics of the Group. The Wild Voter Looks.

2011-06-17T09:26:00.009-04:00

Jante's Law
Janteloven and the Tea Party

NYTFOB - New York Times Finally on Board on issue of national or party norms affecting current events
In Norway, Consensus Cuts Two Ways: Jante Law (context: Breivik mass killings)

Debt ceiling proposal passes House by Jante force, not merit

O, Little Town of Jante [Koge, really]

Scandinavia's Ten Commandments of Conformity comforts the group. Meet the concept in the fictitious Danish town of Jante: The Group's sultural leveling system proliferates to benefit itself, at the expense of creativity. Is this so: that the Jante approach inspires the Republican Purity Tests, "Loyalty" Oaths, Litmus Tests. See the "Pledge to America" --Whose America is envisioned, fostered, and at the expense of what?

The Group Speaks and overcomes the individual. Try Mnemonics: ABCD. Always Beat Creativity Down. Is that at the base of the current debt ceiling fiasco. Jante has taken over the Tea Party.

Jante says,

1. Do not approve another's idea, lest that other find success in it. Oppose, oppose, even though the idea may inure to your own benefit.

2. Do not praise another's accomplishment, lest the other's effectiveness display your own lack.

3. Speak ill of others and oppose those proposed for leadership positions. Prefer absence of any leader to the risk of progress through another's plan.

4. Dissemble on fact, if fact fails to support past culture-myth and present lucre source. Stand fast to your view of your own lucre entitlements. Stand fast, regardless.

Jante says, "Oppose the individual creative ones, lest their ideas succeed and reflect badly on us." Is that so?

Jante's Law --

Overview. Jante is a fictitious Danish town, the subject of a 1933 novel by Aksel Sandemose, A Fugitive Crosses His Tracks.

The Town follows its own Ten Commandments, a 10 commandments of conformity, and its precepts are still at work, and infiltrating politics and a religion near you.

The concept is part of Scandinavian culture, referred to simple as "Jante" or as Jante Law in parens, in the midst of other topics. The idea expands to this: Even when the group's members are now surviving well enough (Jante is not in danger); the Group itself (Jante as institution, as culture) must Perpetuate Itself, for Itself. Use envy, fear, humiliation, whatever works to keep people in line.

Here:

A.   The Jante Commandments. Jante Law.
B.   The Source - and how it has made its way into culture
C.   The Political and Religious Application:
C.1 Republican Litmus Tests
C.2. Republican loyalty-purity tests/oaths
D.   How Jante Law Functions (well in a crisis) and Dysfunctions (after the crisis, when the Group perpetuates itself for itself)

Conclusion and comment. Note that government perpetuating itself for itself is just as dysfunctional as a form of Jante law (how dare you question the government, etc), as a political party doing so. But the insidiousness of the political party in working against democracy is the advance requirement to adopt a line of thinking without thinking, regardless of voter constituency. The constituency becomes the party.

The issue of whether legislators serve voters or special interests is addressed at pending legislation, see http://posejuxta.blogspot.com/2011/06/voter-as-client-of-legislative.html
..........................................................................

A. Jante Law

The "us" in the text is as given (sic). It is grammatically incorrect, but perhaps that was intentional. It does express the groupthink, thinking it knows it all, better than a "we" would, think we.

Join us now, as The Group warns, fingers wagging:

Jante's Law:

Jante says, "Do not think you are somebody."

You will stay in line. You will stay in line. We will make your life miserable if you do not stay in line.

Open quote

1. Do not think you are somebody

2. Do not think you are just as much as us (sic)

3. Do not think you are smarter than us

4. Do not delude yourself that you're better than us

5. Do not think you know more than us

6. Do not think you're more than us

7. Do not think you are worth something

8. You must not laugh at us

9. You must not believe that someone cares about you

10. Do not think you can teach us something

End quote.*

Jante Law. You only have the freedom we say you have. Stay in line.

Here, Mel as William Wallace at Stirling, Scotland, Freedom! shouts he. He thinks he is getting it, but the Group has other ideas and he ends up drawn and quartered.
...........................................................

B. Source of the concept, Jante Law

* Jante's Law, the implementation of conformity and repression, comes from Denmark, the work of a Danish-born Norwegian, see http://www.janteloven.dk/; http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=da&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.janteloven.dk%2F Jante is a fictitious village in Denmark that lives by the precepts laid out: the small town, the repression of the individual.

Jante's way of life is the brainchild of Aksel Sandemose (1899-1965): see his novel, A Fugitive Crosses His Tracks, 1933; see http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,771871,00.html; see also http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/852300/A-Fugitive-Crosses-His-Tracks

Its roots go deeper, however, and are familiar throughout Scandinavia, apparently.

Jante's law is also in Sweden: see http://www.waste.org/~xtal/red/jante.html

Meet the idea at work in Sweden centuries ago, during the Reformation and Counter-Reformation and reformation of the Reformation. Meet a Lutheran Pietist imprisoned at Bohus Fortress, then used as a prison. He denied that the pious individual needed the institutional group to think for him. Asked he: Do people not have the moral right and even the moral obligation to think for themselves, rather than give over their individual perspective as given (so the believer would believe) from the deity as the deity saw fit. So the group, its power challenged, had a fit. See http://swedenroadways.blogspot.com/2011/06/kungalv-bohus-fortress-castle-prison.html.

Jante's law is also in Norway: see http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/resources/global-etiquette/norway-country-profile.html

The cultural aspect of Jante's law is in mainstream information for people visiting. Find it in websites about culture, living there, studying in Scandinavia. Were you raised with it? What mindsets did immigrant families bring with them. Ask.

Child of Jante. Do not think you are somebody. We will think for you.

....................................................................................

C. Political and Religious Application:

Jante Commandments of Conformity

Jante's push to conformity serves group members' survival needs. Jante becomes dysfunctional when the group conformist methods remain to foster its own power after the emergency. Jante destroys individuality and creativity. Jante is an enemy of ongoing functioning democracy.

The group first existed to foster survival of the members, but the Group After zombies on.

You will sign this purity test here, now. And you will check your brain at the door.

Watch the Group create Fear and Negatives in order to regain control of the individual.

Loyalty oaths for national interest matters, to support and defend the Constitution, for example, are a part of our acceptable spectrum, see http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Loyalty+Oath.
See also http://law.jrank.org/pages/8371/Loyalty-Oath.html

Not acceptable are loyalty oaths that substitute some Group for the oath-taker's brain. Not acceptable, for example, to voters, who do not like being forced into group identities, are oaths that force legislators and politicians to take specific positions on a) specific candidacies or b) political ideologies as phrased in the oath; rather than assess the merits of each legislation or candidate. Ideologies are word-smithing, the subject of neuro-ads and other well-developed persuasion techniques, and definitions are like water, fitting the container in which poured. And evaporate if air is let in.

..........................................................

C1. Republican Litmus Test 2010 Candidates -

See the text of the litmus test at http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/republicans-new-litmus-test-for-2010-candidates-only-conservatives-need-apply.html

You must agree with eight of the positions as they are written, no questions, no definitions, no nothing except as the party dictates, in order to get funding from the Party.

Reagan's Unity Principle they call it: Unity in opposing, opposing elected others' acts in governing. See the Pledge to America.

Unity is one thing. Forcing it with awarding or withholding value is another. To the degree that platforms become alleged contracts with third parties, with penalties and damages for breach, voters are disenfranchised. See the drive to make others conform to one group's demands, that arise perhaps to bribery. See Vitter-Gate, at http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/167609-crew-files-ethics-complaint-against-vitter-for-bribery-of-interior-secretary

It must be public domain or it is otherwise fair use -- The Republican Procrustean Bed, see http://www.goines.net/Writing/procrustean_bed.html, is made up as follows. What do these mean in practice, with actual legislation being considered? Put your finger on the mercury in the dixie cup and watch it disappear, and your brain gets poisoned, is that so, old thermometer days?

..............................................

a. Provisions of the Republican position litmus test (what loss or award of value for compliance or noncompliance?).

Scorecard follows: How much of the litmus test is plan, and what is opposition to the plans of others.

"(1) Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill; [smaller than when? where are the jobs? the infrastructure? for what purpose? lower taxes than when?]

Oppose. 1
Definitions. 0
..........................................................

(2) Market-based healthcare reform and oppose Obama-style government-run healthcare; [what if the market is poisoned?] [we like medicare -- and the VA -- it does better than the market who can't or won't provide except for its own profit] [give us single payer]

Oppose. 2
Definitions. 0
..............................................................

(3) Market-based energy reforms by opposing cap-and-trade legislation; [one size fits all? what if the market is poisoned?]

Oppose. 3
Definitions. 0
..........................................

(4) Workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing "card check"; [let the individual legislator decide based on constituent interests]

Oppose. 4
Definitions. 0.
....................................................

(5) Legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants; [do we want 10,000,000 enemies among us?] [do a cost-benefit analysis] [make amnesty legal]

Oppose. 5
Definitions. 0
........................................................

(6) Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges; [old definitions again? no definitions? when? how?]

Support. 1
Definitions. 0
............................................................

(7) Containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat; [who decides effective? individual legislators do] [what is "containment"] [how do you know it when you see it?] [can we eliminate their threat and let them have the weapons?]

Undefinable -
.............................................................

(8) Retention of the Defense of Marriage Act; [why?]

Meaningless position. Why? What is the threat, except to ideological positions?
...................................................................

(9) Protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing healthcare rationing and denial of healthcare and government funding of abortion; and [what if the poisoned market already rations? define, and as to the A word, she is a moral being. Let the constituent woman decide]

Oppose 6
Definitions. 0.

Protect the vulnerable by removing health insurance from reasonable reach

................................................

(10) The right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership" [and who is paying for this one?] [what if time, place and manner restrictions meet public safety needs? open carry is intimidating]

Oppose 7.
Definitions 0.

NRA says, "Arm the supermarket cart! Blam!" (Nate Rudy Asclater does as he is told)

........................................................

b. Scorecard:

Out of ten positions to be parroted, 7 oppose things, none have definitions, and two are meaningless and float. Where are the jobs? Where is the evidence of improvement to the economy, rather than to individual high perk people in their institutions? Where is the evidence of anything not to be outsourced, or is it all to be put carefully away in the gated community to be enjoyed by the very, very few. Who is protected by all this Opposition? The Group; not the ordinary people. Who will tell them? Who will bell the cat?

Who is the client of the legislator? Does anyone know. The voters; or the party. See http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?61+Law+&+Contemp.+Probs.+21+%28Spring+1998%29
Who can enforce it, if the voter is the client. Why should the special interest financiers supersede the voter in a democracy. Silly question.

Who will notify CREW of potential ethical violations here.

......................................................

C2. Other status reports, on a first look

Florida

"Republican Party of Florida Party Loyalty Oath.

"I, _______________________________, swear and/or affirm
that during my term of (Name of Member – Please write clearly) office
I will not actively,
publicly, or
financially support
the election of any candidate
other than the Republican Candidate
in a partisan
unitary,
general or
special election,
or a registered Republican
in non-partisan elections,
other than Judicial races
governed under Florida Statute 105,
if there is a registered Republican running for the same office." http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2643701/posts

[Other than judicial races under FlStats 105? What is Florida Statute 105 that judicial races governed by it are excluded from the prohibition? See it at http://law.onecle.com/florida/electors-and-elections/chapter105.html]
Are signers bound if they don't know either? Dysfunctional conformity]

Florida tells you who(M) to vote for - see http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/article1089570.ece

Fair use quote of an example of the expansion of the control, to show the consequence:

"Any member who fails to formally revoke his or her public support and request the return of any contributions made to a candidate running against the candidate of the Republican Party would be in violation of the RPOF Rules and would be subject to removal from party office and membership on Republican executive committees," See site.

Jante ex-official says, "I supported the best candidate, who was not a Republican, so The Party took my job away."

See Florida's oath in PDF -- http://www.suwanneegop.com/loyalty.pdf
http://www.suwanneegop.com/loyalty.pdf

Virginia

Copies of Virginia's are hard to get. See http://spectator.org/archives/2007/11/29/the-virginia-gops-loyalty-oath#
[Heretics! We need heretics!]

Illinois - see http://campaign.robburns.com/essays/illinois-%E2%80%98loyalty%E2%80%99-oath

Kansas. See http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=166879

Comment as to need for this repression of individual thinking:

The members of this political party group are not at survival risk (although some in danger of losing basic needs or basic access to opportunity [education, infrastructure] funding may be, even if down the road).

So need for repression moves from benefit to the group members, to Benefit to the Group Itself, its own perpetuation.

In order for the Group to maintain its hold despite no "survival" of the individuals at stake, and to prevent the people from casting off and thinking for themselves (self-actualize), the Group must rein them in again, by threats, propagandizing individuality as a negative. It must impose fear and irresistibly persuasive ideological motivation, so people will seek protection in the Group.

The Group can, and here does, even threaten "survival" politically, or in terms of damnation [religion] if the person does not conform to the Group line.

Wild Voter. Heretic alert! Heretic alert!

Wild voters vote with their feet

Public services. Private sector or public, sometimes this is better, sometimes that. Here, sleeping in the airport (here, Copenhagen). Will the private sector please supply rockers? Government might.

Position Statement, to be applied as each possible legislative idea shapes.

I believe in a place for government, to serve the common good; particularly where the private sector won't act because it sees insufficient profit for its investors.

I believe in fostering opportunity, access for every individual to a life of productivity and dignity, by whatever means that is served from time to time.

I will not vote for anyone who signs a republican litmus test loyalty oath purity creed.

I will also demand advance candidate dirty laundry disclosure, and their own position-intent statements for voters to rely upon (not oaths binding allegiance to positions set in advance by another group); and justifications to the voters if those positions are not followed in specific cases while in office.

..............................................................................

D. Politics of the Group:
How Jante Law Functions and Dysfunctions

1. Where Jante thrives:

Jante law thrives where fear is real and requires heavy handed unified orders. The issue, bona fide survival, not mongered, justifies keeping the individual in line for the sake of the group members' own benefit, survival.

Repeat. Jante thrives where group survival is really at stake, and not manipulated by the Group wigs so they can perpetuate themselves for their own benefit.

Basic needs come first, before individualism.

Common sense, as well as Maslow, note that elemental needs must be satisfied before the individual can move beyond to self-actualize, develop creativity. Survival means food, clothing, shelter, basics. At the stage where those are at risk, the group fills a role in ensuring the members stay in line so more can survive. The group imposes a collective negative upon the individual who hoards, for example, while others starve. Maslow's hierarchy of needs is laid out at http://www.abraham-maslow.com/m_motivation/Hierarchy_of_Needs.asp

Jante's Law Works Well in Emergency, Survival Situations

2. Where Jante dysfunctions:

Jante dysfunctions post-survival, in keeping the individual in line even though individual group members' survival is not at stake. Jante reasserts control not for the sake of the individual, but for the Group.

Think of the difference in stages. Jante can be good, when it serves the benefit of the members whose survival is at stake. Then Jante can be bad when it overstays its reason for being, the benefit to the members, and turns into a benefit for the Group Wigs. Is that so? Moral judgments are an excellent way to repress individuals. Fear arises from the functioning of the negative in human perception.

Jante dysfunctions at the stage where the survival of the members in the group is no longer at stake.

Jante repository for persistent independent thinkers

Continuing Jante-ism then serves only to cripple individuality, reducing the pool of ideas, choices. The Group is looking at its own survival as a Group, not at the individual members, and says, Whoa. If we don't get these people back in line, we as the Group are out!

Enter Fear. So what does the group do, in its effort to remain in control even though survival is no longer at stake? The group imposes fear, rules, dogma, doctrine, fear of not belonging, fear of ostracism, fear of whatever, fear of minority stereotypes, fear of free-loaders, fear if others get opportunity. Make people afraid and they will defer or even forget about the idea of self-actualizing, their own creativity, their own ability to make moral choice. Watch the images of Hell, and the hate ads.

Fear. See http://phobialist.com/fears.html

3. What is the effect of Jante in politics and religion.

And what happens to the heretic or the one thinking of going rogue? The Conformity Voice Thunders from the Robots Behind the Ads and Hate Emails. Get back in line. What does the Republican Litmus Test Party say to the individual thinker, working for a constituency of voters and not the party?

1. Do not think you are somebody
2. Do not think you are just as much as us
3. Do not think you are smarter than us
4. Do not delude yourself that you're better than us
5. Do not think you know more than us
6. Do not think you're more than us
7. Do not think you are worth something
8. You must not laugh at us
9. You must not believe that someone cares about you
10. Do not think you can teach us something

Don't forget to check your brain at the door. Is that so?

CONCLUSION, COMMENT

In survival need times, Jante ensures the group's interest supersedes the greedy individual. In post-survival for members, the Group itself will kick into gear to foster its own survival, despite lapsed need. The Group will spread fear, and negatives against individual behavior that takes any number of forms. Humiliation of the child, discouragement of fresh thinking, lowering sights, the group is right, you are nothing. Call the individual analyst a heretic. Evildoers. Nonbelievers. That works. As in Crusades and Inquisitions, then you can literally kill them.

How to stop people from thinking. Fear will do it. It is not a simplistic response, however. It is one of the many tools of persuasion. See http://changingminds.org/techniques/general/articles/fear_persuasion.htm

How does it spread. At least watch for it. Watch for the Sell, the institution touting the individual's lack if not in the group, the ongoing identification with the group, they need you, they will think for you, you can't make any mistakes if you do what the group says. Sacrifice your individuality to the group. The group is always right. Newt, you were right, but even you backed off. Group dynamics. Powerful. See Group Dynamics Resources at https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~dforsyth/gd/

Do you need analysis and truth and facts? No, says the Group. Our survival means more than that. Where there is ambiguity and no easy answer, make up the answer.

Is such conformity really required for survival? Perhaps in exigent circumstances. What happens when there is only one group's ego or status survival at stake. Must the authority to support one group's ego prevail? Republican Party Oath: see http://the-voters-org.wikispot.org/Republican_Party_Oath

Absorb our dogma or die. Political papa.

Oath of Conformity. Creed this and creed that. Make the benefit to the Group, not the members, a Creed. The Group will thank you. The Group is Pure. Love the Group. But don't misunderstand, ordinary person. Do not think you are special. You are used.

The Big Lie. Audacious, Unrelenting Lie. Birthing Trump's Pet Trumpet.

2011-04-11T13:42:00.001-04:00

Who is Passing the Big Lie Ball Now?

When Big Names Do It, There Should be Accountability.
Trump! Big Name!

Birthers cheer.

The Birther Lie Gets Repeated in High Places

While more slogan-creators huddle and e-bomb the next disembodied phrase to apply to whatever all together.

The Big Lie. A big Name picks one and run with it. Then Repeats. And Repeats. The tactic works because the lie is so big and so ridiculous that people will think, aha, there must be truth here because look at all these Big Names touting it.

Pick any silly slogan and watch the repetition without application to specific facts supposedly supporting it --

Other strategies:

"The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly."

"The broad mass of a nation does not consist of diplomats, or even professors of political law, or even individuals capable of forming a rational opinion; it consists of plain mortals, wavering and inclined to doubt and uncertainty. As soon as our own propaganda admits so much as a glimmer of right on the other side, the foundation for doubt in our own right has been laid. The masses are then in no position to distinguish where foreign injustice ends and our own begins. In such a case they become uncertain and suspicious, especially if the enemy refrains from going in for the same nonsense, but unloads every bit of blame on his adversary."

"But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success."

"The purpose of propaganda is not to provide interesting distraction for blase young gentlemen, but to convince, and what I mean is to convince the masses. But the masses are slowmoving, and they always require a certain time before they are ready even to notice a thing, and only after the simplest ideas are repeated thousands of times will the masses finally remember them."

