Thursday, August 17, 2017

Gaming the Game

Image result for tolerating the intolerant cartoonThere is a new game that has transformative powers.  This game is based on the age old premise of good vs evil with the winner of this game actually being the loser.  When all the points are counted the scoring gives more credence to the weight of the choices rather than the total points accumulated.


What is really interesting is that during the game the players have opportunities to alter the scoring rubric in order to instill a sense of  real life relativism, giving the player excuse points that can mitigate bad choices or bad behaviors chosen during the game.  As the game continues around the board the players realize that the platform is related to real life scenarios and expectation, but it’s those excuse points that put a spin on the mundane aspects of dealing with the real life foundations of the game.


I am taking orders ...Just kidding, and as far as I know there is no such game on the market.  If anyone wants to tackle the project I only require a small percentage based on my idea...However there is a real life game that many seem to want to play.  That game has to deal with the differences of responsibility and the motivations of how we react to what is responsible, who should be responsible and most important, how do we react when others we like or dislike act irresponsibly.  


Part of the real life game, it could be an important part of the board game as well, is the component of blaming.  The blame game is really nothing more than one party blaming another party for acts they don’t like.  In today’s game the level of blame has taken on a life of its own with blame being spread to others who are blameless, mostly to counteract the negative feeling of those who really should be blamed.  


If you have children you will recognize this process.  It is mostly an innocent maturing process that most children go through but it has morphed into a much more insidious practice that has found its way into our society and more succinctly into our lives.  From an innocent reaction of children to an evil attempt to cover up abhorrent behavior, blaming others for actions that you have done or continue to do is explained by Christ, “He that hath no sin, let him cast the first stone.”..No one picked up even a pebble, for they had been taught...


We have the left blaming the right, the democrats blaming the republicans, we have the white supremacist blaming the anti fas and we have the anti fascist acting like the white supremacist.  There is plenty of blame to go around, that’s for sure, but who truly is to blame? Who is responsible and what can you and I do about it?


The blame game is real, we all play it, we all use those excuse points to alter the perceptions of others, generally to make ourselves look better.  We point our fingers and wag our tongues never realizing that we’re acting just like those who we are criticizing and blaming.  The first thing we need to do is realize that regardless of what the others are doing we need to alter our perceptions so that we can more clearly see their perspective.  Having done that we will be able to more fully understand where “they” are coming from.


Part of the blame game includes specially designed dice that when rolled will tabulate your tolerance index.  It is this index that places you in an area of tolerance or intolerance. One major question within the game and society is should we have to accept, or be tolerant of those who we view as being intolerant?  


This subject is a complex issue of personal opinion, power, and political acumen or at least the desire to be adept at making good decisions.  The one issue seen in our society is the unwillingness of our political leaders to take an unpopular stand and I suspect that when dealing with the issue of intolerance vs tolerance most political figures would chose to ignore the entire issue.  How would you deal with those who you don’t like, opinions that fall short of your morality or an ideology that even threatens your own?  


In the game you would simply roll the dice and the decision would be made for you, allowing those who are intolerable or removing them from the game if a roll of snake eyes is achieved.  We do not have that option, and the intricacies of our society and constitution make those seemingly obvious choices not so easy.  There are lots of groups that do not share my ideals or morals but do I have the right to force them to change?  Only if their choices impact my ability to live and breath and exercise my God given rights, then something should be done.


We have forgotten the basic precepts of our constitutional republic and that is to live and let live within the confines of that constitution.  When a group defies those standards and precepts than those in authority must act accordingly and in concert with that constitution.  One problem now is that their are groups and individuals who claim that their way is a better way and everyone should be forced to follow their way.  That is intolerance and not acceptable.  As long as I have the right to pursue my beliefs, my dreams and my opinions without interference and as long as I allow others that same privilege, those we don’t like, agree with, abhor or even hate should be allowed to exist and thrive as we expect from them.  


Anything short of this level of tolerance puts you into the muddy waters section of the board and in that section the risk of total loss is real, the risk of immediate removal from the game is an imminent possibility, it will happen if your actions do not conform with the foundational rules of the game and in our case those foundational rules are our constitution.   


Intolerance is at a new societal high, tolerance for what is dangerous and illogical is also at an all time high leaving the country in a state of bewilderment and constant level of confusion in relation to how to throw the dice, how to react to your opponents rolls and who we can trust.

