The Christmas Raisin, A true Story

I don’t recall ever being told how the tradition got started but I do remember eating the special rice pudding every year of my young life and enjoying the sticky goodness of the overly white, sweet goodness, never getting enough to satisfy my craving.

The year was 1962, I was six years old and I do remember having to practice the duck and cover while crawling under my desk at school.  Our teacher told us that we had to be prepared for a nuclear attack, I didn’t know what nuclear meant but it was fun to get out of my seat and squirm under my desk.

“The Nevada bombing a few days ago should remind all of us that we need to be prepared,” the fear in my teacher’s voice told us more than her words as we scrambled to beat the clock and shield our small bodies.

A few days after that Christmas vacation started and we were free for two wondrous weeks, two weeks of exploring the orange groves that surrounded our home and down to the creek where we hunted for crawdads and kept a sharp eye for the elusive wild pig that sounded its warning but was only occasionally seen.  Two weeks of playing with my friends, Brent Moore, Charles Drysdale, Brad Zitsh and my little brother Wayne, no school, no homework, no problems and only a few days before Christmas what a glorious time.  

Christmas meant family, lots of family, parties, and food, the food was everywhere.  We would start by visiting my cousins or they would come to us; going to grandmas and grandpas house, both sides and again the food, always the food.  Everyone had their favorites, my little brother loved the divinity and would take handfuls putting them in his pockets and stuffing his little face, every one smiled as they saw him try to sneak the sugary treat and not caring that he took too much or would get sick as he did almost every year.  

My favorite was the rice pudding.  I loved the texture, the lumpy look of ricey clumps, but mostly l liked the surprises hidden within and the contest of being the lucky one to find the magic treasures.  I had never won before but I knew this was my year.

A Danish tradition and a Hansen family favorite we always made rice pudding for Christmas Eve dinner and within the pudding one penny, one almond and one raisin.  Each had an important meaning but I didn’t really understand except the idea of simply being the one to earn the acceptance of the rest of the family for finding the treasures within.

I have since learned that each hidden gem had its own clairvoyant meaning and promise of future events but at the time all I wanted was the lovely, sweet rice and the chance of being the victor.  If you were the lucky one to find the penny you were promised wealth for the coming year.  The almond meant luck and whoever found the coveted almond would be the recipient of a lucky year.  It was great to get the penny or the almond but everyone wanted the raisin for the raisin meant long life and with long life came happiness and joy.

I really don’t like raisins but I knew the raisin was the most desirable and most wanted of the three.  If you were lucky enough to get the raisin the entire family would encircle you with praise, hugs, and kisses all around and for that short time you would be the center star and for me, at six years old that was the center of everything.

On Christmas Eve the entire family came together to my grandparents’ home in Montebello California.  Their home was small but it had a large room off the kitchen where we could all sit and talk, eat and enjoy the festivities of that special day.  After a dinner of turkey and ham with all the fixings we would clean the room, move the chairs and tables and I would rush to the pink chair and sink deep into the feathery pillows and feel the secure comfort of grandpas’ favorite recliner, until he emerged from the kitchen drying his hands, he would give me a happy frown, reach down with his arms and pick me up placing me on his lap, not as comfortable as the pillows but much more satisfying.

The adults would be given their small bowls filled with the yule pudding and then the kids.  I looked at mine and I knew something was missing.  I couldn’t see into the white goodness, but I knew that there was no penny, no almond nor a small wrinkly raisin; I would not be winning tonight.  My eyes, that a second ago were filled with hope and wonder lost that sparkle of anticipation, my mouth turned into a small frown, I could still enjoy the rice pudding I tried to tell myself but even that wonderful whiteness would not make up for the impending loss of not winning the penny, the almond nor the raisin.

As my grandma raised her bowl of rice pudding in the air and announced the rules of the contest, a speech repeated each year like the preamble of the constitution or a reverent prayer, my grandpa quickly pulled my bowl from my tiny hands and replaced my kiddy bowl with his adult bowl, giving to me his portion and his chance for winning.

“Start eating everyone” my grandma announced stoically.  

With a spoon in hand and ready to dig in my heart stopped a beat as I noticed my grandpa not eating, waiting, watching me with his tired but loving eyes.  I looked at him, his smile bright and knowing, encouraging, he nodded his head and I took a tentative spoon full, tasting the enchanted creamy delight as it melted in my mouth, forgetting for that moment the penny, the almond, and the raisin.

His arms encircled my small body as he hugged me and held me tight, his own bowl of rice pudding gently set aside, watching me, encouraging me, loving me.  It was at this moment in my life that I understood love, I could feel it as I sat on his lap, his eyes wanting me to win, knowing perhaps that I would win and me not really caring if I won or not, all I wanted was for this moment, these feelings to stay forever.

  

Near the end of my bowl of yule pudding, I did find the raisin and with the dried grape the adoration of everyone in the room.  It was a grand experience, the hugs, the kisses, the warm eyes of all, but most of all the realization that I loved my grandpa and he loved me, a feeling I would never lose, a relationship that would endure throughout his life and still endures in mine 40 years after his death as he sat by his typewriter writing a letter to me.  He died loving me, writing me and enjoying the benefits of giving me an insignificant gift of a little piece of dried fruit. The raisin may have been mine on that event filled Christmas Eve but the promise of a long and fulfilling life was his and is mine as I remember that special gift from a very special man.