"Once the basic ideas and methods of execution were recognized as correct, they were applied throughout the whole War without the slightest change. At first the claims of the propaganda were so impudent that people thought it insane; later, it got on people's nerves; and in the end, it was believed."

Visit ://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch06.html

When something is a quote from something long ago, are we allowed to link directly to it? Who knows any more. If this direct link violates anybody, let us know and we'll remove it, so you can cut and paste the site above on your own.

Hitler Writings: Mein Kampf, Chapter VI, War Propaganda

Mr. Trump and Mr. Fox and all others in the fairy tales have checked out all the library copies, so you have to go online.

Parse a Gingrich Speech. Entrench. No empathy, no opportunity for all.

2011-03-21T21:06:00.010-04:00

Parse a Gingrich Speech.
Parse Newt Gingrich's Speech at CPAC.

Do You See Leadership, Concrete Alternatives;

or Political-Slant Description, Personal Money-Making, and Reaction
.

Old Newt, New Newt. The Package. The Baggage. Scan! *

* Photo postcard promulgated by Speaker Gingrich (was it free or did they charge??) while Speaker, Washington. 1990's exact year? Have to find it again. I think the year was on the back. Crooked knot.

.
This parse, of a speech of Newt Gingrich, is another in our series of analyzing actual speeches by the words used by the speaker.
.
Start with Ronald Reagan, addressing CPAC at http://bogomilia.blogspot.com/2011/11/reagan-democrat-parse-ronald-reagans.html.
.
Find a parse of President Obama speaking, at Parse an Obama Speech.
.
For each, what is the content of the speech: do we leave informed by facts, assessment, reasoning, or are we hit with the buzz-phrase du jour that is aimed at applause, not enlightenment for any voter. What personal qualities reveal: empathy, commitment to principle; or payback to contributors.
.
Mr. Gingrich is speaking to Freedom's Lighthouse, see interview at http://freedomslighthouse.net/tag/gingrich-speeches/ Here is a synopsis, see the full speech at CPAC, for background, see Siepacque ( the speech is in the public domain, is not copyrighted?) at FN 1. By way of update (11/2011) he appears to be a serious contender for the Republican nomination. Is that deserved? Is his world view vetted?
.
Ask:

What is historically referenced in the speech, with what supporting fact base;
what is new information and not just reaction, to inform the debate,
what is demagoguery,
what is schilling for personal financial gain in books, movie sales,
what is mere loudness and tone absent content.
Update: After a slump, Gingrich is on a poll rebound at this conservative site, see 11/13/2011 http://freedomslighthouse.net/

.
Back to the earlier speech. What do you find.
.
Newt Speaks. Our comments are in caps, some other emphases, like book promotion and movie promotion, are in boldface or italics.

Newt running. From or two what?

1. Introduction, and Tone.

Thank you.

I am delighted to be here;

I want to thank Dave Bossie.

WHO IS DAVE BOSSIE? BOSSIE IN 1998. AIDE-INVESTIGATOR FOR A HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE ON A GOVERNMENT T COMMITTEE, WHO DECEIVED AND DISTORTED EVIDENCE AND OTHERWISE MISSTEPPED SO BADLY THAT GINGRICH AS HOUSE SPEAKER PRESSURED HIM TO RESIGN See http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=3227

2. Commercial credits

Callista LATEST WIFE and I have a great working relationship with Dave
and we have made a number of movies that we’re very proud of and
the new Reagan book that we’re proud of and IS THAT LIKE THESE, SEE http://www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm#murdoch/?
all that he did at Citizens United SUPREME COURT LAWSUIT THAT GAVE LEGAL ORGANIZATION BUT NON-PEOPLE THE SAME RIGHTS OF SPEECH AS YOU AND ME PEOPLE in the lawsuit last year and in the
hard work he’s done to help elect conservatives LIKE CITIZENS UNITED across the country
is really, truly remarkable so I’m glad to be back with you THOSE IN THE CITIZENS UNITED FOLD.

2. I also want to thank

David Keene,
CONSERVATIVE SEE BIO AT http://www.seekgod.ca/cnp.ijk.htm#keene; ALSO PRESIDENT OF THE NRA, see that site and http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/DavidKeene-NRA-ACU-CPAC/2011/03/28/id/390893
while he has retired from that job (ACU?), held together both the ACU and CPAC since 1983 and he deserves a big round of applause.

3. CPAC connections

I almost always

NOT ALWAYS. BUT WHEN IT SUITS

start by going back to the very 2nd CPAC, 1975,

SEE THIS IN CONTEXT: WHAT ELSE HAPPENED AT THE CPAC 1975? WHAT WAS SAID BY REAGAN? PRESIDENT REAGAN'S SPEECH TO CPAC IN 1975 IN PART AT
http://bogomilia.blogspot.com/#!/2011/11/reagan-democrat-parse-ronald-reagans.html

at a time when the republican and conservative prospects seemed at their very bottom,
when the country seemed to have lost its way and when
Governor Ronald Reagan, recently out of office, came here and said that we have to have bold colors, not pale pastels.

BIG PRIMARY COLORS LIKE KINDERGARTEN!

And he laid out a policy which, in a very short time, defeated

the soviet empire,
re-launched the American economy HE DID THAT BY ALSO RAISING TAXES and
rebuilt American civic pride and American exceptionalism SO LONG AS YOU ARE WHITE MALE AND PROPERTIED AS THE HISTORIC FIRST VOTERS, THE RICH OVER THOSE WHO ARE NOT THERE YET, IS THAT SO?

20 years after that

THAT IS, THIS SECTION HAS NO REAL CONNECTION WITH REAGAN AT ALL,

I came to CPAC as the first republican speaker in 40 years and I

START COUNTING THE I'S

I

(ARE YOU COUNTING THE I'S?)

outlined a series of very bold ideas [as to which he himself did nothing]:

welfare reform so people would go to work
BUT I DID NOTHING ABOUT JOBS AND TRAINING
and school
BUT I DID NOTHING FOR EDUCATION IN POORER AREAS WHERE PROPERTY TAXES COULD NOT SUSTAIN AN ADEQUATE PROGRAM
instead of being dependent on the government,
AGAIN, I FOSTERED DEPENDENCE ON GOVERNMENT BY DOING NOTHING FOR EDUCATION
a balanced budget, ON THE BACKS OF WHOM?

tax cuts for the first time in 16 years TIME TO HELP THE ALREADY HOARDING TO HOARD SOME MORE to stimulate economic growth WHICH THEY DID NOT DO

strengthening our intelligence capacity against terrorism YOU DID THAT?
… now I’m back. SO WE HEAR.

Here we are 16 years later and what’s happened?

OUR VERY QUESTION

Well, just two stories from yesterday: the Germans are buying the New York Stock Exchange, and in fact the German exchange is bigger than the New York Stock Exchange so they will have 60% control of the exchange.

OOH -- AND WHO WAS IN CHARGE THIS LAST DECADE AND MORE??

This marks a major decline of New York as a center of world finance; it is a fundamental blow to our capacity to lead the world

WHERE DID YOUR FOLKS LEAD US, EXCEPT INTO IRAQ AND TOO BIG TO FAIL'S?

and to create jobs DOES GOING INTO PEOPLE'S BEDROOMS CREATE JOBS?

and in fact what’s truly astonishing is that the German government, that Germany as a country, pays 50% more for manufacturing than we do. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENTIAL IN PAY BETWEEN OWNERS AND WORKERS? HOW HAS A GAP EVOLVED?

You earn more money in Germany and they have the lowest unemployment rate since 1992.
So it’s not always cheap labor- sometimes it’s just terribly bad government. OR TERRIBLY GREEDY PEOPLE -- LOOK AGAIN AT THE SPAN OF INCOMES AND HOW IT GREW -- COME ON, NEWT!
Let’s look at the case: the German government is pro jobs, the German government is pro manufacturing, the German government is pro worker training, the German government is pro exports. And now let’s look at the Obama government.

Why are we falling behind?

Why is the New York Stock Exchange taken over by Frankfurt?

IT'S THE LAST 10 YEARS, STUPID. WHO SAID THAT? RETRACT. SAY IT IS A MERE SAYING THAT EVOLVED, AS IT WERE

Why are we in a mess?

IT'S THE LAST 10 YEARS.

Why do we have over 9% unemployment?

IT'S THE LAST 10 YEARS.

PROBLEM: FROM HERE ON WE HAVE NO CITES TO FACTS AND FIGURES, JUST OPINIONS AND BROAD GENERALIZATIONS. SO WE WILL MINIMIZE ANYTHING NOT FACT-BASED-CONNECTED TO A CLEAR POINT, NOT INFORMATIVE, ONLY PATCHWORK OF THINGS, CONCLUSORY.
.
SO THE TYPEFACE REFLECTS INCREASING LACK OF RESPECT FOR THIS CONTENT-FREE SPEECH

Well, the Obama administration is anti-jobs, anti-small business, anti-manufacturing, pro-trial lawyer, pro-bureaucrat, pro-deficit spending and pro-high taxes…

SUPPORT THAT, PLEASE, WITH THE RECORD.

What do you think is going to happen? My favorite political governing slogan for the next 20 years is 2+2=4. Simple, basic, honest facts. (WHERE?)

HOW ABOUT ANOTHER EQUATION: ONE THAT PROVIDES FOR THE FIVE BASIC HUMANA FREEDOMS, SEE HOW TO DO THAT AT FIVE BASIC FREEDOMS

if you want to kill jobs you can and Democrats prove it all the time.

.
WHAT HAS BEEN DONE ON THE JOBS FRONT. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR US? WHY DON'T YOU DO IT -- YOU'RE ON THE STAGE

Now let’s look at the second big story from yesterday. Yesterday, Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano said we have the most heighted threat since 9/11, that after 10 years there are more terrorists in the United States who are indigenous terrorists, recruited through the internet, than at any time in the last decade. And yet this is the administration- we did a movie,

.
GREAT! WHAT DID YOUR MOVIE SAY. DID YOU TITHE THE PROCEEDS? IDEA THERE, NEWT.
.

Callista and I G0 CALLISTA! MOVIN' ON UP! did with David called “America at Risk: The War with No Name”- this is an administration which doesn’t even have the courage to tell truth about who wants to kill us

.
WHA? HMMMM. DEATH BY ECONOMIC UNDERMINING IS A WAY OF KILLING, IS IT NOT?

.
I know that I would get attacked for telling the truth IS THEE THE JUDGE OF THY TRUTH, so when somebody whose nickname is Jihad Jane confesses in court to being a terrorist,

.
WHO??

it would be inappropriate to suggest to you what patterns might have lead her to that.

.
BUT YOU ASK ANYWAY? AGAINST YOUR OWN BETTER JUDGMENT?

When you have a Nigerian who trains in Yemen, who arrives over Detroit on a Christmas day seeking to blow up an airplane over the neighborhood to get collateral damage;

.
WHAT IS THE BROADER CONTEXT HERE, NEWT? WERE COLONIALS GREAT IN NIGERIA? HAS THERE BEEN A HISTORY THERE OF EXPLOITATION?

when you have a Pakistani who lied, who says to the judge, when the judge says “How could you have sworn an oath to the US” he said “You’re my enemies. I lied.” The judge was suitably shocked.

WHEN HAS CORPORATE OR BUSINESS ENCROACHMENT FROM OUTSIDE BENEFITED THE PEOPLE THERE, NEWT? DO YOU SEE YOUR OWN HISTORY?

When you have a man jump up at Fort Hood, with a card in his wallet that says “Warrior of Allah”, yells Allah-hu-Akbar, kills 13 Americans and wounds 33 and the President of the United States and the chief of staff of the army urge people not to jump to conclusions.

MAYBE THE CONCLUSION IS TO KEEP TO OURSELVES? REIN IN OUR FINANCIAL EXPLOITATIONS SO THAT PEOPLE IN THE AREA BENEFIT FROM THEIR OWN HERITAGE. IS THAT WHERE STABILITY LIES?

Do not generalize. When you have mayor Bloomberg after they pick up a car bomb from the Pakistani in Times Square, whose first comment on television was “Let’s not rush to judgment: it could have been someone who’s opposed to Obama care.”

IS IT RADICAL TO WANT YOUR OWN LAND? ASK NATIVE AMERICANS AS WELL. SEE, FOR EXAMPLE, I SING A SONG OF SITTING BULL

Now do you know how willfully, deliberately you have to hide from reality to assume that after thousands of radical Islamist terrorist suicide bombers that your first thought is it’s somebody who’s oppose to healthcare?

PERHAPS CORPORATIONS ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM, NEWT, BECAUSE CORPORATIONS HAVE NO BRAINS AND ARE BEHOLDEN ONLY TO THEIR OWN BOTTOM LINE.

I mean this would be a psychological problem if it were not a public official. The Obama administration is wrong on terrorism, wrong on Iran, wrong on the Muslim Brotherhood, wrong on Hezbollah, and being wrong on that many national security items is an enormously dangerous thing.

HOW? DATA PLEASE.

But, the president’s popularity remains relatively high

BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUCH DATE. IS THAT BECAUSE HE'S SENSIBLE, SMART, AND LISTENS.

because the media loves him.

WRONG, NEWT. HE SEEKS, I THINK FROM THIS LITTLE IDEA STORE, THAT HE WANTS
1) EMPATHY FROM THE WELL TO DO, AND
2) OPPORTUNITY FOR THE LESS WELL TO DO.

IS THAT HERESY?

As one liberal analyst said, “My leg shakes thinking of him”. Time Magazine just did a cover on Reagan’s 100th birthday: “Why Obama Loves Reagan”. Now I want you to know first of all my leg doesn’t shake.

WE ARE NOT SURPRISED. EMPATHY BY THE INSIDE RING FOR THE SITUATIONS OF OTHERS, AND OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE KEPT IN THE OUTSIDE RING, IS NOT IN YOUR PURVIEW

And I want the elite media to know something: I knew Ronald Reagan. I began working with Ronald Reagan in 1974 when I first ran for Congress. And I hate to tell this to our friends at MSNBC and elsewhere: Barack Obama is no Ronald Reagan.'

AND YOU ARE NO LEADER, IS THAT SO? OOPS. POLITICALLY INC0RRECT, FOR YOU AND YOUR CALLISTA.

However, the media wants us to be responsible. The media wants us to be bipartisan.

WHO OWNS THE MEDIA, NEWT. YOUR PEOPLE DO. NOT ANYBODY ELSE WE CAN SEE.

The media wants us to bring a new, positive tone to Washington. READ RICH-FRIENDLY So I’m going to risk shocking you.

YOU'VE DONE THAT ENOUGH.

In the tradition of Ronald Reagan’s 1975 Bold Colors proposal, I want to suggest that CPAC do something very bold. And let me say, by the way, for those liberals who think 2010 was the peak, the fact that we have 2000 more registrants this year ought to tell them “Oh no. 2010 was the appetizer, 2012 is the entre.” So what I’m going to say is so bold, I just want to ask you to hear me out before you react.

THAT'S ASKING TOO MUCH ALREADY. HOW LONG HAS THIS SPEECH BEEN GOING ON WITHOUT FACTS, WITHOUT INFORMATION, WITHOUT CONCRETE ALTERNATIVES.

I want us to offer President Obama the opportunity to be the keynote speaker at CPAC in 2012, if he earns it.

WHO HAS TO EARN IT? DEAR NEWT. WHAT MERIT BADGE WILL BE BESTOWED.

Der Newt

Now let me explain. Many people write about moving to the center. Many people cite Bill Clinton as moving to the center. Just as with Reagan, I was actually there. (WOO)

Clinton signed welfare reform and 2 out of 3 people either went to work or went to school.

SO GET GOING ON THE JOBS AND EDUCATION NOW

Clinton signed the first tax cut in 16 years and, as Art Laffer pointed out in the Wall Street Journal this morning, it included the largest capital gains tax cut in history designed to create jobs and unemployment went down from 5.4 to 4.0 % and that was the largest single step towards a balanced budget. We kept spending down to 2.9% a year for 4 years: the smallest increase since Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s. Bob Livingston, as chairman of appropriations, had a huge spending cut bill, the first since 1981. John Kasich, as chairman of the budget, authored a series of changes leading to the first 4 balanced budgets in a row in 2 generations.

AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED, NEWT? WHERE DID THE DEFICIT COME FROM IN THE LAST 10 YEARS. WHO RAKED WHAT IN?

The House GOP moved fast. In fiscal 1995, the Democrat’s deficit was $164 billion. We

WHO??

brought it down a little bit the first year, but the second year, we

WHO??

had it down to $22 billion, from 164. The following year we

WHO??

had a $69 billion surplus in our third budget that we were in charge of. Over a four year period, we paid off $559 in federal debt, by controlling spending, cutting taxes, and increasing economic growth.
The number one job today is to create jobs.

ARE YOU STILL IN THE BEDROOMS AND THE OBGYN OFFICES?

America only works when American’s are working.

IN SIX MONTHS SINCE THE LAST ELECTION, WHERE ARE THE JOBS BILLS?

And nothing would do more to balance the budget than to go from 9.2 percent back down to 4 percent unemployment, taking 5 percent of people off of unemployment, off of food stamps, off of Medicaid, put them back with a job, paying taxes, giving their family a future.

AND KEEP THE HOARDERS HOARDING, WHOO0-EE. A NEW CATHEDRAL TO AYN RAND

And let me emphasize something that Republicans all too often, and conservatives all to often fail to be honest and direct to talk about. At a time when we have forty-five percent black teenage unemployment in January, that is not acceptable to anyone in America,

SO WHERE ARE THE EMPLOYERS HIRING? HOW WILL THE PEOPLE GET THERE WITHOUT TRANSPORTATION, INFRASTRUCTURE, HEALTH.

and we should be the people to drive for the policy changes

YOU CAN DO THAT

so every young American can get a job, no matter what the ideological bias of this President.

IDEOLOGICAL BIAS OF WHOM? SOME FOLKS SEE THE CREATION BY THIS PARTY OF A PERMANENT UNDERCLASS, SEE REPUBLIGOPOLY GAME

And I’ll be candid. We did not need a deficit commission. We needed a jobs commission who talked with people who only create jobs.

SO WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BY YOU, IF YOU WANT THAT?

I am sick and tired of Congressional hearings, where people who have never created a job show up to explain what their theory is of doing something they have never done.

AND LEFT ALONE, NEITHER DID THOSE WHO DID SO IN THE PAST.

CAN WE LOOK FORWARD TO STOPPING OFF-SHORING, TRAINING OUR PEOPLE HERE? SHALL WE PENALIZE THOSE CORPORATIONS THAT OFF-SHORE THEIR MONEY AND/OR THEIR JOBS? SEE MERRY OFF-SHORING BANKING? WHY DO WE SUSPECT SO?

I am going to outline two large strategies that will move us towards job creation: an American Energy Plan and an Environmental Solutions Agency to replace the Environmental Protection Agency.

PRIVATIZE. IS THAT THE IDEA. PUT PROFIT MEASURES INTO AREAS OF SUSTENANCE AND BASICS, WHERE THE PEOPLE SERVICES DO NOT PRODUCE PROFITS, AND THE SERVICES WILL DECLINE. IS THAT SO?

But first, let me discuss how President Obama could move to the center, and could be bipartisan, and could be invited to keynote CPAC. There are seven steps…there are seven steps, we have just convinced every liberal of what they have always feared, I think there are seven steps to the center for Obama. First, sign the repeal of Obamacare.

WHAT DO YOU OFFER COMPREHENSIVELY IN PLACE OF THE CURRENT HEALTH CARE LAW, THAT SERVES AT LEAST AS MANY PEOPLE AT AT LEAST THE SAME COST

Now let me make a point to my news media friends, 58 percent of the American people, in the most recent poll, favor repeal of Obamacare.