It’s your turn, roll the dice, hope you don’t get snake eyes but remember if you do you can always use your intolerance points in conjunction with your accumulated excuse points to alter the rules so that no matter what you do you can always be a winner.  Good luck with that.

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Peace or Freedom?


Image result for freedom or peace  cartoon

A simple question needs to be asked and answered by all;  what is more important, peace or freedom?

Especially now, and in relation to the impending conflict between the United States and North Korea is peace more important than freedom?  What are we willing to sacrifice for peace or what are we willing to sacrifice for freedom?  Are they held in equal standing or is one more important than the other?

Please answer in complete sentences.  

Saturday, August 12, 2017

Right or Wrong

Image result for right and wrong cartoon



Deciding what is right and good has become nothing more than a political ploy of gaining traction on any given issue.  It has gone well beyond the simple course of morality and now firmly sits within the realm of group dynamics with both the right and the left falling prey to the wish list of resolutions based on political expediency and nothing else.

Most of society has been subjugated by the left’s ideology and precepts of inferiority.  We have become pawns to their whims and commands as they continue to drive our beliefs, our morals and our sovereignty deep within the pit of despair and slavery.  To them we are nothing more than chaff, forgotten workers who toil endlessly for their gain and enjoyment.  Their disdain for the truth is monumental as is their refusal of all things good and wholesome.  

When our society has problems with gender identity the issue of truth defined vs relativism is clearly understood.  Those on the left have little or no defined morality, no specific understanding of what is right or wrong and only govern based on the relativistic premise that all is ok, as long as it’s ok within your framework of understanding, experiences and your continuing to vote along their party lines.

A progressive ideology would have you believe that progress is the ultimate expression of the truth and the need for progress trumps all other concerns.  We need to inquire however, is what they preach progress or simple change?  There is a fundamental difference between the two.  Progress means to advance a cause, a position or an idea toward an understood truth.  While change is simply that, change, not good, not bad per say but simply to change without regard to the conservative model to conserve the truths learned first, then build upon those truths, here a little, there a little, line upon line, albeit slowly at times but with a deliberate purpose toward understanding that truth.

Susan Rice stated that we should accept a nuclear North Korea.  Her statement makes perfect sense from the perspective of her belief system.  For eight years her boss Barack Obama negotiated with the North Koreans and followed their progress toward nuclearization, never intervening or attempting to stop their proliferation of a nuclear arsenal, telling us now that we need to accept the facts as they allowed.  Obama knew of their progress and could have intervened in a number of ways to slow or destroy their capability but now imposing his view, through Rice of acceptance and inevitability.

Accept life as they describe it, let it be, leave it alone, can’t we all just get along, be whatever you want to be and force others to accept whatever you think you want to be.  That is the mantra of the liberalist.  What they don’t tell you is in that process of acceptance and relativism we give up who we really are and are forced to join the throngs of the indecisive and undecided knowing deep within our souls that when we do we also forsake our own individuality and sovereignty.  

There is no God, no purpose in life, no plan of salvation, there is nothing but the progressive agenda that force feeds our souls the dogmatic dribble that nothing matters, there is no truth, no morality and no reason to look beyond our selfish desires.  We are nothing more than animals and only a small part of the natural selection process.  We live, we reproduce, we die, that is our existence according to those who use progress in their name.

I am here to say that we are so much more.  We are a defined creation, a limitless being of unbelievable potential.  I am a child of God with all the rights, privileges and opportunities afforded me within that divine lineage and with that spirit the ability to discern between the dribble of the left and the promises of the right and know that our current leadership in congress shares few if any morality as my own.  

If I am the only one who knows, my promise to myself is to live by those precepts and those principles and to speak out, share and exemplify what I know to be true, despite the screams and derisions heaped upon my head from those within their lofty towers of despair.  You can join me anytime, there is plenty of room next to the tree.  Be careful, there is a mist of darkness that deadens the soul and confuses the senses, hold fast to what you know, deviate not and never give up.  We Can Do This.

Wednesday, August 9, 2017

Bully Tactics

Image result for bully pulpit cartoonDealing with a bully effectively means to disassociate his ability to terrorize and bully.  How we accomplish the above depends on your definition of cruelty and power with some believing that rhetoric is always better than conflict and regardless of how long it takes “jaw, jaw, jaw is better than war, war, war.”  Winston Churchill


At what point does the bully recognize his deeds as terror or when does an individual actually start to understand that what they are doing is wrong?  How long do those who are affected allow the terror to control their lives and disrupt their free expression of life and choice?