HOW HAVE YOU INFORMED THE PEOPLE'S VIEWS? WHAT IS THE POLLING RESULT ON WHERE THESE PEOPLE GOT THEIR INFORMATION

Now, 58 percent ought to be the center. I mean, where is the center if it is not with the majority of Americans?

WHAT IF THE ROOTS OF BELIEF ARE PROPAGANDA. ASK IF THE BELIEF IS A WORTHY ONE, FACT-BASED.

I know, for some people, the center is the faculty club at Harvard, or it is the New York Times editorial board, but that is just not factually correct. So if the President would like to truly be a part of the American middle, sign the repeal.

NOW THERE'S A LEAP. NO INFORMATION THERE, NOTHING BUT BALD POLLS THAT DON'T SAY WHAT QUESTIONS WERE ASKED BY WHOM AND WHY, AND DID NOT ASK HOW THE PERSON GOT THE INFORMATION ON WHICH THE BELIEF IS BASED.

Two, sign Tort reform for doctors.

WHAT? Make a mistake and get home free? Where did that come from?

ASIDE -- COMMENTATOR MOVES TO STAGE LEFT, LEANS TOWARD AUDIENCE, MOST OF WHOM ARE ASLEEP

Know what? I give up. This is a total hogwash of non sequiturs, assumptions without foundation, buzz phrases, all that. I quit. You go on your own. If you want a coherent policy speech, intelligent, informative, inspiring and not reactive and money-grubbing, go to Parse Political Speeches for Empathy toward Others and Opportunity for All

This is nothing but an exercise in unfounded description and opinion. All windy conclusion and directives and buzz words and no facts. Get the emotions going, Newt. Go for it. We need analysis and not bombast, but you may win after all. It's up to the people and who is asleep?So here is the rest of the speech, in suitable small type.

He said the other night he would like to do it, let’s let him do it. The Congress should pass him, based on Texas and other reforms, the strongest possible tort reform bill, and let him become President and know, by explaining that he didn’t actually mean what he said, because if he said what he said, he wouldn’t have actually meant it, because he couldn’t actually mean it, cause that’s why he needs the trial lawyers, so we should have understood that he actually meant something else he forgot to say, cause the teleprompter wasn’t working at that moment, and it is not his fault.
Three, sign the permanent repeal of the death tax. 78 percent of the American people favor the repeal of the death tax. That has been consistently a large majority for the past thirty years, and I would say to the New York Times, and to CBS news, and even daringly to our friends at MSNBC, if 78 percent isn’t the center of this country, where are you going to find it, and what are you doing when you get there?
Fourth, sign a new Hyde Amendment, so no tax payer money funds abortion in the United States.
Fifth, sign a new Paul Ryan drafted Conservative Budget Act, to control spending and move to a balanced budget.
Sixth: Sign a law to decisively control the border now. Seventh: Sign a tenth amendment implementation act returning power from Washington to the states and to the people thereof. This is not about shipping it from Washington to Atlanta or Washington to Sacramento. Remember, the amendment actually says “and the people thereof,” so the power ought to go back to local people, local communities and then they can decide what they want to give to state government. And that act should include – to prove how real it is – block-granting Medicaid so that states can control the cost and improve the quality without interference from Washington bureaucrats. Now, I hope you’d agree with me that a President Obama that did those seven things would have come to the center and would deserve the invitation to be the keynote speaker next year. I would not bet a lot on that ticket.
But now, think about my two major policy proposals and the context for that centrist program. First, we need an American energy policy. At American solutions, we’ve discovered over the last few years that 79% of the American people think that we need an American energy policy to create jobs in the United States. 79% of the American people believe that we need an American energy policy to keep the money here rather than in China. 79% of the American people believe we need an American energy policy for national security reasons. No matter how you ask the question, it consistently comes out better than four to one. So wouldn’t the center of American politics, the base of bipartisanship, be doing what the American people actually want and having an American energy policy. Now by contrast what you have from the Obama Administration is a war against American energy. They just can’t help themselves. Even in the State of the Union, at a time when we’re facing rising oil prices, what does the president want to do? He wants to raise taxes on oil and gas – in America, not in Saudi Arabia, not in Iran, not in Venezuela.
So, Callista and I were at the Reagan hundredth Anniversary, which was a wonderful event at the Reagan Library, which by the way just had a brand new wing opened that is marvelous. If you get a chance to visit Simi Valley, it’s remarkable. We have lunch with Secretary of State George Schultz, and I was asking him about what’s happening in Egypt and does how he thinks Reagan would approach it, and he finally said to me, if you go all the way back to 1973 and the very first oil shock, done deliberately by the Arab countries and you look at Reagan’s State of the State address in 1974, where he called for American energy policy, Schultz looked at us and he said, “It makes us wonder how many times you need to get hit over the head with a two-by-four to figure out this is serious.”
Cliff May of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy wrote me the other day and he said, “Lenin in the Communist era said, ‘Capitalists will sell us the rope to hang them. ‘” He said, “But it never occurred to Lenin that we would give them the money to buy the rope with.” And that for thirty years, we’ve followed an energy policy which makes the Saudis richer, the Iranians richer, the Venezuelans richer, which allowed them to subsidize madrassas across the planet teaching hate, which allows them to subsidize people that want to come and kill us, and for the last thirty years we’ve had the worst possible national security policy in energy and it’s time we’ve stopped it, and it’s times we’ve an passed aggressively pro-American jobs, aggressively pro-American energy.
In 2008 when gasoline was at four dollars a gallon, American solutions launched a petition drive: Drill here, Drill now, Pay less, which frankly, up until the collapse of Wall Street was actually working and the week before Wall Street collapsed, John McCain was ahead by 3 points and the Republicans were ahead by 5 in the generic ballot, because the Left couldn’t survive in a world where we had the courage to say, “Why don’t we find American oil and why don’t we find American gas, and why don’t we have the next building boom in the United States, not in Dubai. And why don’t we make sure that the terrorists run out of money?” And that ought to be our approach to this, so let’s do it now.
First of all: Reopen off of Louisiana which by the way, this administration, with utter total hypocrisy, said they were going to lift the quarantine, but then said, “Oh but by the way there’s a new regulatory policy and we don’t issue any of the new regulations.” So they have effectively stopped everything they promised us last fall everything they would allow to happen again. Governor Jindal wants it to happen. The people of Louisiana want it to happen. They understand that 80,000 dollar a year jobs aren’t all that available in the United States and they understand that shipping the rigs to Egypt and the Congo because they’re more politically stable than the United States is not a good sign for our future. So let’s reopen the areas off only those states that want to reopen them, but if a state wants to go and find oil and gas and wants to create more jobs in that state, and therefore wants to help the American balance of payments and keep the money here, let’s let them do it now.
We should end the Environmental Protection Agency’s war against American oil and gas. For example, Shell won in 2006, five years ago, a lease to allow them to explore in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas off Alaska. Three billion dollars later, the EPA has refused to allow them to move forward and they announced last week they’re stopping it. Now, this wasn’t the Alaskan wilderness area. This was an area that was totally, legally open for exploration in which the environmentalists inside the government and the environmentalists outside the government deliberately conspired to stop a company from creating American oil and American gas in the United States in a way which can only be helpful to the Saudis and the Iranians. And I for one am tired of being told that we ought to cripple our companies in our country on behalf of people overseas, and you don’t see any lawsuits over there because they don’t frankly allow it. And so you have a situation where every time you stop Americans, we strengthen our enemies and we weaken our own economy and this is a perfect case study.
We should also stop the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to cripple the development of gas found in shale. We now have technology that let’s us go down as far as eight thousand feet, reach out as far as four miles horizontally. We can now produce commercially available natural gas from shale. We have an 11 hundred year supply. And the answer is, “But you don’t know what’s happening 8,000 feet down.” And therefore your EPA is going to protect you from the possibility that 378 years from now something bad will happen. Well let me tell you something bad is happening this morning with all the people who can’t find a job because the government is killing their industry keeping the cost of energy high.
We need to develop effective clean coal pilot projects that prove the concept we can use coal because we have more energy in coal than Saudi Arabia has energy in oil and it is utterly, totally foolish to say to say that the United States is not going to aggressively develop clean coal. The Department of Energy promised in 2003 they would have a plan done by 2008. They then studied it to death. They now hope to have one done by 2016. At the current direction, the Chinese will have built, patented, and licensed new technologies worldwide faster than our bureaucracy in Washington can figure out how to issue the permit to even try. That is fundamentally wrong and we should cut through the red tape and we should maximize the ability of our own electricity industry and our own coal industry to develop new plants in the most rapidly possible way. And for example the Obama administration just a few weeks ago reversed a permit that had been given for a coal mine in West Virginia because the new EPA bureaucrats decided the old EPA bureaucrats were wrong.
How do you invest? How do you create jobs? How do you have any sense of energy production when you know that the next left wing, ideologically-committed, anti-business bureaucrat could in fact take away every single thing you’ve ever done. And so they ought to reverse that decision. They ought to go back to keeping their word. They ought to allow West Virginians to have a job and create energy for the rest of us. They should also streamline the nuclear regulatory process to enable us to build nuclear power plants. There is something fundamentally wrong.
I always say to my environmental friends, “If you really wanted to get carbon out of the atmosphere and if we produced as much electricity from nuclear power as France, you would take 2 billion tons of Carbon Dioxide a year out of the atmosphere.” And they’d say “Well, that’s not the right solution.” Because there’s never a right solution if it’s a solution because then our economy would grow, free enterprise would work, and that would be wrong. So what they always want is a technology that doesn’t exist but could exist someday if only you were patient long enough. And in the meantime, why don’t you ride a bicycle to prove you’re a patriot because they’re not going to permit you to do anything else.
There are two things about Nuclear power. One, we should dramatically go through and streamline the regulatory process for the big plants, but two, there’s a whole new generation of very small nuclear power plants, that are very, very safe, that should not come under the certain kind of regulatory design for a huge, giant multi-million dollar plant. And we could go to a much more effective nuclear power, very fast and have a very big job creation technology.
We should also insist on flex-fuel cars and blender pumps, and hear I just want to say a word, because some of my friends I think are confused about this issue, frankly. The person who first got my attention on this is former Director of the CIA, Jim Wilson, who said, “This should be seen as a National Security Issue.” Brazil went to a flex-fuel car model years ago, the very companies, by the way, that will come and testify here that they don’t know how to do it, are building the cars in Brazil. Cause the Brazilians said, “Either you are going to build them, or you are not going to be here.” They said, “Ok we will learn how to do it.” That cost less than putting in a seatbelt. And the fact is, it allows the consumer to choose. It is not a question of dictating what you want to do, it’s about giving you a range of choices about what you want to do. Brazil today is totally energy independent, by a combination of offshore discoveries, flex-fueled cars, and the use of sugar-based ethanol. And they don’t pay a penny to Saudi Arabia. They don’t pay a penny to Iran or Iraq or Venezuela.
Now, I just think we ought to be clear about this, let the consumers have the opportunity to choose what they want to do, and most of them are going to be economically rational, and it is a step toward us getting away from relying on foreign fuels.
Finally, I do think, cause I used to…I’m a futurist, I believe in the future like Ronald Reagan and I think you ain’t seen nothing yet. I believe in investing in and developing new technologies, if the investments are made largely by the private sector, without the government picking winning and losers. And, I am happy to say to many of my friends, look hydrogen matters, bio-fuel matters, solar matters, wind matters, but the truth is, in the next twenty years, what is going to matter the most is oil, gas, coal, and nuclear, cause they’re simply and statistically going to remain the bulk of the supply. So we need to move forward on every front, not stop the biggest, most successful fronts, while we wait around someday for a better future that may or may not come fast enough for any of us to be either employed or safe.
Now in order to have an American Energy policy, we need to replace the Environmental Protection Agency with a new fundamentally different Environmental Solutions Agency. For my friends in the media, I would like to emphasize replace. This is not about tear down, destroy, eliminate, walk away, let the environment be destroyed, sell out to corporate interest, and all that bologna. This is a different question. And Terry Maple and I wrote a book called “A Contract with the Earth” which outlining the model of a green conservative. The question is could you in fact develop a better solution than a Washington based, command in control, top down, bureaucratic, regulatory, litigation model?
Now I believe, and by the way about 75 percent of the American people believe that relying on science, technology, markets, and incentives, is a better future, with better solutions, than relying on bureaucrats, trial lawyers, litigation, and regulation. This is a very fundamental question about can we do it better? I want to replace, not reform EPA, because the EPA is made up of self selected bureaucrats, who are anti-American jobs, anti-American business, anti-state government, anti-local control, and I don’t think you can reeducate them. I think you should allow them to go home, get a college job, write their memoirs “What I did before the Revolution”, and just go on with what we are doing.
I don’t think the EPA bureaucrats, who are dedicated to a Washington centered, top down, bureaucratic control by litigation and regulation, are going learn a new dance, a new approach, and a new model. What we need is, and by the way this is double true because Obama wants to use EPA to control carbon, so he can control all of the non-health economy to match his control of the health economy through Obamacare. And it is the two of them together that is such a fundamental threat to freedom in this country, by centralizing power in Washington, DC.
Now a new Environmental Solutions Agency, I believe, would do a better job of both protecting the environment and the economy. The principles are straightforward, localism when possible. I believe local people who actually live there, may have a higher value for their environment than a Washington bureaucrat who has never visited their town, and may never have even been in their state.
I believe that state governments can be very reliable partners, in that there ought to be a cooperative attitude from Washington, seeking to work with the states, not a dictatorial attitude, seeking to tell the states the limits of some bureaucrat here, based on paperwork.
I believe that incentives, innovators, and entrepreneurs will solve environmental problems, and improve the environment better than the bureaucrats, regulators and litigators.
I believe the new Environmental Solutions Agency should see communities, states, and industries as partners, not adversaries in solving problems when one approaches.
The Environmental Solutions Agency should look for new science, new technologies, and new approaches to get more energy, more jobs, and a better environment simultaneously. As an American, I reject the idea that you have to choose one or the other. We have never done that in our history. We have always believed that you can create a better future, and in my mind, a better future as a healthy environment and a healthy economy, and healthy local control, within a Constitutional system of a limited federal government, and we Americans should be able to do that.
I taught in the second Earth Day forty years ago. I was director of an interdisciplinary program at West Georgia College on the environment. Terry Maple and I, as I said, wrote, “Contract with the Earth” to outline a green conservatism. I believe you can love nature and be a conservative. You can love the environment and also love American energy and American jobs.
So I want to close by asking you to do this, call your Congressman and your Senators. Ask them to introduce a genuine American energy plan to cut through all the red tape, and all the litigation, and get us to energy and jobs this year, for American national security, for the American economy, and for a better future. And urge them to introduce and pass American Solutions, I’m sorry, Environmental Solutions Agency this year. And then let’s give the President a choice, does he really want to be president and know? Does he really want to veto every good idea that comes up from Capital Hill? Or does he want to work with us, in a cooperative, bipartisan, common sense, centrist majority absolutely supported by the American people, doing the kind of conservative, sound things that the American people want even if the Washington elites hate them. Let’s let him choose. I don’t actually personally believe he’ll make it here next year, but still, it’s a goal. We are all having a good time, why shouldn’t he get to come and have a good time too?

................................................................................
This speech must be public record, uncopyrighted. Find it at http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2011/02/12/transcript-newt-gingrich-speech-at-cpac-2011/

Any other politico who is interested in service rather than making money win or lose can do better than this. Or is he relying on the uneducated status of the American voter? Gingrich relying on lack of education of the American voter. There you have it. Give us NPR. Educate the people. Case in point. NPR, please do an analysis of this Gingrich speechlet. We can't wait.
........................................................................................................

Alternate worldviews: Parse Pawlenty: Counter-Speech for Proposed Legislation, Based on His to CPAC

Gendarmism. Policing Others. When Control is a Goal in Itself.

2011-03-09T14:55:00.008-05:00

Gendarmism:
When enforcement, control is a goal in itself.
Policing Others for the sake of the status quo.

Protecting the Established Order against Change, Opportunity.
Examine the Drive to Manage Others.

History of gendarmism, forms, how to spot it and defend

Gendarmism is a mindset driving enforcement as a goal in itself, with only side regard to the merits of the controls, or an underlying social, religious, political policy.

Gendarmerie. It sounds genteel but is threatening in its derivation: send in the gendarmes, the gens d'armes, the people with arms. Can, will, do ordinary people put themselves on the line to defend themselves, or is the show of force in uniform enough to maintain the status quo the uniforms represent.

Domestic and international gendarmism is on the rise: create the fear of some "other" and bring in the enforcers to be sure the "others" stay away. But are the "others" something to fear? For example, the eternal fear of rabble, from the church and nobles, royalty and burghers of the middle ages, to today. But who is rabble? Those still beneath you? Would global stability rise if basic opportunity were in reach of all., including all "rabble."

A. Overview

Gendarmism. Send in the enforcers.

1. Gendarmes
.
Who? Gendarmes are a group authorized within a legal system to enforce. The name has an exotic, vaguely affected foreign sound. Gendarmes are functionaries, not original decisionmakers or policy makers. They do as they are told; and have an image to protect. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/7652641/French-Jewish-grandmother-banned-from-telling-school-gendarmes-handed-her-over-to-Nazis.html/. If abortion is against the law, send in the police.

2. Vigilantes

If the act is perhaps legal, but you feel it should not be tolerated, you may choose to send in the Vigilantes. Vigilantes are catchers and punishers outside the processes of the law. A lone wolf is a self-appointed vigilante. Only accountable if caught.

Vigilantes are not authorized to enforce, but appoint themselves to enforce their own views on others anyway: unpredictable, violent, summarily impulsive and self-certain. Outside normal legal proceedings. One who takes law into own hands, see http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vigilante/.

Example: If abortion is not against the law, but you do not like it, send in your ownVigilantes or do it yourself-- an effective tactic is to spring in secret -- ambush. Or threaten in secret. Or overtly.

.
The vigilante mindset can also become a collective mind, is that so? Supremacists of any kind fall into the vigilante group easily, when they act violently against others for conducting lawful activities that the vigilante disagrees with. Terrorism. Intimidation. Open carry.
.

Self-appointed Moral Vigilante. Homegrown Radical Terrorist.

3. Militia person (using formal military-type training and hierarchies to do vigilante acts) probably believes that institutions for enforcement of laws on the books are not to be trusted to do the job, and do not address the real evils that may not actually be prohibited.

The Militia as well as the Vigilante watches for moral escapees and any means justifies monitoring others. If it means sending in the government to oversee medical exams and doctor-patient relationship, do it. See Rules of Extortion Procedure: Defunding, Shutdowns. In the old days, a girl could get a simple D and C -- dilation and curettage just in case, or in the real case. Now probably not. Gendarmism on the rise.
.

B. Implementation. Historical Gendarmism

1. Against Women.

The term "gendarmism" was identified early on. And found not needed.

"***** A woman who loves herself and her duty can take care of herself. One does not need any gendarmism for oneself.***** "

That from 1844, The Neighbours, by a Frederika Bremer. http://books.google.com/books?id=9iFAAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA57&lpg=PA57&dq=gendarmism&source=bl&ots=NH4mh8_PLm&sig=66Eh0akjPGFerx_64JySeNe4H7s&hl=en&ei=88B3TZWBEfS40QHs7XfBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=gendarmism&f=false/

2. Against Upstarts.

Gendarmism is a mindset for control, not necessarily a need.

a. Uzbekistan

A policy of stabilization for those in power, is seen as gendarmism by those so controlled. For example, in Uzbekistan, the government at one poitn called an intervention a "policy of stabilization." Those whose activities and beliefs were to be restricted, called the "stabilization" as they experienced it, as "gendarmism."
.
Apparently a Minsk summit was pending, but the Press Secretary for the President of Uzbekistan complained about a broadcast from two studios contradicted each other just before the event.

Politikia v ATV. The station Politikia,broadcast a program entitled "The Chosen Ones and the People." That program had been offset as to its impact earlier, however, by a broadcast from another studio, ATV. The earlier broadcast painted the government action as totalitarian: the ATV group safely at a distance endeavored to paint matters as fascist etc. What was the objective activity? Is the situation really a policy of stabilization or is it despicable gendarmism.

Part of the government letter objecting to ATV's programming reads as follows: From this, figure easily what was suggested or said in the ATV program --

"How is it possible to entertain the idea that a group of renegades could instruct an independent republic at a distance how to live, to slander the honor and dignity of the people, frighten them with totalitarian, despotic, fascist regime, calling a policy of stabilization in the region gendarmism?"

The government writer goes on to characterize the radio station that permitted such an outrage, as 'inhabitants of the outback of ignorance' -- (wonderful phrase!) -- and requests suitable punishments to be inflicted and apologies given.
.
The tactic is clear: Slander the honor and dignity of the people: frighten them. How dare a radio station call a "stabilization" policy totalitarian. ATV must have suggested the people are uneducated and unable to decide matters for themselves.

Find it at Uzbekistan, 1993 or so, the book Human Rights in Uzbekistan, by Erika Dailey, Jeri Laber, and Helskinki Watch. Find it at http://books.google.com/books?id=norB-huPlQUC&pg=PA61&lpg=PA61&dq=gendarmism&source=bl&ots=HiPd_UaTV7&sig=qz8H3GWp0irOrFlI1SzZXBqXn4o&hl=en&ei=hMN3Ta2FGOWQ0QHA64jSBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=gendarmism&f=false/

3. As Foreign Policy. A tool of control --"Idealized gendarmism" --

Elizabeth Young referred to gendarmism in this way, as to the United States' days of so-called limited war and counterinsurgency in the 1960's and 1970's.

See book Truth and Tragedy, a compilation edited by Kenneth W. Thompson and Robert John Myers, see http://books.google.com/books?id=4ejXvbBV0ocC&pg=PA263&lpg=PA263&dq=gendarmism&source=bl&ots=Qjgucw0-7Z&sig=Az93CzWDE42jtN8_xDtSRsXBcBU&hl=en&ei=hMN3Ta2FGOWQ0QHA64jSBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=gendarmism&f=false/

And what good did idealized gendarmism do?

Idealized gendarmism masked what else was going on; and the tragedies going on in its wake.

Idealized gendarmism merely wasted time and attention on southeast Asia, masking the expansion of Russian nuclear capability, and was not matched by any comparable expansion in nuclear capability in the US.
.
Vietnam squandered lives, was a setback in the image of the United States as having judgment in foreign matters. Siphoned resources, divided the country. Read on at page 263 ff. The point is the phrase: idealized gendarmism. Elizabeth Young made good use of it there. The term even sounds flighty. Slightly fey.

The process, however, was similar to any propaganda movement: Slander the honor and dignity of the people: frighten them. Call a "stabilization" policy totalitarian. ATV must have suggested the people are uneducated and unable to decide matters for themselves.

4. Gendarmism further afield. Czar Nicholas I as the "gendarme of Europe" -- promoting order and tranquility

In 1848, Czar Nicholas set up his own empire as a gendarmist, a "bastion of order and tranquility"-- see paper (available to boost one's own academic obligation when one does not want to have to research all that alone?) at http://www.research-assistance.com/paper/14875/a_ra_default/nicholas_i.html/.

The thesis includes that Nicholas saw Russia "as the supreme force of morality and justice which should dictate to Europe the policies that were in Europe's best interest."

Did it work? No. However, the financial economies proposed and implemented (buy uniforms, not ammunition, for example) were really "rooted in the status quo and solely designed to maintain the established order (Petersburg).

5. The purpose of "Gendarmism - to protect the established order (in the Ottoman Empire?) ...."

Back to Nicholas I. Nicholas' foreign policy was "insulation" but that "could not meet the long-term needs of Russia at home."

Gendarmes. Spain version. Pamplona.

6. Gendarmism if misapplied (in the eyes of the viewer) as producing its own just desserts.

"Americans unconsciously have repented for their prosperity, world leadership, bragging, messianism and certainly gendarmism. Gendarmes are really a nuisance...." Denis Dragunsky from New Times 2001 --://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/3497305/ Title: Frankensteins Taught a Lesson.

This was just after 9/11 -- "Who would have thought that a pawn could successfully make it across the chess board to become a queen and then put out the eye of the grand master." It goes on to note it is time go get out of the "traditional hammock of containment and counterbalance."

Stoutly done, lad. Stoutly done. Containment and counterbalance. Out of the hammock. Then again, to get out of that hammock means other extremes: overt intervention, or ignoring the issue entirely. We prefer containment and counterbalance to overt interventions if that means going it alone. Going it alone smacks of what we got into before, and could not then shake. Side comment. Authority to intervene must be international. Is that so? How many people have to die, however, before the global gendarme does it anyway, just this last time.

7. International gendarmism. Interferencism.

"Recent wars waged by the U.S. in the name of fighting terrorism are just derivatives of 'interferencism' and 'international gendarmism...'" see www://rejjy.freeshell.org/Foreign_Media_Reaction/.../wwwh40915.html

C. Contemporary Gendarmism
.

Deprive Authoritarians of One Stage On Which to Play,
and they will try to take over Another

Who determines here what shall be the bastion of morality for the nation, as Nicholas tried to be for his? Global chutzpah.

Domestic Gendarmism . Gendarmism Over People. GOP for short. Short for short-sighted.

Domestic Gendarme, on the way. Gendarmism Over People. GOP

Interference with the Family. We shall allow no regulation for business, investors, says the Gendarmist over People group, but get in that family and regulate! Who out there is most like Old Czar Nick? - set up moral standards for everybody else. They need us because we are superior.

Newt running

Is this the Gendarmist Agenda:

1. Ignore the Economy: People's Standard of Living, Aspirations to Opportunity, Health.

2. We must instead, now that the election is over, Monitor and March!

3. Onward, Christian Gendarmes. Ye Vigilantes for Your Views. Into the Bedrooms and ObGyn Offices. Everybody Look! Punish! Pack your heat. Control! Take Away the Other's Moral Decisionmaking! Ah, feels go good. Addiction to interference? never. Couldn't possibly be.

Is that so? It appears to be worth shutting down the government for. See again Rules of Extortion Procedure

Newt running away?

Is that so?

DNC Adopts Humana Freedom Cap for Convention - The Phrygian Cap Goes Mainstream

2011-02-28T20:20:00.004-05:00

DNC Is Busy Already.
The DNC Adopts Humana Symbol Phrygian Cap

Democratic National Convention

1. Opens Online Store;
2. Introduces Goody Bag Competition; and
3. Adopts Phrygian Cap as Symbol of Independence and Liberty

By way of update, the Congressional People's Committee, what is it, CDC, CPG, what are those letters? Progressive somethings. Democrats, we think, but that doesn't matter - all can propose. The CPC! Congressional Progressive Caucus! Got it! CPC is the first to help stock the Store and goody bags. The CPC has already supplied unlimited copies of The People's Budget for inclusion, see An Act for The People's Budget , thereby qualifying all on the Committee for an advance Phrygian Cap.

Phrygian Cap, from our old Edwardian hatpin collection. Here, symbolizing freedom in France.

In preparation for national convention, the DNC announces the opening of its new store, and thereby hires People and promotes jobs. It also demonstrates its broad interest in the new All-People's Party, crossing red and blue lines, in its marketing of ideas and solutions. Here, the solution to headwear: traditional, yet bold.

1. Anyone can buy.

Any registered Democrat, or Republican, or People's Party Member, or Independent, merely by attesting to intent to vote, can see and buy in advance products from the DNC Store, although the items to be included in the actual Big Bags at the Convention itself will remain wikisecret.

2. Bandwagon.

Consistent with the DNC big tent idea, a mere statement of intent to register as a democrat shall suffice to enter the site. No items shall be included that are geared to generate wridicule, wrath, wrage or wrevenge. Humor is good, but serious wrudeness shall be disallowed.

DNC Store. Old eggs and new eggs mingle.

3. Testimonial supporting the advance goody bag.

"I just love the idea of an Ahead of Convention Goody Bag," said one hopeful delegate. "I can shop starting now for whatever holiday I like."

Of course, the Big bags will still be present at the event, but these mini-bag items are geared to rev up the Democratic voting populace starting now, for Presidential and other elections in 2012, and to be held in North or South Carolina.

4. Appeal beyond the United States for the Phrygian cap as a Humana symbol:

As to the Phrygian Cap, see (used by permission from Phrygian Cap, Humana Symbol of Independence and Liberty. Find its history at the following sources:

Phrygian Cap, Liberty Cap; Phrygian Caps in Senate and State Seals; Phrygian Caps Jump the Fence.

They often come in Red, an anathema to those who favor legal persons, who have no heads for any hats at all.

5. Who may support?

Local groups and even individual creativists are encouraged to submit further proposals for the DNC store site; and for the secret inclusions (special goodies) for the Big Bags at the Convention.

Decisions for inclusion at the site, or a catalogue in process for online purchases, or at the Convention, will be made based on runes.

6. Judging the inclusions in the goody bag.

If, as expected, few DNC judges will agree with any others because of their independent cussedness, they have decided to call themselves ahead of time the Committee of Herding Cats rather than Judges.

Hopefuls note that a single judge's vote may well cause a Distribution Event of that particular Goody to random recipients for free. That indeed happened last week, Last week's winner was heard to exclaim as he bounced out of sight, I haz prize. I haz prize! And so he did.

I Haz Prize. Opinionated Edwardian Hatpin Cat awarded a Phrygian Cap

6. Notes to applicants.

The Cat Herders announce that they have received enough requests for inclusion of the R is for Riptide App, and board game for those unapped. Point made. This would indeed make a great holiday gift so it is hoped that production people can get on board.

Copyright protection for that App-Game is already in place, and if you have an idea for revision, production and marketing, please let the Committee know, see R's Make a RipTide: Game, Amusements. App

7. Entrants

Entrants are asked to keep all proposals for the catalogue, advance goody bags and the Big Goody Bag simple, because goody bags and other gifts may well be taxable, so with that caveat, let's take a look at the hopefuls to date.

8. Phrygian Caps for Independence and Liberty, particularly liberty from teabags has been suggested, but that added phrase for placards has been shelved, lest someone be offended. The Humana Freedom Cap has the most votes so far, and samples have already been ballooned to the Middle East and the MidWest.

It is noted that teabags get hung out to dry but do not improve in the process no matter how much more hot water is poured over. The Phrygian cap goes on for millennia, as shown. If history is unfamiliar, then trust the headgear of evolved Smurfs and Gnomes.

Hitler by Paraphrase. Examine Mein Kampf, Ch VI, Propaganda . Unser Kampf. Our Struggle. Use of the Tactic in Politics Makes Enemies of Us All

2011-02-16T17:32:00.016-05:00

Mein Kampf.
Hitler's Struggle. 1928 Text.

Here: A Text Paraphrase Study Tool
See the Politicsl Shift Backward Today
Rabble's Eye View of What Hitler Said.
Godwin's Law is not offended with the analysis of Hitler is appropriate.

Unser Kampf. Our Struggle.

What to learn from Hitler's Propaganda Chapter VI, Mein Kampf

Read the Master of Mass Persuasion

"At first the claims of the propaganda were so impudent that people thought it insane; later, it got on people's nerves; and in the end, it was believed. " Mein Kampf, Ch VI

For today: Do Propaganda Techniques,
Used in in politics today with technological upgrades, make Enemies of Us All.

"Generations of rabble without honor deserve no freedom." Adolf Hitler 1925.
Who becomes the rabble in the new propaganda.

Can we self-inoculate against the Propaganda InRoad, if we study the field.
.

Overview.

1. Mein Kampf. Chapter VI. Propaganda. Hitler's Struggle, what he learned from WWI, how he applies it in 1928.

2. Godwin's Law: Godwin's Law proposes that a Hitler meme, or Nazi meme, leads to unproductive, emotional comparisons to Hitler, and reflects a desire by the person invoking the name to stop the discussion, or to lead it to inappropriate paths, see http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.10/godwin.if_pr.html/.

3. Here, however, we take the other path: that Godwin's Law supports appropriate analyses of Hitler's successes, and that it is appropriate in particular to focus on his techniques.

Update: Even Governor Jerry Brown cites the fact-avoidant, no-debate mindset, while repeating a big lie, that obstructs governmental processes. See http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/21/us/politics/brown-says-california-gop-is-harder-to-work-with-decades-later.html?scp=1&sq=Governor%20Jerry%20Brown%20republicans&st=cse

4. Here: Unser Kampf. Our Struggle. How to learn from Mein Kampf propaganda techniques and rationales, in order to defend against propaganda today. We lay out the paraphrase, part by part, here. Note the steps, the techniques. The vulnerable populations, T is for Tsunami. Intellectualism at Risk
.....................................................................................
The propaganda principles of Adolf Hitler, with propaganda originally merely a word to define "sales" -- emerged from Germany's losses in World War I and Adolf Hitler's brilliance in analyzing where the flawed propaganda effort of WWI went wrong. Fast forward to our contemporary civil political setting.

Propaganda Regimen, power playbook, Adolf: what do you see nightly in this regard? Use a nonsense mnemonic to remember the steps.

instill fear I
spin S
sloganeer S
scapegoat S
focus on the emotional "masses" - ignore the thinkers F
oppose factfinding O
oppose debate O
obliterate humanitarianism (see progress report, obliterating humanitarianism today) O
spin, repeat the spin, the slogan, ignoring the other side S

ISSSSFOOS

WWI German War Memorial, Enger, Germany

Why does the media let these tactics go by without challenge? Interviewers complicit.

Caution. The goal here is readability. Ellipses and quotes and asterisks and brackets clutter. So some are in, some are not. Go back to the site for exact comparisons. I added a question-answer format, a little Hitlerchism; and headings. Useful for me. Suit yourself.

.....................................................

MEIN KAMPF

CHAPTER VI

A. Is Propaganda a Means or an End

1. Propagandist activity is an instrument, an art, to be applied with skill.

Socialist-Marxists did propaganda activity well before World War I; bourgeois parties did not.

The Christian-Social movement also used propagandist activity well. Only after the War did it become clear how effective correct use of propaganda could be. And there, it was the enemy who did it well -- German propaganda activity was only modest.

...........................................

2. We, Germany, can learn from our enemies in WWI: what practical instruction is there in how to use propaganda, as the enemy of Germany did then, to our detriment.

I, Adolf Hitler, learned enormously from the propaganda of that time. But others simply chose to forget how effective the enemy propaganda was against us, perhaps because they did not want to acknowledge the cleverness of the enemy -- land lack of that kind of good will led to our losing the opportunity to learn.

Do we have propaganda skills now? No. What we have is inadequate in form, and wrong in the psychology of it.. We lack clarity even in asking basic questions, defining propaganda.

.........................................

3. Is propaganda a means or an end.

Hitler says, propaganda is a means that must meet its end, so will change as the end requires. Where big ideas like freedom, independence, food and honor are involved, no less than full effort will suffice.

As a means, propaganda must be judged with regard to its end. The form it takes may change. The form changes because the form must support the aim that it serves. That, in turn, puts the focus on the aim of the propaganda.
.
This varies; and so the "inner value" of the propaganda will also vary. Wartime aims - life and death - the propaganda must meet the challenge.
.

What were the aims of WWI. In the Great War (WWI), Germany fought for lofty, overpowering goals: In WWI

"[Germany fought for] freedom and independence of our nation, the security of our future food supply, and our national honor."

.........................................................
.

4. What is the role of national honor and a higher justice.

National honor: There must be national honor, because people without honor sooner or later lose their Freedom and Independence. Freedom and Independence stem from a higher justice. That means that rabble without honor do not deserve freedom. Repeat:

"Generations of rabble without honor deserve no freedom."
.

So, any man who is satisfied to be a cowardly slave can have no honor. If he could, then honor itself would become contemptible.

........................................................
.

5. What is the nature of the Struggle, that

a) calls forth that national honor, that
b) safeguards freedom and independence; and
c) calls for Propaganda in its service.

The Struggle. The German Nation in WWI. We were "engaged in a struggle for a human existence."

As to the Propaganda, the nature of the struggle meant that "the purpose of war propaganda should have been to support this struggle; its aim to help bring about victory." At stake was the question of destiny - 'to be or not to be' -- that cries out for a solution.
.

.......................................................

6. What happens to concepts like Humanitarianism and Aesthetics in that struggle.

They dissolve into nothingness. Subordinate.
.

At the point of the great struggle for existence, "all considerations of humanitarianism or aesthetics crumble into nothingness; for all these concepts do not float about in the ether, they arise from man's imagination and are bound up with man".
.

If Nature itself doesn't recognize principles of kindness and beauty, then those concepts only exist because a race of humans carries it forward. The concepts themselves are transient, and race-specific. When a man dies, his concepts of humanitarianism and aesthetics again dissolve into nothingness. If a race dies, its concepts of humanitarianism and aesthetics also dies.
.

Nature knows nothing of kindness or beauty, and among humans, only a few nations or races recognize these concepts seriously. When they do, they emanate proportionally from the feeling of the race in question. Lose those races that recognize humanitarianism and aesthetics, and the concepts would vanish from the earth.

Humanitarian and Aesthetic values become necessarily secondary when a nation fights for its existence. They become irrelevant at the moment that they threaten to paralyze a struggling nation's power to preserve itself. All humanitarianism and aesthetics do anyway, is get in the way of self-preservation, in the time of struggle.
.

.................................................................
.

7. What is the relationship of humanitarianism and war.

Aesthetics becomes drivel where war emerges. Humanitarianism in war is in the brevity of the war itself.

"The most aggressive fighting technique is the most humane."

Great issues of war and struggle subsume all else.

"[W]here the destiny and existence of a people are at stake, all obligation toward beauty ceases."

The yoke of slavery is the most un-beautiful thing in human life. Throw off that yoke.

Reference: "Or do these Schwabing 2 decadents view the present lot of the German people as 'aesthetic?" Schwabing is a district in North Munich, that was Bohemian in tradition, see ://www.worldlingo.com/ma/dewiki/en/Schwabing.

.............................................................

8. Propaganda must not concern itself with concepts of humanitarianism and beauty.
.

Jews: They invented this "cultural perfume" and we do not have to discuss it with them. Their existence is a protest against the aesthetics of the Lord's image.
.

The criteria of humanitarianism and beauty must be eliminated from the struggle, therefore humanitarianism and beauty is inapplicable to propaganda. With such high stakes, the struggle for the existence of the German people, propaganda in war was a means to its accomplishment and cannot be distracted, diluted.
.
The only possible attitude toward war in such a struggle is this:

"In this case the most cruel weapons were humane if they brought about a quicker victory; and only those methods were beautiful which helped the nation to safeguard the dignity of its freedom."

.........................................................
.

9. So what went wrong in WWI?
.

The so-called responsible authorities lacked clarity. They fell into uncertainty over the form and application of the propaganda weapon.

"[P]ropaganda is no more than a weapon, though a frightful one in the hand of an expert."

....................................................................................................................................

B. Who should be addressed by Propaganda?

The Intelligentsia, or the Less-Educated Masses?
.

1. Propaganda must always be addressed exclusively to the Masses.

Aim at their emotions. As to the Intelligentsia, the function of Propaganda is to provide scientific instruction, not to focus on the propaganda content itself. The function is not to educate those who are already educated, or those who strive after education and knowledge. Aim instead for the emotions of the Masses, and only in a limited way at the "intellect"

a. The exhibition poster model.
.