Being a bully is a choice, not a great choice for those who get bullied but it is a choice.  Choosing to be a bully may have some serious extenuating conditions but to those who are bullied those conditions mean nothing.  All they care about is the fear, the danger and the daily terror inflicted upon them and the utter hopelessness of trying to dislodge themselves from the grips of those who make them suffer.


Bullies may be born that way or may develop those illicit traits as a result of life experiences but when you’re being bullied does it really matter how the bully got their?  Those deeper questions can and should be answered but not at the time the bullying is taking place.  Stopping the terror should be the primary focus, not a dialogue of hope that may or may not, in the future, have some positive benefits for the already mentally deranged individual.


The psychology of a bully used to be about compensating for a low self esteem but today it is understood that bullies have a sense of entitlement melded with feelings of superiority and a lack of compassion for others.  These profiles seem to change with the weather as do most things, especially if you spend the time to consider history and the events that created our history.  But the basic premise of being a bully has never really changed, it is still the outward attempts of the anti social, impulse deficit, cretins who relish the pain and suffering they cause others.


There are ways to deal with bullies, some better than others.  Your first decision needs to be how to get the suffering to stop and for that the best advice seems to be to ignore the bully.  Good luck on that one.  You may want to hide away or make yourself scarce in order to be forgotten but that does not solve the problem it only puts it on hold.  


Let’s consider a real life, worldwide bully, Kim Jong Un.  Here is a severely entitled individual who is certifiably deranged.  It may have been due to his upbringing and his social ineptness or it may be simply due to his lack of compassion for anything or anybody other than himself, does it really matter?  


He has taken it upon himself to threaten the most powerful nation in the history of mankind and for the first time in over 25 years we have a President that will not be bullied by this despot leader.  But what if he sends a missile  topped with a nuclear warhead to Guam or worse to California?  You need to ask the question, if we fail to confront the bully now what will we have to confront in the future?  Will rhetoric be enough to scale down his threats and return the world to a more peaceful stance.  What happens to those who are watching North Korea and waiting to see how America will react, like Iran, Russia, China etc...how will our decisions at this time affect our future choices and threats?  


My opinion is that we have two choices, both difficult and both dangerous.  The first is we back down and hope for the best.  Never really knowing how those who are aligned with North Korea will interpret our inaction.  Chances are they will be emboldened, leading them to make more egregious threats and an increase in more provocative rhetoric based on our decision not to engage.  Will a decision to ignore be met with less violence or less risk in the future?  I do not think so and I think history supports that premise.  


The second choice is to take a definitive stand.  As the greater power we have the option of attempting to force North Korea’s hand and in a way bully him to stand down and disarm.  This position should have been made years ago, but it wasn’t.  Instead we chose to sit back and ignore the threats and hoped that they would just go away.  


There is a risk but it is my opinion that any action we take now will be less than in the future.  From a stance of power, greater power and threat to their existence, the chances of a peaceful resolution is far greater than a continued process of appeasement and compromise.  


What are we negotiating?  What are we willing to give up to allow North Korea to remain a constant and ever present threat to our sovereignty and safety?  Like with Iran, past leaders tried to appease and please but failed to demand and follow through leaving the rest of us subject to an ever increasing threat because of an ideal of peace from words rather than a peace derived from strength.  


Trump has decided it is better to call them out, like some gunslinger from the old west, knowing he is faster and has a bigger gun but also realizing that any further delay will result in our adversaries having the time to hone their skills, increase their firepower and become emboldened by our fear of action and our cowardly attempt to talk our way out of what has become a real life showdown.


Whether a bully on the playground or a bully on the world wide stage the process is exactly the same.  The consequence are much greater but the steps to defuse the issue should not be minimized because of the level of threat.  Just like the concept of not negotiating with terrorist, negotiating with a bully only creates a scenario of failure, compromising with evil always nets more evil than before.  


There is a risk to standing strong, especially when the position of past leaders was vacillation and rhetoric without strength or position.  I side with Donald Trump and his stance of power and strength and against the bullies of this world that would see us destroyed and forgotten.

Friday, August 4, 2017

The lies we all believe

Image result for truth trump cartoon
Judging anything has turned into a debate based on current ideology and past experiences.  This may sound like a respectable way to discern but booth ideology and experience may sway the reality of what should be seen and obvious by imposing already established biases and preconceived ideas on the current process of judgement.

Like history, many have a tendency to view historical events through a prism clouded by current political and socio economic perspectives without taking into account the specifics of that history and how those who lived through those events perceived and lived.  

Henry Ford it seems did not sell the first car.  He was not even the first to standardize the assembly line but for most those are indisputable facts and a part of their history.  Vikings never  wore horned helmets, that was purely a fictional attribute of the German Opera to increase attendance.   General George Custer fought and lost to under equipped and primitive indians.  The truth is that custer was outgunned and outmaneuvered by a superior and better equipped force.  Most of Custer’s troops were still using bolt action rifles while many of the Indians were using repeating rifles stolen, traded or given to the indians for a profit.  The indians new the value of being prepared, at least in that battle.

History is filled with instances of facts gone wrong, even today we tend to believe in what we want to believe rather than the obvious or logical.  WMDs (weapons of mass destruction) in Iraq, were actually used by Saddam Hussain.  He gassed his own people using WMDs but when it came time to find those weapons, nobody knew what happened to them.  The fact that they could not be found does not alter the reality or the need to remove those threats that were plainly in evidence.

It also seems obvious that when Syria was fighting against its rebels Bashar al-Assad used WMDs in his fight against those rebels.  Was the castigation of former President Bush warranted and are we using the same obscured lenses to view the current President Trump? Does our perspective born of our ideology and insufficient understanding really serve us in making overall judgements, even on issues we think we know everything there is to know?

Regardless of the reasons for misinformation they are present and pervasive.  Just because something  is frequently repeated, and routinely recalled does not make a supposed truth truthful, in fact it can have the opposite effect.  Why do you think that popular commercials are popular?  Why do we listen to the same songs over and over again?  Why do we repeat news we think we like?  Mostly because we simply like what we hear and then believe what we hear and say, simply because we like it.  We become influenced by the sizzle and not the stake, expecting that familiar sound that just so happens to be deep in our mind's eye, that ever present reminder of what we like as opposed to what is right or truthful.  The more we partake of that forbidden fruit the easier and more believable it becomes.  

Frequency plays a major role in how are brains transfer information from short term memory to long term and in the process alters the information to the more permanent status of trustworthy, aka truth, but not really.

As can be evidenced throughout history and in all facets of learning, Man (and women) are wrong about most things, most of the time.  Just like believing that Edison invented the lightbulb.  He did not invent the lightbulb but he perfected the process and made it work for a longer duration, making it marketable to the general public.  It should also be mentioned that Edison’s failures with the lightbulb far out performed his successes, but his perseverance overcame those failures and success and truth was the result, thank goodness he kept trying.

It seems sad to admit that most of us, including me, really don’t have a clue and we take that cluelessness to vaulted heights of superiority when politics is concerned.  The opinions of the day, those oft repeated opinions stream through the ether and somehow become accepted as truth just by virtue of their repetition.  Say something enough and it affects your brain’s ability to judge between what is right and what is comfortable.

Your comfort levels are really nothing more than your brain telling you that this is a safe way to think simply because it’s a way you’ve previously been thinking.  Repetition is a great way to learn but it’s also a great way to fall into the trap of misinformation and false assumptions.

You may want to trick your brain into doing what’s best rather than what you think is right.  “Of the 10 million bits of information that each of our brains process each second, only about 50 bits are devoted to deliberate thought–in other words, 0.0005%. We’re wired notto be ever-vigilant. We’re built to avoid continuous decision-making.” www.fastcompany.com

When your wiring is ineffective then it’s time to rewire the connections of your brain and start to rethink the rote process of predictions vs reality.  Are we really making decisions or have we simply allowed our subconscious to make them for us?  We are wired not to make every decision but there are advantages to moving away from the .0005% of deliberate thought and one of those would be a bit more control over what we think we know into what we actually know.  

It really is time to start thinking purposefully without the autonomous brain ruling what we think, what we believe and how we act.  There is no inner person wanting to come out.  If you actions are mean and selfish, you're a mean and selfish person.  All we have to do is act according to what we want to be and voila the magic of reality takes center stage.  We really are what we do.

If most of what we currently believe is suspect than perhaps our views of our current President are also suspect, to some degree.  Trump is obviously not a “normal” politician and in fact has shown tendencies toward his business acumen, leaving no doubt about his intentions and his motivations.  We cannot judge him based on our preconceived ideas but need to alter our deliberate thoughts and adjust them in relation to what he is and what he is trying to do.