We know that the content of propaganda is not science, any more than an object shown in a poster is art.

The art of the poster is in the designer's ability to attract attention, with form and color. The poster ad must direct the public to the art being exhibited. That is the measure of the success of the poster. Let the poster show the significance of the exhibition, but not substitute for it. Let the individual drawn to the exhibition examine and immerse in it , and little by little, "form a fair opinion."

b. Compare the exhibition poster model to uses of propaganda.
,

The propaganda, like the poster, is not to train the individual scientifically, but to attract attention. The propaganda, like the poster, is to draw attention to certain facts, processes, necessities, and bring the significance of those elements within their field of vision.

Here is the art of propaganda: to convince. To convince of the following:

that the fact is real --
that the process is necessary --
that the necessity is correct --

..........................................................

.

2. Why focus on whether propaganda should be Popular or Intellectual
.

All propaganda must be popular, aimed at the People.

So, adjust its intellectual level to the most limited intelligence among those it reaches. The greater the mass, the lower its purely intellectual level must be. If the aim is to influence a whole people, as in propaganda for "sticking out a war", then "we must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public...."

Intellectual focus is a distraction.

If the intellectual ballast is modest and not extensive (ballast as the weight needed to balance a ship, for example), then the propaganda more exclusively can consider the emotions of the masses, and the more effective it will be.

Use that appeal to emotions of the masses as the measure of a sound propaganda campaign: Does it exclusively consider the emotions of the masses. And skip whether a few scholars or young aesthetes are pleased with it.

...............................................................

3. How to find the emotional heart of the masses, so the propaganda can be directed at it.
.

Rule. Adjust the propaganda to the broad mass.
.

The art of propaganda requires that we need a psychologically correct form for the propaganda. That will lead to the attention of the broad masses, and to their emotional ideas, their heart. "The fact that our bright boys do not understand this merely shows how mentally lazy and conceited they are." Then, once we understand that, the next rule emerges.
.

Rule: Make it one-dimensional. "It is a mistake to make propaganda many-sided, like scientific instruction, for instance."
.

This is because "the receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous."

So, to be effective, follow a simple line, and make the basic tactics psychologically sound.
,

a) limit the propaganda to a very few points, and
.

b) harp on those in slogans.

"[H]arp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan. As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crod can neither digest nor retain the material offered. In this way the result is weakened and in the end entirely cancelled out."

..........................................................

4. What mistakes did German propaganda make in WWI

"It was absolutely wrong to make the enemy ridiculous, as Austrian and German comic papers did. It was absolutely wrong because actual contact with an enemy soldier was bound to arouse an entirely different conviction, and the results were devastating; for now the German soldier, under the direct impression of the enemy's resistance, felt himself swindled by his propaganda service. His desire to fight, or even to stand firm, was not strengthened, but the opposite occurred. His courage flagged."

The German soldier accordingly rejected the German propaganda services as purveying swindles and bunk. The propaganda worked in reverse.

The English and American propaganda, however, was psychologically sound. It never let a soldier feel misinformed by his own people.

The English and Americans represented the Germans as barbarians and Huns, and prepared the soldier for the coming terrors. This preserved the soldier from disappointment. The most terrible weapons on the battlefield only confirmed what his propagandists had told him. It reinforced his faith in his government's truth. And it increased his rage and hatred of the vile enemy. The cruel weapons confirmed the brutality of the Hunnish barbarians, and he probably never thought that his own weapons were perhaps more terrible.

The propaganda service, the "Enlightenment" Service for Germany, acted against its interest. There was no correct psychology.

[This from a later section]

The German propaganda contained an inner ambiguity, that carried the seed of ineffectualness. Its content failed to make the needed impression on the masses. "Insipid pacifist bilge."

"Only our feather-brained 'Statesmen' could have dared to hope that this insipid pacifist bilge could fire men's spirits till they were willing to die."

Their miserable stuff was useless, even harmful.

.......................................................................

5. What did the British and American propagandists do that worked.

Axioms:

a. Take a basically subjective and one-sided attitude toward every question. If you are advertising a soap do not describe other soaps as "good".

b. Emphasize the one side or right that the propaganda has set out to argue for. Do not, in propaganda, weigh and ponder the rights of different people.

"The function of propaganda is, for example, not to do an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly."

Half-heartedness is fatal. After WWI, there should have been no acceptance of "war-guilt" as resting on German shoulders alone. Instead, load it all on the shoulders of the enemy, even if that were not true, although of course in that case, it would have been true.

......................................................................

6. What principles did the British and Americans tap into.

They understood "the primitive sentiments of the broad masses."

Go back to the broad mass of a nation.

The broad mass is not comprised of diplomats, or professors of political law, or even people with the abilty to form a rational opinion. Instead, the broad mass is plain mortals, wavering, inclined to doubt and uncertainty. If our propaganda admits even a glimmer of right on the other side, the foundation for doubt in our own right has been laid.

The effect of uncertainty on the masses is this: they can no longer distinguish where foreign injustice ends and our own injustice begins. The masses will become uncertain and suspicious, especially if the enemy holds firm to his view of his being right, and unloads all his blame on us. The whole country understandably gives more credence, then, to the enemy's propaganda because it is unified and coherent

We Germans suffer from a mania of objectivity. We take great pains to avoid doing the enemy any injustice, even if we put ourselves in peril of "seriously besmirching and even destroying" our own people and country. The authorities at the time did not intend this result, of course, but the people who felt its effects did not know that.

"The people are, in their overwhelming majority, so feminine by nature and attitude that sober reasoning determines their thoughts and actions far less than emotion and feeling. And this sentiment is not complicated, but very simple and all of a piece. It does not have multiple shadings; it has a positive and a negative; love or hate; right or wrong; truth or lie; never half this way and half that way, never partially, or that kind of thing."

.................................................................

7. So how to boil this down

English propagandists understood the importance of absolute consistency, brilliantly.

"They made no half statements that might have given rise to doubts."

Look at their knowledge of the primitive sentiments of their masses. Look at their atrocity propaganda, that adapted to it. Ruthless, brilliant, and creating the needed preconditions for moral steadfastness at the front.

The English carried on in the face of great defeats, and then pilloried Germany as the sole guilty party for the war's outbreak. They were rabid and impudent in their bias, and persistent, and always expressed their lies while taking into account the emotional and extreme attitude of the masses, and were accordingly believed.

Their propaganda enabled them to stick to its guns, and even begin to nibble at us with it.

.............................................................

8. And here, we let Adolf Hitler's own words carry through to the end.

Paraphrase for yourself.

a. And now, Adolf:

Consider this a large quote, all the way to the end, but with sentences separated out.

The letter paragraph-sentence indicators are added for reference later, perhaps, if we come back to match current sound bites, repetitions, never bending, no half-statements, all to win big and stomp on the despicable enemy, me, a rabble.

1) "But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unfiagging attention.

2) It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success.

3) Particularly in the field of propaganda, we must never let ourselves be led by aesthetes or people who have grown blase:

not by the former, because the form and expression of our propaganda would soon, instead of being suitable for the masses, have drawing power only for literary teas;

and of the second we must beware, because, lacking in any fresh emotion of their own, they are always on the lookout for new stimulation.

4) These people are quick to weary of everything; they want variety, and they are never able to feel or understand the needs of their fellow men who are not yet so callous.

5) They are always the first to criticize a propaganda campaign, or rather its content, which seems to them too old-fashioned, too hackneyed, too out-of-date, etc.

6) They are always after novelty, in search of a change, and this makes them mortal enemies of any effective political propaganda. For as soon as the organization and the content of propaganda begin to suit their tastes, it loses all cohesion and evaporates completely.

7) The purpose of propaganda is not to provide interesting distraction for blase young gentlemen, but to convince, and what I mean is to convince the masses.

8) But the masses are slowmoving, and they always require a certain time before they are ready even to notice a thing, and only after the simplest ideas are repeated thousands of times will the masses finally remember them.

9) When there is a change, it must not alter the content of what the propaganda is driving at, but in the end must always say the same thing.

10) For instance, a slogan must be presented from different angles, but the end of all remarks must always and immutably be the slogan itself.

11) Only in this way can the propaganda have a unified and complete effect.

12) This broadness of outline from which we must never depart, in combination with steady, consistent emphasis, allows our final success to mature.

13) And then, to our amazement, we shall see what tremendous results such perseverance leads to-to results that are almost beyond our understanding.

14) All advertising, whether in the field of business or politics, achieves success through the continuity and sustained uniformity of its application.

15) Here, too, the example of enemy war propaganda was typical; limited to a few points, devised exdusively for the masses, carried on with indefatigable persistence.

16) Once the basic ideas and methods of execution were recognized as correct, they were applied throughout the whole War without the slightest change.

17) At first the claims of the propaganda were so impudent that people thought it insane; later, it got on people's nerves; and in the end, it was believed.

18) After four and a half years, a revolution broke out in Germany; and its slogans originated in the enemy's war propaganda.

19) And in England they understood one more thing: that this spiritual weapon [emphasis supplied] can succeed only if it is applied on a tremendous scale, but that success amply covers all costs.

20) There, propaganda was regarded as a weapon of the first order, while in our country it was the last resort of unemployed politicians and a comfortable haven for slackers.

21) And, as was to be expected, its results all in all were zero."

b. We went to get some copies of Mein Kampf for our friends, but at the library, all were checked out to the RNC or K Street. There were holds on some of them, but we couldn't read the names upside down. I wonder who they are. Masses and rabble will never know.

Conclusion:

Ask: Why is the media complicit, failing to call out propaganda when they let it on their shows, see CNN MSNBC ABC NBC CBS PBS: Missing the Propaganda Boat

So forge ahead. You are on your own. You are responsible for your own education. Self-educate. Do your own paraphrase from an original text to learn the material. Return to1925. Mein Kampf. Volume 1, entitled "A Reckoning." Open to Chapter VI: War Propaganda. The text: Mein Kampf -- My Struggle -- see ://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch06.html/

See for yourself how Hitler looks back at the German losses in WWI and writes what he learned, and what must be done this time. Hitler's propaganda for today. How is it used.

From catechism to Hitlerchism. It is the same process. Beat in the answers you want. We use a question and answer format, like a catechism here because it is familiar to so many. A format: an exposition of belief, in segments, like a caterpillar. Each with its own legs. An outline for instruction or understanding, in bits.

Is this so? Vet.   FN 1

Hitler by Paraphrase, informal: Topics presented, and the discussion from the text. What Hitler asked, and how he answered. How he sees Germany restored to its deserved greatness, superiority.

............................................................

FN 1

The Propaganda InRoad. Finding the clear path to power. In Mein Kampf, Hitler is quarterbacking after a disastrous Wartime, WWI and Germany's devastating loss -- and obligation to pay huge reparations. This is the setting in Mein Kampf, for the propaganda portion there.

Uses of the propaganda tactics in today's politics.

Propaganda regimen laid out here:

I Induce fear, threat
S Spin
S   Sloganeer
S   Scapegoat
F   Focus on the masses; skip the thinkers
O Obstruct facts,
O Obliterate humanitarianism
D   Display certainty; don't debate
R   Repeat

ISSSFOODR for the mnemonically challenged.

There is no defense except full information disseminated before opinions are formed; and calling it out when we see it. Educating ourselves against it can work: self-vaccinations; transparency and disclosure -- without exception. Self-innoculation. Propaganda's methods in Mein Kampf were to be used against enemies of Hitler's plans, and those persons or groups were to be killed because Great Germany was locked with them in (so Hitler posited) a survival struggle.

We can choose to be taken in by that asserted against our own nation's people, or dig deeper to vet every assertion. Who says, what is that individual's or institution's or financial conglomerate's interest in persuading us that we are our own enemies.

Democracy's policies by vote: Do differences make us such "enemies"? How did that take hold, so that any form of misrepresentation, emotional holds before a person has facts, and serving the interest of the handler, the puppeteer, not the regular person, is tolerated.

Who? Research the transition. That is beyond us, so we study the effects of propaganda. What are the concepts of the Masters, the Master Sellers historically applicable to winning against an "enemy" where there are "war" struggles for independence and freedom and honor. Or the marketer duping the buyer. Slogans, repetition, simplistic, aim at emotions, what carryover to the market?

What does that overlay do to our political parties and governing policy decisions. Who is the real enemy within. Has it gone too far.

Watch in Mein Kampf how the masses are manipulated, how and why; and how the "intelligentsia" are belittled and accommodated just enough to keep them out of Hitler's hair. See how fragile the concepts of humanitarianism and beauty are -- just get us into a war mindset, and watch them go as well.

Instead of acting against each other as wartime enemies, how do we get the meme back, backed by facts, that we are merely political parties in a democracy. How to revalue neutral information sharing that voters need to act in their own interest, when propagandists make so much money and have such success for themselves. Is this so: That Propaganda techniques from wartime does not further democracy. Propaganda requires an enemy. How did that happen? Who created the enemy relationship here.

Propaganda in marketing, Wall Street, professional relations. Is it too late to revalue in favor of information.

The treatment of a party as an enemy is a brilliant tactical move for those who want "war" and intimidation and not democracy. War, says Adolf, leads to justifying these propaganda techniques -- and the casting aside of humanitarianism and beauty as legitimate in a culture. And the manipulation of the masses - see it laid out here. That condescension is part of it. Is that our people? With some information, would they question the characterizations of them also?

Political Cannibalism is an interesting concept. An American party using wartime propaganda techniques against the other. Cannibalistic. Is this as dysfunctional as it looks. Does the attitude of war used internally for civil policy jeopardize the nation's survival. Who taught so many of our people that they are at "war" for their very independence and freedom" ? Rove? Boehner? NRA? militias? Who?

The Paraphrase. Like a school-day book report. A summary.

Original texts, even in translation, can be daunting. So here, we paraphrase a complex text, in hopes that others will go directly to the text to do their own understanding. With a number of approaches, we can all get at a plainer meaning. The paraphrase technique for learning, the very act of putting ideas into other words, highlights what is understood and what is not. It opens a door, and where an author is hated, even, lifts the bar of that reputation of a disliked author so that another dimension of that author can emerge, possibly.

History may have made the person toxic, but are there elements worth recalling -- if only to reinforce brilliance at the root of evil. Too often, the worst of their philosophies, the racism, the horror, and not how they succeeded as well as they did, become all that is remembered by many. That means the lack of attention to the ignored skills -- as in Propaganda -- lets those skills be used again. A higher morality. A higher justice. Ends justifying means. Placate the masses. And repeat without deviating, a simple tune that never varies no matter what.

Fair news.

What is fair. For a survival struggle as with Hitler, once that is declared and inculcated in the masses, any method is authorized. No humanitarianism, no aesthetics, nothing except victory.

Fair news. Depends on context. Hitler decries, as harmful in War, the objective mindset that seeks to be fair and to present all sides. Instead, in War, a survival War that is a struggle for independence and freedom and honor: these are needed, and in this order:

a) Mustering of population and soldiers; and that takes
b) Smart propaganda to move the emotions of the masses (he deals with the Intelligentsia another way); and that takes
c) Simplistic but Iron Certainty That Never Deviates.

As a side, persuading people that they are in a survival war, also means that concepts of humanitarianism and aesthetics can die off. They are not natural to nature anyway. They distract from the Winning.

That ABC approach may be effective for survival wartime struggles, but we are not in that, are we? We are a nation seeking to accommodate civil and mutual problems of plurality and policy. Who has taught people otherwise? Based on what? Propaganda keeps people in their place. But voters in a democracy need objective information to make decisions in their interest. Propagandists apply staged Certainty That Never Deviates. What is the voter to do, who swallows that. Propaganda and its repetition and aim at the lowest wit in the patch (Hitler is clear that the slogans of the propagandist must carry one idea at a time, and aim at the least educated, the least able). This is only destructive to an analytical process.

Is this so: That there are modern political strategists, marketing, psy ops operatives, who look back at brilliant if toxic strategists, like Adolf Hitler, and seek out why he was so successful, at least before he wasn't. His brilliance as a propaganda strategist gets lost in the hate and racism and slaughter; so look back at the propaganda.

Guns NRA Narrative History and Selected Time Frames Highlighted

2011-01-27T18:34:00.008-05:00

Relocated URL for segment, Guns NRA Narrative History, previously included at Natural Resource Auxiliary (Nature NRA) Distinguishes Itself from the Guns NRA

II. GUNS NRA NARRATIVE HISTORY
AND SELECTED TIME FRAMES HIGHLIGHTED,

TIME-LINE DETAILS, HISTORY OF THE GUNS NRA
with Government research efforts

Sites: (isolated sites referenced as they occur)

://www.nrahq.org/history.asp -- the NRA supportive narrative at this site forms the basis for the sometimes alternate view of the same facts here. Please bring up the nrahq site to follow along for yourself as we go;

://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper;
And, just happened upon
://bozosapiens.blogspot.com/2010/11/national-rifle-association-accuracy.html;
.

1871.

Back in 1871, one George Wingate and others established the National Rifle Association to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis." See Union troops were poor marksmen. Training was bad. Troops were not schooled in the necessary time, place and manner skills for combat. Some veterans of the Civil War, a colonel and a general, decided to improve troop marksmanship, those called to military duty, by offering marksmanship training that used scientific methods. No seat of the pants aim and fire.They formed an association in the state of New York, with another former general (also had been governor of RI, and a US Senator) as president. They bought land for a rifle range and promoted annual competitions. The purpose: teach riflery with scientific methods.

Founding issues, a contrary view, see the creatively entitled://bozosapiens.blogspot.com/2010/11/national-rifle-association-accuracy.html

New York wanted none of it. It said no. New York citizens opposed the promoting of marksmanship as a goal in itself, so the association gave the property back to New York, and moved to New Jersey where they got a warmer reception for bringing military training to the home front.

Co-objectives emerged: Aim for the Young; Move from Necessitated Shooting to Recreational Shooting

New Jersey.

Accordingly, once the association was in New Jersey, it promoted recreational shooting and among young people; not just marksmanship among the group eligible for military service, and where the training had been wanting during the Civil War.

Recreational Shooting Clubs. The secretary of the association then also promoted clubs for riflery for older young people, so there would be no gap in service as they grew. The association set up clubs at major institutions of higher learning. This program for youth was successful, and boys (some 200 by 1906) came to compete in marksmanship at the New Jersey facility.

And the Young indeed flocked. Soon they were a million. Some 1,000,000 youth responded to this promotion of recreational shooting. Groups working with young people, like the Boy Scouts (Girl Scouts invited?), 4-H, Jaycees, American Legion, etc. were effective in building numbers, solicited by the association.

Ohio.

The association then needed a larger facility to process them all, so the association opened one in Ohio. There, competitions are held annually, and represent (to advocates) the high water for skilled marksmanship. Some 6,000 participants each year compete. Young and old. That is, not all of the 1,000,000 young people in training showed up, but the competition was strong nonetheless.

Categories for skills include pistol shooting, small-bore shooting, and high-power shooting -- all very recreational.

Membership development; political involvement.

Membership rolls became very big, and lucrative. The association had created a magazine for its members. There was a shift in focus from marksmanship skills and competition, to politics and legislation.

The Information Arm.

The association soon included articles in its magazine to the membership about legislative proposals for bills concerning firearms and related possible time, place and manner restrictions on use of firearms, to inform the membership. There was no call to action, at that point, but a furrowing of the field, so to speak.

And that information focus soon turned into calls to action.

1934.

The Great Depression. This was an era of fear, uncertainty, people losing what they had. Lost jobs, lost bank accounts, stuff happening in Europe (Hitler, Third Reich), propaganda.

Fear became like salt in the NRA publications -- gave zing. This is still an approach at NRA.org. Much relates to fear. It is as though fear acts as a Distractant -- get fear going and people will be distracted from other things, which can be good for running from wolves (focus!) but not if running from this wolf opens your house to that pack over there, ready to move in, is that so.

Fear in the Great Depression was not the only chink in people's natural independent thinking capability. There was also, understandably, depression probably. Who would not be depressed? Only the safely rich. The effect of the fear and depression was malleability. Who has a way out. Go this way. Go that.

Situation in Employment:

Drastic at 22%. At this point, in the pit of the Depression, unemployment was at 22%. In comparison, unemployment hovering at 9-10% in the 2010-11's thereabouts is mild. Not for the individual unemployed, but in the perspective of the aggregate.

Situation in Europe.

Dire current events. Hitler had declared himself Fuehrer, Stalin carried on massacres, and Mao Tse Tung touted communism in China, 35 million acres of farmland here were destroyed by drought, and the FBI was rounding up celebrity lawbreakers like Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde, Baby Face Nelson and Pretty Boy Floyd, and (a positive thing) FDR set up public works to get people and infrastructure on their respective feet and foundations, see ://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1934.html/.

More fear. People were easily scared, and with good reason.

The Action Arm.

NRA saw Opportunity. The association initiated a new activity to rouse further the distressed membership who were (as was the nation) discouraged by the state of the economy, world, ideologies, national and personal. The Action Arm. Strike up the Fear.

Fear patrol. The association formed an arm to take action: in the middle of all these Huge Events, to foster fear. Subscribers were urged to watch out for legislative arms control, and this was a fine distraction from the economic disaster around them. Focus on fear of losing your guns, not jobs. People received fact sheets and analyses. They then could take action on their own on something at least, with the persuasion in place that it was in their interest.

Yes, this early. Focus on gun "rights" as though the losses and economy were just on the periphery anyway.

1940

World War II started across the pond.

By then there were large numbers of firearms in this country. They proliferated as fast as the competitions and education to use guns recreationally could manage.

Good news. This had a good result in one way: The association collected over 7,000 firearms (out of how many total in homes by then?) (7,000 may not be that impressive, depends) from members and sent the arms to Britain for its defense in case Britain was invaded. Those were not much help against a blitz, however; and if those were rusty extras, they would be even less help.

Bad news. But this association getting 7000 guns over to England had a bad result also:

The association spun the fact that Britain was a no-gun society, into a fiction for propaganda use in the United States. The British no-gun situation was so distorted as to arouse fear in this country of a similar situation if guns were restricted or banned here. Britain had passed laws completely disarming its citizens (not even police carried guns), so of course they didn't have any, or many.

No comparison. That total ban is a situation not even considered in this country. Britain didn't even need or ask for a gun influx from America because its total ban was actually better -- keep guns in the hands of the civil guard, not in the hands of the people jammed in the bomb shelters. Imagine the mayhem. Nobody even knew how to shoot except to hunt, and those guys were on the front. Guns: only needed to protect your from your neighbor who has them and is going nuts. Yet the myth goes on that collecting some old guns for Britain was a big deal, see ://adventure.howstuffworks.com/outdoor-activities/hunting/clubs-and-organizations/nra1.htm/

The influx was not needed. As for us, we have rights to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and your gun helps me not. Public safety before toters.

Gun Control! (more spooky music)

Still, the association did not distinguish the context between the nations, the differences between the US limited, diminishing threat-approach by seeing firearms as defensive and not offensive for citizens. But watch what happened regarding Britain's total ban. The association began defining Britain's plight as the result of any kind of mere "gun control" laws, including reasonable time, place and manner for civilian safety; emblazoning that phrase gun control as Demonic.

NRA: We command guns.

1941

World War II comes to us from across the pond and sinking us in the other pond.

Good news.

The association was indeed generous in offering some of its facilities for government use, and developed training materials. They also got members to be industry guards and home guard members and set up materials for securing industrial sites (ten points each for sliding under the radar of self-interest, and looking public-minded). Need someone to reload your ammunition if you are guarding a war plant? The association people are there.

At all costs, was the undercurrent, don't let the government accomplish the job of training its most important domestic people for protection of industry, homes in case of disaster. Privatizing was pushed, and in the context of emergency, that is understandable as a focus,

Bad news. But the special Profit Interests and agendas became entrenched in issues that really are public health and safety, and defense with an agenda for profit, and would not give the song up, so the melody lingered on.

And so they did.

1945.

Alas, for the association. Again, a war that brought them so much ended. People felt good again. No fear! Whew. What is the association to do now? What to get people to rally around, and make money for the association and its Bank.

Bank? What bank? What bank benefits from the NRA? Who owns that? Etc. What? Coming up.

For the association, the British Ban continued to be the goose whose golden eggs just keep coming. A fine PR opportunity to keep guns mainstream and everywhere, stemming from the British ban, continued even though no ban was ever considered here. Any time, place or manner restriction was set up as gun control, not gun management as a matter of public health and safety. Fear: without a gun in every pot, we would be eradicated and helpless if invaded. Who would come to our aid?

The NRA! Clap hands and believe. Click heels.

Moneymakers:

1. HUNTING

Then came the Big Chance. Somebody in the association looked around at the target practice places, the clubs for shooting for recreation, and Look! To the Woods! Here are Hunters! An untapped resource! And all these returning soldiers know how to shoot already; and may just want to do that in civilian life. They also know how to take orders, to be part of a group with Loyalty to your buddy, and we need them with us. They can even keep their old camouflage.

Boon time hit like a boom-time Texas gusher. Hunt for hunters, thought the association to itself. A new group to tap.

Seriously, How unsafe was "hunting", until the association lured millions more into the bushes, from their lairs in their sad man-caves, to go out and kill things for fun?

So the association looked around for hunters and potential hunters, and created or fostered their desires to get out, keep your army camouflage and weaponry, use your stealth, and now you can obey us instead of the military. Yes, sir! Go ye and inflict recreational pain and suffering and death, not just recreational target practice. One door shuts, a war; and another door opens; use those skills in peacetime to make money for the NRA. What else to do with the wartime skills? Levittown was just so, so, well, you know.

Yes, sir!

Now hunting does come naturally to predators such as we are; our eyes face front like a predator's, not to the sides like a poor bunny rabbit; and the adrenalin does indeed flow, we are confident. A photo op at the end just might not do it for some. Killing was once needed for those who wanted meat, and so they did, and got good at it. A fast, clean kill, far better than wounding every poor critter in sight, then going home to your fake lodge and a brew. But did we get the fast, clean kills? Who reports.

The NRA could tap into that need to use old skills, the adrenalin for people looking for it, and say here are the woods, get hunting, and now you can buy our hunting equipment, and you will need our "education and training" and please pay your dues and read our Mega Magazines while you reload yours. Reload!

And so they did.

2 SAFETY.

Another moneymaker: Add "safety". Gun safety. Safety is needed, but should it be administered and taught by the ones with a financial interest in making a profit out of the activities that they then say are so unsafe, like hunting. If hunting is unsafe, it is because the woods are now full of recreational shooters who whatever. Let us create the need for "safety" courses, and then get paid for offering them Another field to plow. Take this course, that course, learn safety from us and only us.

How "unsafe" was hunting at the time?

It was great PR. And now the NRA fosters safety classes with law enforcement, oh, yes. Identify, identify.

We would have to check numbers of accidents, bad shots hitting bums, to see if the argument about "safety" was merely a ruse for getting more hunters out there and seeking training. Not sure. But probably not many even at that time went around shooting at anything that moved. The hunters of the time probably hunted for their own food as needed, or to protect their flocks. Enter, Levittown.

The good side of this is that hunting can be dangerous, if carried on carelessly, without skills, as even our politicos know blasting each other in faces. So it can do no harm to educate them in gun safety, right? Ready, aim, be sure that is a bear and not a bum, and fire.
Ka-Blam! Fun for hits and misses, both. No buckshot in your bum, just somebody else's.
But what if the "safety" program simply promotes recreational killing without remorse or compassion, so that more duped and dumbed-down people head for the woods. Are we safe yet?

So there were lots of programs initiated, and probably an increase in safety but we want to see the number of accidents vs. numbers of hunters out there. Where are the figures on accidents against numbers of hunters and ages, etc.

There were also, by reasonable projection, an increase in numbers of those numbed-down people, conditioned out of their empathy, who finally had an outlet for their aggressions, numbed to hurting for pleasure. Not my problem, say some, probably. Kill for pleasure. My Biblical right! This is an interesting issue. Is that so?

Not. See Hunter and Literalism. Is this so: There was no hunting in Eden, not in anybody's job description, and Abel who was the animals guy, was a herder, not a hunter. This is a digression, but surely no conservative literal Christian can be a pleasure-hunter and believe in Creation, can that be so? Gotcha.

And surely not a hunter from a blinkin' helicopter, for X-sakes.

Un-christian hunting? Or just cowardly.

1956

Moneymaker. Police School and Politics.

Another moneymaker; and propaganda op. Now this is capitalism, and private industry if it does a job well, and better than a government, should do it. The issue becomes one of commitment. Now there are 10,000 security and arms trainers and instructors bowing and beholden to the association.

How many then become members. Is there a conflict of interest when an organization takes on public training, for a governmental function, and then lures them into membership where it can lay out its own agenda politically. Subtle advocacy for this candidate or not, propaganda by uses of terms, etc.

So the association move out of civilian side work to those in direct law enforcement, quasi-military in orientation. The association branches into civil administration law enforcement matters. Is that legitimate, getting into administration? Need to find out more about that idea. Is it on target or not? We work for you! It sets up a Special Police School. It is the only national trainer for law enforcement officers. What else is being taught in terms of politics, fear of gun management, cutting into profits of the association.
.

1960

Moneymaker. Firearms Instruction Program for law enforcement people, now with another tier and income, Certification.

More training. This time with bells and whistles, more like the military every day. The association ups the ante in insinuating itself with ordinary people, with involvement in civil law enforcement, and sets up a Firearms Instruction program for law enforcement, and offers certification. Everybody likes a certificate for the wall. Go, association.

1973.

Moneymaker. Hunting Education Program.

Look back at this oldie. This Program is on a parallel track with the newer Firearms Instruction Program; and continues to bloom. The magazines, the equipment, the environment, the groupiness, all mellows people out for persuasion of the values of the group, the gun. PR. More PR. Hunting is advertised as fun; that is the reason to go; even if your larder is full; no-purpose pain, we can call it. We persuade, you follow.

Moneymaker. A new magazine.

And indoctrination in the association's political push legislatively: prevent all of it any kind as to guns.

PR Front. A New Magazine. This is needed to jumpstart old ideas and give space for the new. The association hopped on the opportunity for new blood, and started a new magazine just for hunting issues. Monthly.

Moneymaker. The gun competitions for kids.

Meanwhile, what happened to all those kids flocking to competitions in New Jersey and Ohio? The association made new opportunities to draw them in.

Moneymaker. Upgrade the competions to "Challenges." There are now competitive and training and indoctrination Challenges so the kids can be reached in 43 states and also in Canada. How many, did you say? Forty-three states.

How many kids? All soon to be voters?

The association proudly points to 40,000 kids now in the Educational Programme and Skills in Killing for Fun, Under the Guise of Mere Marksmanship. What an education! Bring on Inception! It works! See ://inceptionmovie.warnerbros.com/ Positioned as deniable feeders in guerrilla warfare, militias

Forty thousand children in our homes and communities working for the association and just waiting to be old enough to vote as instructed, or strongly suggested in the ideology. We thought bust implants were scary at one time. Kids with gun implants in the brain now, is that so? Let's just implant ideology. Try something new. Take my kids.

Meanwhile, at the Action Arm:

To this point, the association's involvement with membership had been informational with action effectively limited to spotting gun management legislation. Action then expanded.

1975.

Good times roll on. A period of inflation was loosening up, the Vietnam War was ending, Bill Gates got Microsoft going and hobby computers became popular, as did video recorders. Fun! Money to spend! See ://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1975.html/. Relax, people and enjoy life without fear! Hobbies.

What? No fear? No handle on people to get them to do what you want?

Not so fast, says the association. Where there is no fear, we will create it. Fear to the Fore. So, in response to this reduction in fear levels among common folk in their daily lives, the association acted to protect its market.

The Action Arm responds: You need to be more active, people.

It upgraded its activities from fostering a merely informational group about what laws were considered as to time, place and manner of use of firearms, with action by people optional; to real ACTION to counter ideas against Guns Everywhere, as they direct. Do this. Do that. Act to prevent, act to demonstrate, protest, write and act to intimidate those who would put time, place, manner rules on guns for public health and safety.

The Institution is born. A new star.

The Institution is set up and Acts. The association set up an "institution" for taking action in the legislatures.

Fear: The Constitution! We are losing it!

What? What is the fear directed toward? The constitution and rights guaranteeing anything for guns. You and we must be afraid that the constitution will be destroyed. Accelerate! Code Red! The association told members that there was now a vital need to defend the constitution itself, with political action.

Second Amendment on all flags, figuratively. Suddenly, the Second Amendment became a rallying cry for the association, that had begun merely as a means of training people better in marksmanship for use in duty in the military, simply because the Civil War training was terrible. Into a created demogoguery. And the Bank hovered in the background. Bank? What Bank? Stay tuned.

So the Institution did its thing to make up causes and rally people, and the association itself carried on with skills training. To the skills training, they added "education". Not just how to use a gun, safely with all the newbies in the woods; but "educate" ideologically.

Not just training and marksmanship, but "education." Read "indoctrination" - is that so.

1990

Moneymaker. Become a Dot Org.

Let's make more money and be a charity! Save taxes. Dot org time. Great idea, Clem, how do we do it. See the requirements at ://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html

Sez the association, we need that tax-exempt arm so we can pour more money into our Bank. We need a 501 (c) (3) organization that is set up to get money for what we say, so long as we don't (wink, wink) influence that legislation stuff, that has driven our anti-restriction activities for over 80 years.

A 501(c)(3)? What is that? Never mind. Clem know what he is doing. And so hey did. They say they are funding education and safety projects with all the money from the moneymakers coming in, including membership fees and going to resort-type bonding places for a week of shooting fenced in creatures. Is that all> None of your business.

LEGISLATION AND POLICY AREA

Mid 1990's, and 1996 to Date (2011)

Source: unless otherwise indicated: ://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

GOVT Mid 1990's. CDC (a Dr. Rosenberg and others) increasingly stressed need to study injuries and deaths related to gun use and abuse, as a public health matter. Studies financed by CDC showed correlations (causation is a different matter) between having a gun in the house and homicide risk to family member or close friend. See://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

NRA lobbyist Chris Cox saw research as politically slanted, but says NRA does not squelch "genuine scientific inquiries." Opposed injury center's work as "political opinion masguerading as medical science ..." Pro-gun legislators tried to get rid of the injury center as "redundant." See http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

Defunding Tactic; Prohibition on Use. The appropriations process then was used to de-fund the $2,600,000 that the injury center CDC spent the year before on firearms-related research.

See study by Dr. Arthur Kellerman on cost-benefit analysis, having guns in the home, finding it a risk factor but not moving into actual causation in an individual case, see ://www.emory.edu/EMORY_MAGAZINE/summer95/kellermann.html/ See activity to defund any of this kind of research, even where circumspect, Rep. Jay Dickey, R-Ark.

This amount then was reinstated, but also redesignated -- for research on traumatic brain injuty, not firearms-related research.

Language remains in place, that no funds for the CDC "may be used to advocate or promote gun control." This is the only instance of a field of inquiry by name being signaled out. There already are regulations barring CDC money from lobbying anything.

Status of development of evidence on which an effective policy could be based as to firearms research, a connection if any between guns and violence: blocked by the NRA, see Dr. Geren Wintemute, director, Violence Prevention Research Program, Univ. CA.

Uncertainty in funding discourages study. See Funding at National Institute of Justice, part of the Justice Department, reduced, as is funding for Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. Dr. Stephen Hargarten, emergency medicine professor and chairman, Medical College of Wisconsin, once had a research center with CDC financing and on gun violence, but that also has fallen away.

Agencies now inform the NRA whenever studies are going to be published re firearms.

Causality and Correlation. Experts agree that "causality" is different from mere "correlation"; but without evidence of correlations, how can causality ever be studied.

NRA. Permit no studies on correlations.

1997

Bring on the PR. Wait. There's more.

Moneymaker. Another magazine. Not a clip, a paper subscription type one.

PR again takes over the Reality that the organization can make even more money. This new magazine was subtle, under the radar: Let's get regular folks to be members, not just the sights-jockeys. Find something to meet their identity and recreational and group belonging needs. Get them on board. Tell them how nice we are, with our Bank. There's that Bank again.

Moneymaker. Program for Self-Defense.

Let's focus on self-defense; that will get the oldies on board, girls in the city, and the fearful. Make them more fearful. Although we are the ones who add to the Offense out there, turn to us for protection. And expand the fun of recreational use of firearms to the retirees, anybody who just likes to shoot or thinks it would be fun. Why, go out there and target any species at all. No specializing, Just go out there and kill, go at it, kiddo, the NRA boss does.

Says the association: We don't want people to feel that we are merely guarding them; that is too wimpy. It tells them they are victims.
We want them to see us as more than protecting the wimpy. We want them to see us as their Saviors: as (ta-da!) We are Freedom's Way!

So they renamed the magazine again. Suddenly, limits on who could carry guns,the time, place and manner that would be sensible for public health and safety, had become a fearful unconstitutioinal idea. Anyone who thought about limits was blasting the most important Freedom we have!! Go Get 'Em! Charge! A witch hunt.

So the name was changed.

Enhance the Moneymakers. Tentacles. Take on more training of law enforcement people. Make that a program to develop.

Meanwhile, the association was looking for a name that suggested, you are being protected and we are the only ones who do it.

2000

Moneymaker. Shooting championships not just for ordinary citizens, but police.

We're on a roll! The association purrs along. There are shooting championships for Police. How legitimate can you get? We get paid for doing the training and the fun, all while setting agenda and the mindsets! We have goodie bags. We are number one. We have 55,000 certified instructors (to teach all those who now are on the gun rolls thanks to the PR adding to our ranks).

How many? Fifty-five thousand loyal certified instructors. Create your market and then milk it, we always say.

Milking the market

Moneymaker. Skills expansion: What skills do we offer, for you whose military training may be wanting, as our originators envisioned: Rifle. Pistol. Shotgun. Muzzle-loading (now that's a winner in combat). Reload other people's firearms! Spousal togetherness! Guns and friskiness. Now we have your attention.

How many children in the Programming: Twenty-one million (21,000,000) pre-K to sixth grade taught what to do when they find our products, so carefully marketed for free use, at home. We can't train the adults, so let's try the kids. 21 comma 0-0-0 comma 0-0-0.

And damage control for people who are not of the Pain for Pleasure affinity groups?

No protection. Let what happens happen, and then isolate the Bad Actor and be sure there are no consequences for the Group. Blame the victim. They create the hazard by the proliferation and mindset that fewer guns in more responsible hands would make a difference. No, guns for everybody.

The association solution to danger for the kids:

Just don't touch it. There it is, all shiny, you know where, but don't you touch it.

Just stop, don't touch

(what kid doesn't touch, just once),

Leave the area

(what's an area, mister?),

Tell an adult

(huh? they're at the shooting range and are children themselves).

I'll just see if it's real....

Hey. It was only a kid. Yeesh! So go have some more.

(thinks the kid who sees fun things with no pain or consequence on TV)

Blam.
That's the kind of protection

They offered for years

For frisky entertainments.

Just stop, don't touch, leave the area, tell an adult.

Ha, say entire generations.

Did that work for you?

Lady, could you really leave?

No.

They got you, didn't they.

And then blamed you.

Like kids.