Like him or not is he trying to improve America?  Is he attempting to strengthen this country and in so doing is trying to make this country more safe, less volatile and more prosperous?  Perhaps if we look with a more deliberate and less subconscious manner we will be able to see what he sees and then, and only then can we truly pass judgement.

Thursday, July 27, 2017

I think therefore I must be thinking


Related imageWe have had years, thousands of years of thought, trying to figure out if our thoughts have merit. Philosophers have pondered the mental questions with their own mentality and have come up with a variety of mentations that upon reading have only provided me with an almost endless variety of choices. Are we what we think?
“Cogito ergo sum, I think therefor I am” RenĂ© Descartes believed that our thoughts, our conscious doubts was sufficient proof of our own existence. This suggestion of mental sovereignty gives rise to the basic premise of thoughts being a foundational platform of not only our existence but our lives in total as well.

Nietzsche held the view that all human actions are motivated by the desire “to increase the feeling of power” Desires are brought on by our minds and given credence and substance by our thoughts. How we act upon those desires and thoughts may be an indication of our motivations, our choices and our desires regarding who it is we really want to be.

Who do you want to be? That thought drives our actions in a profound way creating with it a  pattern of behavior that instills in us the practices of our success and our failures. Who we want to be may never be fully realized and in some cases causes great concern over the realities of ones life. The media, social media, peer pressure and the many other ways our thoughts can be manipulated, interfere with our initial desires to balance our inner cognition with those realities that surround us.

I wanted to be an artist. In some respects I have accomplished that desire but only after I realized and balanced what I wanted with what was needed, not only for myself but for my family. In retrospect I could have done a better job at symmetry but I also believe that as we learn we improve, also understanding that learning is the fundamental process of growth. It really doesn’t matter where we start from; what matters is how we progress.

My goal of being an “artist” was never fully realized in the financial sense but I can fully appreciate and utilize my gifts, my desires and my talents in that specific direction, but only after I balanced and harmonized my thinking. I used to compare my talents with others who were more successful but were not as good and wondered what I was doing wrong or what I could do to be more than what I was or am.

It took me a few years to understand the differences between wanting something and being something. Being something requires a level of thought and action that transcends the basics of wanting into an almost spiritual level of searching for who we really are and what are true potential is. Becoming an artist is what I wanted but being an artist was always there, all I had to do was let it out.

How we think, what we think about and the time we devote to thinking is the determining factor of what we are. “For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he” telling us that our thoughts are important to control. Proverbs 23:7

The above scripture bridges the gap between the mind and the heart with the warning or promise of where we spend our time determines who and what we become. Spend out thoughts on negative, soul draining endeavors and we soon become enamored with the spirit of those thoughts. Spend our thoughts and time in positive ways and we soon become more positive, more enlightened, more kind and more Godlike.

The term Positive Thinking as coined by Dr. Norman Vincent Peal was a standard in creating what was thought to be a ground breaking process of mind focus and control. Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill was also a treatise on focusing the mind toward your desires. Both works have had a profound effect on the mental outcomes of hundreds of thousands of people wanting to improve their lives.

Both writers understood that as we think we become, the more we think the faster we can become whatever we choose to spend out time thinking about.

There is ample evidence to support the process of thinking positively and the mental and physical benefits of moving our minds away from the negative and destructive emotions like hate, revenge and fear. In her landmark study Barbara Fredrickson of the University of North Carolina has been able to show surprising results from her study and associated experiments in relation to the negative and positive impact in relation to brain activity.

When we think or are forced to think negatively our brains produce certain chemicals that literately narrow our minds and in the process narrow our perception of the events and the world in general. For someone who is facing real danger the exception of this narrowing of the mind can be very useful, especially when all of your mental functions are needed to escape or to simply survive.

The opposite is true with positive thinking. As we are faced with real world problems those who espoused a positive outlook were able to draw upon an increased tapestry of options where those who were negative were forced to deal with less options. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-clear/positive-thinking_b_3512202.html

Positive thinking does not solve the worlds problems. Man must be ready to initiate the protections and the defenses needed to protect themselves from those who would harm or kill, but thinking with a more positive attitude toward life, opportunity and gratitude for what we have will always generate more options to any given problem than those that are negative.