Why did you touch my gun!

2010

Numbers time.

Certified instructors: 55,000.
People trained in how to use guns: 750,000 per year. The association sponsors Police Shooting Championships! National! Cameras! Videos by people on the sidewalk? No.
But 2,800 certified coaches teach your kids how to shoot. Put that away, Arnie! Aargh!

You learn skills for daily defense, and more!

I wanna shoot somebody for something that happened years ago. Can you help? Sure, lady. Here's a gun.

..................................................................

Guns NRA Growth Timeline Summary; Gun Violence Timeline; Legislative Activity

2011-01-27T18:34:00.007-05:00

Relocated URL for segment, Guns NRA Timeline Summary, previously included at Natural Resource Auxiliary NRA presents the Guns NRA History

I. GUNS NRA GROWTH TIMELINE SUMMARY;
GUN VIOLENCE TIMELINE (3+);
AND INSTITUTE/ LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY

Sites (UPDATED PERIODICALLY WITH EVENTS)

See http://www.nrahq.org/history.asp/;

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/a_glance_at_us_mass_shootings.html/;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_assassination_attempts_and_plots;

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper.://www.crimenarrative.com/2010/02/mass-murder-2010-and-beyond.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/college-student-shot-to-830006.html

1835. Assassination attempt on President Andrew Jackson.

1865. Assassination of President Lincoln.

1865: KKK founded in Pulaski TN by Confederate veterans, see ://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/kkk-founded
1870: Fifteenth Amendment Ratified, granting African-American men the right to vote, see http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/15thamendment.html/. This was followed by eras of poll taxes, literacy tests and other intimidations, so that full voting rights were not effective until 1965 and the Voting Rights Act. See Civil War and Reconstruction Timeline at ://www.pinzler.com/ushistory/timeline6.html/ The earlier 14th Amendent granted citizenship to Blacks, protecting their rights to life, liberty, property. See ://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/grant-colfax/

1871 ff. NRA incorporated, founded by two union officers, New York, see ://www.answers.com/topic/national-rifle-association-of-america> (often here as "association") Service: Said to be military necessity Shooting was taught by scientific means, so stated in NRA's own statement of its history, to begin with. Train men to be soldiers, marksmen, post-civil war, in absence of other training, none offered by govt. Note other context, however: see 1870 above. Without a war, expand into into recreational shooting, attract children to programs, set up clubs, invite organizations like scouts, then expand to competitions, a magazine. Information arm. Inform people about items the association thought important. Expand to recreational shooting clubs.
1873: White League, paramilitary in Louisiana, clashed with the predominantly Black state militia. Killed: 3 whites, 100 blacks, and of those, 50 were killed after surrender and capture in cold blood. Subsequently, after disputed elections, whites formed a shadow government, and their own army that they called the White League, similar to the KKK/ President Grant called in federal troops to "restore order." see ://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/grant-colfax/

1881. Assassination of President James Garfield.

1901. Assassination of President William McKinley.

1912. Assassination attempt on Theodore Roosevelt, former President.

1933. Assassination attempt on Franklin Roosevelt a few months before taking office.

1934 ff. Era of fear. Great Depression, unemployment 22%, Hitler rising. Competitions and clubs proliferate. Association sets up action arm and fear becomes a dominant theme in attracting members. Information arm becomes Action arm. Fear target in the Depression, with all that was going on, fear that guns would be restricted. Nothing we can find in reality there, but members were told to watch out. Provide members with fact sheets and analyses (would like to see those) so members could act if they wanted to.

1940 ff. More fear. WWII. Good deed by NRA,

Collect guns for British who were ungunned and feared invasion. Problem: only 7000 guns were collected, condition unknown (keep the good, donate the bad?); and were little use against a Blitz. Still, a good thing in case, but small. Bad deed. Even though not a whisper we can see of gun bans here, association used the unprepared ban-minded Brits as reason to highlight need for gun rights here. Propaganda op. PR bloomed so the US would not be like the Brits.

Note: this is NONSENSE. The British defended against the Blitz heroically and effectively without guns. They launched a successful, brave, heroic defense against the Germans on the home front without us, thank you, and without guns at home. No guns needed at home. None. Not. The British DID IT without guns. Think of the uselessness of the NRA 'contribution'. Because of the long ban, the British couldn't shoot straight anyway; like us, would end up killing our own kids, or granny wheeling her way to the shelter, in "accidents." And the military-qualified men were away in the armies. People with their own guns in the bomb shelters? Terrifying idea. And 7,000 dusty old guns cast-offs, as are the usual "donation", would have been useless against any German ground invasion, as an American recreational target fun or hunting gun would also be and was absolutely useless against the real "invasion" - the air invasion by the Luftwaffe, the Blitz. The idea that guns are needed to fend off invasions is fraudulent, false, propagandistic, revisionist non-history. Good heavens what will we swallow next. We are so beyond using home guns for anything except terrorizing other creatures and our own kind. The world is beyond it, all except Not Really Accountable Land. Guns are not a defense; they are a threat. Thank you (applause).

1941 ff. Good deed by NRA. Uses its facilities for training civil guards, defense plants, etc. Developed training materials.

1945 ff. Bad deed by NRA, in sense of manipulation. War over, entrenched itself as arms trainer, continued to tout need for gun rights so we wouldn't be like the Brits, caught with none, even though no effort we can find to restrict. PR and marketing on rise. Moneymakers: with soldiers coming home, develop new areas to market: Hunting and "Safety" - with all the hunters now in the woods. Big areas for expansion. Also can use old camouflage.

1950. Assassination attempt on President Truman. Korean Conflict starts.

1953. Korean Conflict ends. Some troops remain.

1954. Vietnam war starts. Some use other dates.

1956 ff. NRA Moneymakers. Start a police school. Soon 10,000 security and arms trainers etc. Associate with govt, get involved with civil law enforcement. Becomes only trainer for law enforcement. Agenda politically seeps in with the education.

1960 ff. NRA Moneymakers. Firearms Instruction Program and Certification soon follows.

1963. Assassination of President John Kennedy

1966. Mass killing. Texas. University of Texas at Austin, from clocktower, 16 dead, 31 wounded.

1968. Assassinations (2) of Senator Robert Kennedy; and Civil Rights Leader Martin Luther King

1973 ff. NRA Moneymakers. Now a hunting education program, getting ideological, not just skills; a new magazine to also do that education, and more competitions for kids. 40,000 children in programming.

1970 Mass killing. Ohio. Kent State University, 4 dead, 9 wounded (protesting US invasion of Cambodia)

1974. Vietnam war ends. Soldiers back

1975 Assassination attempts (2) on President Gerald Ford (Fromme and Moore)

1975 ff Economic good times continue, but use of guns at forefront. In absence of generalized cultural fear, NRA expands Action arm from providing materials if people want to act on any legislation or idea politically; to Do It. Directive, not optional focus. Do This. Do That. You have to or you will lose your Rights.

1976 Mass killing. California. CA State Univ. 7 dead, 2 wounded. Edward Charles Alloway. (library custodian shooter)

1981. Assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, by John Hinckley, Jr. William Brady also shot. (see 1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, requiring background checks on gun purchases)

1990 NRA Moneymaker. Arm of NRA becomes a dot org, exempt 501(c)(3) charitable organization See FN 1

1984 Mass killing. California. MacDonald's. 21 dead. James Oliver Huberty. (unemployed security guard shooter)

1986. Mass killing. Oklahoma. Post office. Shoots 14 (wounding?); shooter kills self. Pat Sherrill. (was about to be fired as postal worker)

GOVT: Mid 1980's. National Center for Injury Control and Prevention, a component of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, rose for about a decade as "a leading source of financing for firearms research." NYT "Sway of NRA Blocks Studies, Scientists Say, 1/26/2011 at A1.

1990. Mass killing. Florida. 10 dead. 4 wounded; kills self . James Edward Pough. (General Acceptance Corp, Jacksonville)

1991. Mass killing. Texas. 23 dead. 20 wounded, shooter kills self. George Hennard. Luby's Cafeteria

Mid-1990's: National Center for Injury Control and Prevention, a component of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was "for about a decade [preceding] a leading source of financing for firearms research for a decade [preceding]

1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act passed, implemented 1994, requiring background checks before purchase of guns. See ://hubpages.com/hub/Gun-Control-The-NRA-And-The-Brady-Bill-Watch-Video (pro gun site, see arguments)
1994 Assassination attempt on President William Clinton (he was inside, not where the shooter shot)

1997 NRA Moneymakers. Another magazine, and Self-Defense Programs to draw regular people, PR outreach to new market, not otherwise shooters

2000 NRA Moneymakers. Shooting championships for Police, some 55,000 instructors; more kids' programs for the some 21,000,000 enrolled, and competitions and championships,

1998 Mass killing. Arkansas. Middle school. 5 dead (4 students, 1 teacher dead); 10 wounded. Shooters Andrew Golden age 11 and Mitchell Johnson age 13

1998 Mass killing. Oregon. High school. 2 dead (teenagers), 20 wounded. Shooter Kip Kinkel age 17. Prelude: Kip Kinkel also killed his parents. 2 more dead. Total both episodes, or really same episode: 4 dead.

1999   Mass killing. Colorado, Columbine High School. 13 dead (12 students, 1 teacher), 26 wounded. Shooters killed selves. Shooter Eric Harris age 18. Shooter Dylan Klebold age 17.

1999   Mass killing. Georgia, at 2 brokerage offices. 9 dead. Killed self. Shooter Mark Barton (former day trader)

1999   Mass killing. Hawaii, at Xerox Corp. 7 dead. Shooter Bryan Ayesugi, Xerox repairman

2001   Mass killing. California, Santana High School. 2 dead, 13 wounded. Shooter Charles "Andy" Williams age 15

2005   Mass killing. Wisconsin. Congregation meeting at the Brookfield Sheraton. 7 dead, 4 wounded. Killed self. Shooter Terry Ratzman, the pastor

2005. Mass killing. Minnesota. Red Lake High School; and shooter's home. 9 dead (including shooter's grandfather and companion; 5 students, 1 teacher, 1 security guard), 5 wounded. Killed self. Shooter Jeffrey Weise age 16.

2006. Mass killing. Pennsylvania. West Nickel Mines Amish School. 5 dead (student girls), kills self. Shooter Charles Carl Roberts IV

2007 Mass killing. Virginia. Virginia Tech dorm and classroom. 32 dead. Killed self. Shooter Siung-Hui Cho

2007 Mass killing. Nebraska. Mall store. 8 dead, 5 wounded. Kills self. Shooter: Robert A. Hawkins age 19. [omitted here for 2007 are non-shooting murders, such as the Cheshire CT home invasion 3 dead]
2008 Mass killing. Illinois. Northern Ill. Univ. 5 dead, 18 wounded. Killed self. Shooter Steven Kasmierczak
2001, 2005, 2008 -- various shots and other actions aimed at President George Bush and others

2009 Mass killing. Alabama. 10 dead, including mother, 4 other relatives, and wife and child of a deputy sheriff. Killed self. Shooter Michael McLendon

2009 Mass killing. California. Santa Clara. 5 dead (shooter's family: including 2 children, 3 other relatives), 1 wounded (wife). Killed self. Shooter Devan Kalathat

2009 Mass killing. North Carolina. Pinelake Health and Rehab. 8 dead, shooter killed by police. Shooter Robert Stewart

2009 Mass killing. New York. Binghamton. American Civic Association, giving citizenship classes, counseling, resettlement programs. 13 dead, 4 wounded. Killed self. Shooter Jiverley Wong, Vietnamese immigrant. This fills out story begun at ://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/a_glance_at_us_mass_shootings.html/ See ://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/nyregion/04hostage.html

2010 NRA Moneymakers. Some 750,000 people a year get gun instruction

2010 Mass killing. Virginia. 8 dead. Shooter Christopher Speight. See ://www.crimenarrative.com/2010/02/mass-murder-2010-and-beyond.html

2010 Mass killing. Alabama. Univ of Ala. 3 dead. Shooter Amy Bishop, professor

2010 Mass killing. Connecticut. Manchester beer distributorship. 8 dead. Killed self. Shooter Omar Thornton, employee

2010 Mass killing. New York. Buffalo. 4 dead (as left a restaurant). Shooter Keith Johnson
2011 Assassination attempt (PLEADING: NOT GUILTY. STAY TUNED), Mass killing. Arizona. Mall. 6 dead, 14 wounded, including Senator Gabrielle Giffords. Alleged shooter Jared Lee Loughner.

2011 Mass shooting, Florida, St. Petersburg. 2 police officers dead; 1 marshall wounded. Shooter status?

2011 Mass shooting, Michigan, Detroit. 4 police officers dead, shooter killed by police. Shooter: Lamar Moore.

2011 Other shootings, of police beginning January 2011.
Indiana, Indianapolis. 1 officer shot, now in coma. Traffic stop. Alleged shooter Thomas Hardy arrested.
Oregon, Waldport. 1 officer, Steven Dodds. Suspect at large.
Florida, Miami. 2 officers dead, serving arrest warrant, murder. Shooter killed by another officer. Shooter Johnny Simms.

2011 Mass shooting, Youngstown, Ohio. 1 college student dead, 11 wounded, two suspected shooters arrested.

Duty to Help. Third Party Legal Duties of Rescue, Prevention. Guns, Immigration, Welfare, Abortion.

2011-01-10T20:30:00.011-05:00

Is there a Duty to Help

Duty to Rescue: Duty to Prevent Further Harm. Formal terms for when you may have to act for the well-being of another. When, or if, has anyone a duty to help another. Put his own interest at risk in some way. The duty may arise if you helped put or keep the threatened one there. Or public policy may require it.

Duty to help someone in trouble:

I. Other names for the same duty.

Forced Benevolence:

What Rationales, if Ever.

A manufacturer makes a product that works as it is intended; but it is used by users in ways that counter public health and safety concerns, even to the extent of facilitating guerrilla-like disruptions of the democratic process itself.

An organization promotes it, an arm of it sells it, and overall finds an easy money path to influence that becomes entrenched.

No legislator can afford to oppose. No citizen dares, much. So, when harm related to use of the product that works as it is intended, leads to tut-tuts, and "mental illness" of the user, rather than the culture that fosters lone wolves and mercenaries turned cannibal, see Studying Wars: Wars for the Mind Soon the people agree, nosirree, no obligation of the industry to rescue or prevent further harm, when its bread and butter causes deaths; and especially when it has so many growing mercenary mindsets in its adventure camps. Will they find out that it is more exciting to hunt a person than to hunt a varmint, even a big on? The industry acts like it hopes so. But no connection here at all, of course, to all the guerrilla lone wolf or other exciting training programs out there. Fodder Site: Way to Mauthausen. Polarize, Propagandize, then Demonize.l

Law generally does not require people to act to help others, but there are exceptsions: especially where someone has had a hand in putting the one in the bad spot, in the bad spot. Then there is the obligation to prevent further harm. Does that apply to our Industry here? Our Organization with its selling arm plus tentacles on triggers? Law will only expand more firmly in this area if people want it, and if the people have already been pulled into the polarize and demonize mindset, see Mauthausen, above, there is little chance.

Probable conclusion: After all the legal talk, technicalities of law will not control; and should not in these major policy areas. Look instead to law's corresponding alter ego, equity and the long view of developing policy and future stability of the country within the limited resources available. Those who helped do damage by making the product and failing to ensure proper use, must act to prevent further damage. A duty beginning with a duty to warn - ha, that sounds so wimpish-- but we don't even have that yet, do we -- see gun torts and negligent marketing at ://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1365255

Think -- people have sued ladder companies when the people march up to the top-top, both big feet balancing up there, when the ladder legs are lopsided below and in the mud, the people fall off, and sue and win against the ladder company. Why not sue gun people on the same ground? Abnormally dangerous activities for some. Failure to warn! and follow through. Can't do that -- that adds a tort area and folks in Washington don't want industry to be responsible. Wrong route.

Seek: A future-oriented course, that can increase the productivity of all groups, access to sustenance whatever age, foster stability in families and sustain their lives in need, and promote privacy in moral areas. See FN 1

Other areas for research: obligations to prevent further harm in immigration, abortion, welfare issues. None easy.

.........................................................

II. Preventing Further Harm

A. Initial definitions needed

B. Overview

C. Possible Legal Grounds for an enforced benevolence

D. Legal Duties - Grounds for Rescue or Prevent Further Harm

E. Morality - Difficult Ground Where Personal "Moralities" Differ

F. Equitable Duties - Grounds for Rescue or Prevent Further Harm

G. Public Policy, Health and Safety Included - Grounds for Rescue or Prevent Further Harm

H. Conclusion: Ground for enforcing benevolence can be found in legal rationales, but more directly in equitable rationales when the legal may fall short, and in grounds of public policy

A. Initial definitions needed

1. Who is the "other".

What is "another" so that an obligation to protect, prevent harm, rescue that "other" may arise. Define. A breathing entity? A potential breathing entity? Someone already there? This is easily influenced by Mass Persuasion; define a group as out of your concern, and no help will come. See Fodder Site: Way to Mauthausen. Polarize, Propagandize, Demonize.

2. What is a "situation."

Define. If you did not cause a bad situation, are you culpable anyway. What if you omit to act reasonably to prevent harm to yet others, but who are still down that highway, approaching, but not yet on the scene.

Involved: How concrete do definitions have to be before any obligation can be imposed on anybody. Is there a generalized peril that can be identified in different areas, that requires specific obligations to protect against, not just involving rescue afterward. Yes, there is.

What possible duties obligate outsiders to prevent, to rescue, to act in the interest of "another". Look at Guns, Immigration, Welfare, Abortion. The mantra.

3. Possibles routes to finding or not finding an obligation:

Fiduciary Duty, Duty to Rescue, Morality, Equity, Policy (Economics, Pragmatism). Legal ground alone does not do well in our tradition. Equity does do well, once law is found wanting, because that deals with the actions of both sides, and fairness. But it is case by case. Moral grounds: those can be based on religion, and how to impose one person's religion on another. Is there a social morality? That also has to be case by case.

4. What areas to address: Protect, rescue, any obligation of one to another. Include the duty to prevent further harm, see its discussion focused at Joy of Equivocating: Duty to Prevent Further Harm, and factors

Guns: Is there an identifiable generalized peril that requires anticipatory action, to minimize the risk of harm where a) one party or group did not specifically cause the bad situation immediately in issue; but b) it is reasonably predictable that people, who are not in issue at the time, will be harmed if.they come along at the wrong time and if those already there omitted to act to protect. Culpability by omission by those who could have prevented the reasonably predictable problem.

Abortion: Who is "someone" -- a cluster of cells, a non-breathing parasitic entity, is the fact that those are incipient humans make a diffrerence? what if you are not a religious person who believes nothing about "sanctity" setting life of humans apart from other life, etc.

Immigration: what obligation to help, if undocumented immigrants cross over, settle in and put themselves voluntarily in a position now in peril Who has to reach out and make it better; or assume a responsibility for their children born here.

Welfare: if there is no duty to rescue, broadly, does an obligation to help the disadvantaged arise from another ground: the ongoing unjust enrichment of those who (it will be argued) enforced and exploited the disadvantage of others, some who lost 250 years (some original slaves) as head start in accumulating wealth, learning how to manage it, pass it on. What of those who benefited from taxes going to the rich, rather then the needy. Lobbyist activity over time. Look to equity: does contributing affirmatively to the ongoing detriment of another, require in fairness, a compensation. Equity. Explore making up for losses in education, health, mobility, ways to access the tools of productivity.

Abortion: This is all definitions and religion. Who if anyone has a duty to rescue a cell cluster. A zygote. A foetus. A viable but unborn. What gives a stranger to the situation a right to intervene. What are the limits of Good Samaritan laws. Applicable to a foetus? Value of one life over another? When does a person carrying the cell clusters (say one) that resulted from an activity that is not always undertaken for reproduction at all, have to put the interests of the cluster ahead of her own, without getting into (the other is now standing up) Moral provisions (see discussion about how morality is virtually impossible to make statutory) and Religious definitions and Damnation that the woman may not agree with at all. Can we force her to act in the interest of the cluster. Call it a baby? All that. Life and breath. Does breath matter. At some point can probably breathe and be independent, but that the time of decision remains parasitic. What is the Legal ground for anybody helping the immigrant, or forcing the woman to keep carrying a cell cluster, even a baby. When does policy arise, if it does.

Policy. Policy, not legalism. Let policy be articulated and applied. Look at the principles of rescue, fiduciary duty, protection against harm, but in the end, it should be policy and available resources and reconciling competing interests that controls, not legalism.

5. Likely conclusion: Policy and pragmatism necessarily will govern, after all the arguments.

We think, so far: Policy will control, after all the analyses. Public policy to foster the productivity of every person at any age (in our economic and social interest) supersedes legalisms, punitive approaches. Economics and Pragmatism will control. The clock cannot be turned back, and that by our own acts and omissions as a nation. Live with it. The legal cannot do it, the equitable requires case-by-case analysis, that leaves policy.

Balance privacy rights, equity and its principles and our own history the past 10 years of inaction; reliance, and money required to do anything. Policy and pragmatism call for moving ahead, not rectifying our mistakes of the past.We don't have that funding possible.

Like your computer, this is the new Restoration Point. From This Day Forward. No more deportations, build in pathways to employment or even citizenship, but we do not need millions of enemies. Do what you want with borders, and that is possible if we do the first part of this paragraph.

B. Overview

Who can force anybody to help anybody else and when. Conclusion here: You can't do that easily, based on general legal principles alone; but you can do basics with Equity, Public Policy and Pragmatics (Economic considerations). Morality no. Morality will run into a roadblock of differing moral viewpoints among responsible, sane people.

$100 is available.

Apply that $100 to foster access to tools of productivity for the most people (unproductive people cost more), such as investing in health, education, mobility (transportation), basic sustenance for all. productivity; buttress a legal obligation to prevent harm; foster privacy rights to all decisions taking place within each person's finger-tip foot span (the DaVinci Rule). This should please the religious because it leaves moral consequences to a deity, not a court; and fosters, in turn, benign ways to encourage voluntarily whatever decision the religious would like the person to make.

C. Possible legal grounds for finding a legal obligation to act on another's behalf.

Fiduciary Duty, Duty to Rescue, Morality, Basic Equity, Public Policy and Pragmatism.

A. Fiduciary duty.

A person enters into an agreement to put another's interest first. Without an agreement to be a fiduciary, you do not have to be one. A fiduciary has high duties of honesty and disclosure. See ://definitions.uslegal.com/b/breach-of-fiduciary-duty/. Why are legislators not? and ordinary investors who act on our behalf not fiduciaries? Stockbrokers are not fiduciaries as to their clients. See ://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-breach-of-fiduciary-duty.htm/

That makes no sense.

So who are fiduciaries: Examples of fiduciaries at the site include corporation board members to the shareholders, a trustee to the beneficiaries of the trust, a lawyer to the client. A breach of fiduciary duty means that the person was in a position of trust, and instead used the opportunity to benefit personally. ://legal.practitioner.com/regulation/standards_9_3_6.htm/ Details of civil lawsuits are at ://www.essortment.com/all/breachoffidu_rkwv.htm/ How about the position of husband and wife, as to finances, for example. Does the marital relationship give rise to a fiduciary duty. Not so, apparently, unless some huge disparity in knowledge, and then reliance, injury? States differ. Still, the people had to get married, but did they agree by getting married that they would be fiduciaries as to each other. I don't see that in vows. Faithfulness, sickness health, etc. Not fiduciary to put the other first. See overview of fiduciary at ://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-breach-of-fiduciary-duty.htm

So: nobody has to be a fiduciary. You have to agree to it first.

...................................................................

D. Duty to rescue; duty to prevent further harm.

No. There is no duty to rescue, unless you are in a special relationship with the one in hazard; or you contributed to the one being in hazard, or keeping him there. Then there is a kind of duty to prevent further harm. Or does it arise when you are simply there, even if you did not cause the problem. The Good Samaritan issue. Our understanding is that someone cannot be forced to be a Good Samaritan. Is that correct?

Is that the justification for welfare, that benefits have gone so long so long to some groups, to the exclusion or minimization of others (the extreme situation is slavery), that a kind of bringing-back-to-speed is justified? Does "duty to rescue" apply more or less to governments, as opposed to individuals; governments having power to set a policy for laws in that regard, even if not part of traditional torts.

You can choose to be a Good Samaritan, but don't have to. If you do choose to be a Good Samaritan, you get protection against being sued for ordinary negligence if you mess up, apparently.

Public law does not coerce benevolence, except in modern societies where taxes are indeed used for the benevolence of others as a matter of public policy, but not as the individual being so forced in a particular situation. This is an interpretation open to discussion, and see an opposing view at ://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/rescue.html/ In summary, with no legal duty to rescue, how can any individual be forced through taxes to do indirectly what he cannot be forced to do directly. What that article does not address, however, if the effect of the person who Haves, having engaged in unjust behaviors -- or his group having engaged in unjust behaviors -- to the detriment of the Have-not, and to the profit of the Have.

Enter Reparations: blacks, slaves as a group (hard to prove exactly who was and wasn't), kept in a position of forced servitude, no pay, no ability to accumulate wealth over 200 plus years, all that labor inuring to the benefit of others, who merrily put it in the bank and passed in on through estates laws, raises equitable issues.

There may be technically an iffy legal remedy, to force one to help another; but there are equitable ones. Reparations, restitution.

How is that idea expressed, that if you did something to put the Have-Not in the position of Having-Not, or needing rescue, there is indeed a duty to rescue;

Jonathan Turley cites this from a case where nobody helped a woman being raped in a subway station.

"**** The mere fact that Bigan saw Yania in a position of peril in the water imposed upon him no legal, although a moral, obligation or duty to go to his rescue unless Bigan was legally responsible, in whole or in part, for placing Yania in the perilous position: ****"

Fair use snippet from Jonathan Turley's blog at://jonathanturley.org/2009/04/10/no-duty-to-rescue-rule-court-holds-that-new-york-transit-workers-had-no-obligation-to-help-woman-being-raped-in-station/

A basic principle is that the person in trouble cannot have voluntarily put himself in it. If it was his own misstep, he bears the consequence, even if his misstep was out of ignorance, or miscalculation. The watcher has to have placed the person in the bad spot if the watcher is to have an obligation to get the person out of it. "Intense individual autonomy" is a phrase for it. No "collective obligation".

And, issues of "negligence" are different from issues of duty to rescue, and not the topic here. See that discussion about midway down at Lester A. Hunt's article, at ://philosophy.wisc.edu/hunt/duty2res.htm/ Negligence: neglect of a legal duty already there.

Back to finding the watcher liable for not rescuing the one in trouble.

You may not have voluntarily caused the problem that blocked the road, but once it happened, you cannot voluntarily omit to take a precaution like putting out flares that could have prevented a third party from crashing into the obstruction. Omitting to act in that circumstance violated basic law that you can't cause harm to others. So omissions can be culpable, See http://philosophy.wisc.edu/hunt/duty2res.htm

You may be in a special relationship with the one in trouble, and this is a matter of social convention and often law: arising from an implied contract or something: employer employee, a public carrier and passenger, even bartender and sop. Ongoing at ://philosophy.wisc.edu/hunt/duty2res.htm/ This also means that, if you are strangers and not in a special relationship, or no role in putting the one in danger in that danger, you have no duty. None. Zip.

......................................................................

E. Morality. Law and morality can be far apart. How to force one person's morality on another.

Long discussion at Lester A. Hunt's site, and too much to parse out here. Morality. How ascribe objective hierarchies. Is tradition or Founders, oh, my. Who could even agree on those, or the role once found.

Go on to #4. I for one would not not not accept enforceability of one person's religious views on me.

Is there a "shared morality" that gives rise to duties to others. But there is noone in a better position to weigh all the competing goals going on in one's head at the time, than the person there. The burden is too great on a court to get into that head, absent a legal duty to act. Positive morality may hope (anthropomorphizing) that a person would act if reasonable to do so reasonably safely, etc. but cannot be forced. Even an "easy rescue" would be unenforceable as law. Etc. Do read that site, at ://philosophy.wisc.edu/hunt/duty2res.htm/ I agree with Les.

.................................................................

F. Basic Equity: In the old days,

there were law courts, tough legal stuff;

and there were equity courts, squooshy fairness, little precedent, case by case.

Find an overview at Puttin' On The Writs, at Joy of Equivocating, Puttin' on the Writs. Here is a writs list -- remedies to make something fair

The Injunction - Stop that.
The Judicial Interpretation In Advance ("Declaratory Relief") - It means this
Forfeits - You get none of it
Reinstating Contracts - You broke this part of it but it is not forfeit. Make the contract operative again
Trusts and Liens Imposed Involuntarily - You hold this for the benefit of someone else
Reforming a Contract - Change this or that
Rescinding a Contract - Cancel it out
Damages - The value of something lost, not received, or altered

Then there are the big writs, the ones that command, called Prerogative Writs.

Habeas Corpus - "You have the body" - the big one in the news today, about the Supreme Court granting rights of Habeas Corpus (the right to request a hearing on the reasons for a detention) to enemy combatants/ others and whoever else at Guantanamo. Since there have never been hearings, we have no idea whom the great governmental vacuum cleaner sucked up. Thus, the Great Writ, the Writ of Habeas Corpus, arises. See ://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htm; and http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/habeastimeline.html

Prohibition - "Stop that!" to keep a lower court from acting, or person, see ://www.bwlap.org/TAPs/writs.pdf

Mandamus - "We command" - to force a lower official to act. See ://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m079.htm

Certiorari - to make something more "certain"- permits appeals to a higher court. See ://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itdhr/0405/ijde/messitte.htm.How to pronounce it? Think sert-chor-ar-eye or sert-chor-ar-ee

Quo Warranto - by what authority does a lower official act. See ://www.enotes.com/wests-law-encyclopedia/quo-warranto

This site is ours, so we can use these lists. More on equity as a way to get at more justice: Those are the tools that someone can try to use, if the remedy at law is inadequate.

Also look at other matters -- defenses against the righteous (thinks himself right and you wrong) against you, the poor klutz:

unclean hands (you also did bad, O righteous one),
laches (you waited too long),
estoppel (you acted as though you agreed with them coming in for so long, that you can't go back on it now because of reliance, etc).

This is a big field.

...................................................................................

G. Public Policy

What is good for the country. What promotes productivity, stability, sound economics reaching into the future, not expending energies in vindictive behavior from the past decades. These days, reduce it to the country's prosperity, money available and prioritized, the practicalities of enforcement, the benefits to the society as a whole of each action chosen or not. Are we as individuals obligated to watch our own contribution to a climate of permission for others to be oppressed in their opportunities, to violence.

......................................................................................................

H. Conclusion

Is there a duty to act on another's behalf without invoking legislating morality.

Yes, but indirectly if the perspective is strongly "legal". Acceptably direct, if the perspective includes the traditional "equitable". Add to the legal and equitable the policy ground open to the State, that requires such duties in the discharge of its governance, fostering stability, not restricting opportunity by its acts.

Guns. We may not as individuals cause a specific bad situation; but if we are able, and where it is reasonably predictable that vulnerable persons or a situation will endanger others, our obligation is to prevent harm. Time, place and manner restrictions on any right to bear arms is consistent with our law and tradition. Type of firearm needed for personal protection etc. Lawmakers are as responsible as speakers of hyperbole for not passing laws to prevent harm where the dangerous situation is before us yearly, we have the power to pass laws to protect those coming down the road; and do not. Political speech: We all know that speech directed to a general audience will include the vulnerable. Speakers also know that. They are obligated to watch their mouths. The old example: Henry II: "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?'' Some minion hears, and does. The King denies, denies.

Immigration. Equity rules. Not law. Law would deport, etc. But we have waited too long, with doors open, and now we have what we have. For 10 years and more, both parties having power,What are the grounds for compelling one person to put another's interest before his own. Estoppel, laches, unclean hands, and no money to deport millions, try each one of them, and then they are back. Bank the money saved, secure borders with it, as reasonably feasible (not much); but increase incentives for people to stay where they are, in their own countries.

Welfare. We have exploited those still underfoot. Foster access to tools for productivity, even at this late date. Education, health care, mobility, transportation, infrastructure, sustenance. There is no productivity at any age without that. Slavery with no ability to set money aside, pass on to kids, learn how to manage it? Imagine. Give up your own inheritances over the years, your own freebies, your legacy admission to a Big School. Your networking. Where would you be?

Abortion. Leave that to the person, her doctor, her own morality. If you are religious, this is consistent with the idea that a deity is fully capable of looking after the deity's interest. If there is to be a punishment for anything moral, the deity can take care of itself. Influence her decision? Offer positive alternatives for her, maybe she'll find your way.

Lions, and tigers and bears.

.....................................................................

FN 1

For the next in line: This takes much more research. What grounds any obligations of a stranger to a situation, to help the situation of another. What in law, equity, policy, can require one person to act for the benefit of another. Guns, immigration, welfare, abortion, all are involved in similar analyses. Is there a duty to protect, to prevent further harm to others if you are there and able, even if you did not cause the first. Yes, there is. A twist on the no-duty general rule. Can that be expanded, should it, tothe gun world. What other legal principles can shed some light on that and other areas, like law and immigration, abortion, welfare. There are many, including equitable and policy grounds undergirding an ever-evolving law.

How to do it, what rationale. Immigration. Why help those who came across voluntarily. What is the role of policy, as opposed to strict legalism. Welfare. Why help those who are clearly losers. What differences do "unclean hands" and "laches" and "estoppel" make. What are those anyway. Abortion. Is there a duty to rescue a foetus. Is a pregnant person a "fiduciary" as to the foetus? Need definitions. non-religious analyses needed in a diverse culture. Where law gets too tangled, what is the role of equity, of public policy, and pragmatism in government.

FN 1

When policy for safety of all requires limiting rights of individuals. I

In England in WWII, where there were no guns allowed in the population (this predated the war), all people could stay in the bomb shelters free of risk from shooting by others like them -- panicked, self interest superseding group benefit.

Guns were in the population during Hurricane Katrina, and public officials attempted to disarm persons coming to the shelters, to keep self-interest from jeopardizing the whole.

Persons favoring gun rights unrestricted, objected.

See Sandra Froman, president of the NRA, in the March-April 2006 issue of the Stanford Alumni Magazine, ://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2006/marapr/features/froman.html/ voicing her right to carry a concealed weapon anywhere, and citing the Katrina emergency issue as an example of infringements of gunners' rights/

Fair use quotation of Sandra Froman at the Stanford site:

“Everyone is safer when criminals don’t know who is armed. I’m this five-foot-two middle-aged lady, but they don’t know I’ll shoot their guts out.”

What if the other person was not a criminal? What if she was wrong about any event where she shoots first, asks later.

Then see the reaction of other alums at ://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2006/mayjun/dept/letters.html/. Some folks fur, some folks agin'. Pay attention to the arguments, both sides. Does the NRA have any obligation when it puts guns out there, trains anyone, when individuals or militia or guerrilla groups then move on their own after that. Is the NRA a deniable feeder to those groups. Should anyone care or feel responsible. Militia: originating when there was no standing army at all, each brought his own weapon when mustered; to defend against outside invaders. The weapon of any of us if we feel invaded by our own is the ballot box, says this observer; not one groups gunfire.

No Thank You Note. Repeal or Gutting. Thank You Notes: Nice Things

2011-01-03T20:35:00.006-05:00

Write a No Thank You Note to This:

Gutting, One Petunia at a Time

Picture It Before You Get Blase About the Process

Healthcare insurance law. R's repeal: guts us. Is the formal gutting any better, that is scheduled for if and when full repeal fails. No. Death by a thousand cuts. But it takes R's to stop the R's. Does anybody have any guts?

Gutting: Ah, the future. I see it now.... NRA and Big Money Take Aim.

Seeing the future: Health care law Gutted, One Petunia at a Time. Not pretty. And worse.

The R word. R's Want Repeal.

The G word. R's Want Guts; Death by a Thousand Cuts.

In between, U for us. Under. Getting stepped on.

RUG. They are shoving us under the rug. But it will take other R's to persuade the DC gang. Who has guts?

Gutting is piecemeal repeal; death by a thousand cuts; and any move either way ties up two years, while the industry rakes it in. Reverie Greats of the Season - Cons and Pros. Cons in many Ways. For anybody with health issues in the family, be afraid. Ornithological fact: it takes 2 years to get ego-nihilists to agree on anything. Proceeding to repeal, or to gut, either way will take two years of no improvement, and higher costs. and outsourcing. The secure are fine, and making only themselves more secure at the expense of us, the insecure in comparison.

Write Thank You for These

Nightshirts/ and deciding not to/
Fancy up the kitchen,/

Chiles with the chicken/
and Walgreen's for fashion./

Modern surgery and/
Turning off TV,/

Let consequences happen/ says Piggle Wiggle

With her radish cure for DC.

Bum diddy bum bum bum bum diddy bee. FN 1

-------------------------

FN 1 Here follows a list of some of the greats of the season, including naming names but there is no kickback.

1. Wintersilks. Your men's silk-cotton nightshirt, size small, fits me Just Right, the lady of the house. One in each color. Comfy, cool and warm (read: no sweats), long enough to tuck under knees, and it is possible for a kid to enter the room without the little direction finders out there.

2. Formica. We opted out of granite 12 years ago because granite is hard, terribly cold to touch, probably ticking radioactive, unyielding, breaks things, and is noisy. We can fix breakfast for one while the other sleeps and not wake the dead each time a saucer dips. Excellent in the 1960's, better now. Formica! Use your money for something else, not fancy faucets or hard-hard clattery surfaces.

3. Cans of little chiles. Dump one under a pan of simply breaded otherwise unseasoned chicken thighs and a pork tenderloin, bake 45 min. at 350, give folks a choice, and enjoy.

4. Walgreens. Go and find a wonderful pashmina long scarf-shawl for about $8.00, rayon, washable, fringe, cozy and washable when you cover your face a couple of times with it. Went back for one for a sister in law and they were gone except for hot pink and hot orange. Not her style. Call me if you find them anywhere in a nice subtle pattern or solid. Brilliant purchase.

5. Robotic prostate cancer surgery. Don't get hospitalized without one. Recovery is faster than you would believe.

6. Not missing the remote. You don't need TV. Read a paper, let your eyes get away from nasty screens that really do strain the little pupils, tune in to PBS if you have to. You have two years until another election, check factcheck as you want, give yourself some peace.

Same vein: What I do not want in "news" -- anything but facts and we want factgs delivered in a neutral, informative tone. No excitement, no breathlessness, no indignation, no spins from owners of the station who think we don't notice how they order the voices to phrase things to persuade us of their point of view. None of it. We are tuning all of you out. We have tuned you all out. Even our NYT gets tilted out of whack even on the first page. A plague on all of you.

7. Aah. Some quiet. Have you tried it?

To be added unto.

8. Sufficiency. The big one. Fine. For everyone. Sufficiency makes the difference between being able to follow opportunity knocking or not. Sick people, uneducated people, lousy transit, bad for the country and us. We hope we last with what we have. Thank you for senses still working well, that we need, to do what we love to do best. Not that we couldn't adjust, but we are grateful for ongoing capability.

9. That one can pick up after falling down stairs, or being pushed, etc. The human condition. Thank you.