How you reach that symbiosis of mind is primarily an individual process. You are responsible for how you think, how you feel and how you view the world. You can either have a glass half empty perception or a glass half full attitude. When both are equally available it seems to me that the simple view of half full is the only healthy perception to take. Both are equally real but the more positive affirmation carries with it more possibilities and opportunities.

Our attitudes do encourage the attitudes of others. And sense our positive attitudes actually produce increased mental possibilities the very personal act of thinking positively should not be ignored nor discounted due to “real world” or “life experiences”. We can all overcome the negative and foster a more positive outlook that will strengthen our health, our minds and our reality, or you can continue to live in fear, distress and anger, it is after all, your choice.

Friday, July 21, 2017

Rights vs Privleges


Image result for conservative differences between rights and privileges cartoonThe discussion between rights and privileges may seem archaic in todays current level of acceptance based on feelings and internally driven, self worth criteria that espouses freedoms for all based on the premise of personal choice but there is a reality that helps to define the differences between what is a right and what is a privilege.

So many in this day care about what happens to those who seemingly cannot take care of themselves and from that caring comes a reluctance to define the right and wrong of that blanket acceptance.  Is their a right and a wrong, is there a good and evil or a can anything be defined as an absolute?  The absolute principles of the past have been marginalized and manipulated with a constant barrage of inconsequentailism as to make even the most basic of principles nothing more than a whim or a  desires.

Let’s start to unravel the differences between these current chaotic movements to destroy the foundation of what we used to be and hopefully establish a level of understanding that will assist others to make decisions based on the truth rather than a purely selfish approach to life in general.

As you all know I love to define the words we use in order to sustain the meaning and maintain the consistency of our language so that all can access that same language in order to forward the ideas necessary to promote a unified society.  Let’s start with the word Rights:  “A right is something that you as an individual own.  A privilege, on the other hand, is something that another entity owns who then grants you the ability to do something.  A privilege definitely can be taken away if it is owned by someone other than you because they own it and you don’t.” Unknown

Ask yourself, what is it that you truly own?  Do you own your health care?  Do you own the right to drive or the privilege to breath?  Do you own the right to eat or is that dependent on your ability to earn a living?  Do you have the right to work?

There are but a few of the many questions that could be asked but in the end, what do you own, what cannot be taken away from you and in relation to privileges who owns those privileges that you seem to think are rights?

Health care has been a major source of contention for quit some time.  The politics of Heath Care is divisive and complicated with the social issues of the day demanding that all should have the “right” to Health services.   The definition (I did not make that up by the way) has to do with ownership and the ability to control what you own.  If you do not own it, someone else controls it and they will make the decisions regarding it, whatever it is…

There are different definitions discussing where I rights come from, suggesting that our ownership is contingent on the vast reaches of space and and an overshadowing deity but for now and within this finite and temporal existence ownership will have to do as a guide to the differences between privileges and rights. 

What aspects of your heath care do you actually own?  Do you control the company you work for and therefore can also control the finances that allow you to pay yourself to buy the health care you desire?  Even if Health Care was adopted as a single payer system with free access who would manage those affairs and who would ultimately control that system? 

The real issue here is in how our rights are being usurped and redefined.  Gun ownership is another hotly contested topic with one side demanding their rights be allowed while the other side demands for more oversight upon those rights.  Inevitably the debate turns to compromise and when it does the rights of ownership are subject to that compromise, magazine size or the number of bullets etc. and with it the rights of ownership.

The right to own a gun is a determination of our constitution, some agree with the wording and some do not. That determination of a right has been altered by how the words of the constitution have been defined.  Others may not agree with that expression of freedom and often try to limit your right to expression through the process of compromise.  The problem with compromise is that rights cannot be compromised or negotiated.  Once you relinquish a portion of your rights your rights are gone.

Our rights under the law are written with our Bill of Rights.  Those are our rights but those rights have been compromised and the outcomes and expectations have changed.  Free speech is not always available or allowed, property ownership is contingent upon the taxes you owe, gun ownership is also dependent on the bullets you can buy or the size of the clip your allowed to install. 

We have allowed our rights to be compromised and altered and that has altered our basic rights into privileges and with those privileges the risk of reprisal from the owner who will at some point recall those privileges and with it our supposed rights.

Health care never was a right but you have the right to treat yourself anytime you like, just don’t make a mistake in the process, you may be in violation of some medical statute for competition infringement….