Nothing Neutral about Net Neutrality

The Myth Of Net Neutrality  (shamelessly copied from,http://www.returnofkings.com/140063/why-net-neutrality-is-an-unnecessary-fraud)

To begin with, “net neutrality” is a loaded and inaccurate term. It was coined by Tim Wu, a far-left lawyer and university professor who ran for New York Lieutenant Governor in 2014 on a socialist platform and campaigned for Bernie Sanders during the presidential race last year. Wu invented the concept of “net neutrality” as a solution to a nonexistent problem.

Everyone wants a free and neutral Internet, but “net neutrality” has nothing to do with this. Net neutrality refers to Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, which regulates what are referred to as “common carriers,” utilities that hold de facto monopolies and thus are required to adhere to standards of open access and use. Title II originally governed such things as phone service and electricity, but two years ago, the FCC’s 2015 Open Internet Order decreed that they applied to Internet service providers as well.

As Gab founder Andrew Torba has pointed out, existing legislation does not prevent ISPs from charging different rates for different types of services, which net neutrality advocates claim will become reality should the FCC end it. All “net neutrality” does is force ISPs to treat all Internet traffic equally. This benefits edge providers such as Google and Facebook by letting them avoid paying their fair share for bandwidth, while financially hurting ISPs:

For that matter, the nightmare scenario in which ISPs charge consumers extra fees to use certain services has never occurred in the U.S. or any other Western country. Despite net neutrality having only been law for two years, American ISPs have never sold Internet service like it was cable TV, forcing consumers to purchase individual packages. Indeed, the only two countries I could find where this model is used are Turkey and China, two non-Western countries whose governments strictly regulate online speech and censor websites on their own.

To put it simply, net neutrality is corporate welfare. Google, Twitter, Facebook, Netflix and other edge providers support it because it gives them a discount on their operating costs at the expense of ISPs, who must pay to maintain and upgrade the infrastructure that makes the Internet possible to begin with. Net neutrality has as much relevance to consumers as Coke vs. Pepsi, and net neutrality defenders are nothing more than useful idiots for Silicon Valley.

Thank you, Matt Forney, 

Moral high ground sinking to new depth

The Moral High ground to the immoral is only a strategic position that can be pursued or relegated to obscurity based on the political needs of those in power. 

When accusations alone become the basis for decision making the entire process of “innocent until proven guilty” is no longer the rule of the land.  It doesn’t matter how credible or how “serious” the accusation is, they remain accusations until proven.  Our rule of law dictates that a person is innocent until they are proven guilty.

Al Franken was accused and subsequently forced from office, by his own party.  He obviously did not want to resign but the question is, are the accusations sufficient in determining guilt or innocents?  They were not.  I am not a fan of Al Franken, I only liked him because of his portrayal of the effeminate Stuart Smalley, who kept telling himself, while looking in a mirror, that people liked him, no one really believed any of what he was saying, that’s why it was funny.

The problem and the truth is that no one really likes Al Franken.  He is abusive, cruel, and weird but was he guilty?  I don’t know, do you really know?   There is some evidence, but does it fall into the category of sexual predator or is it just weird?   When the accusations surfaced it was more like Stuart Smalley, the weird guy, rather than the sexual predator of the Weinstein ilk.  Do we now judge based on personality types and convict based on if he fits into a preconceived mold or do we provide the Due Process guaranteed by our justice system?  

  

When the accusations are enough to convict then there is no need for due process, no need for facts or evidence of any kind.  The accusations are the judge, jury, and executioner all rolled into one neat, unassailable package of convenience.  The Media has become that hangman, that hanging judge and malicious sheriff manipulating the politicians (or is it the other way around) sending them out like have vigilantes ready to string up any who get in their way or serve their purpose.

Judge Moore’s accuser has recanted her story of the yearbook and basically exonerated the Judge, on that account.  He decided to fight back and for a time he has landed successfully on his feet, but for how long?  Who will be next?  Who will accuse who of some misconduct from years past and who will be forced to resign because the company, the party or group, demands a resignation because of the “Seriousness of the Accusation”?  

Many are guilty and for them, I would suggest resigning early like the Weinstein’s and the Spacy’s did, but for those who are truly not guilty, make the anonymous voices prove your wrongdoing. You are innocent until proved guilty, that is still the law of the land.

There are some Women who are applauding this strategy and the outcomes of destruction and are feeding themselves on the discarded carcasses of their victims.    Rule of law means nothing to them; Due Process is just an idea that gets in the way of their mission for control.  All men are evil, all men need to be controlled and marginalized with the new saying around the media being “it’s time for women to be in charge”, repeated by former President Barrack Obama, maybe he wants his wife to run for something and maybe, in this case, she would be a better leader than he was, just saying…

There is much more to this issue than just the idea that woman make better leaders.  This is a planned and concerted effort to displace President Trump and to force him to leave the office of the President through the implications of impropriety and accusation that have been established by the sacrifices of other politicians who find it "necessary" to clean house, to make room for more deserving leaders, any leader will do, just not Trump.

I know this is just a theory, but I think my theory should hold as much weight as an unfounded accusation.  It all starts with the left losing an election that to most was a slam dunk victory for Hillary.  The first step was the Russian collusion, but that is failing fast, so they had to rethink their tactics and someone came up with the idea to capitalize on the avalanche of sexual harassment cases; it would be easy to implicate President Trump but only after the left captured the moral high ground by sacrificing its own despicable members. 

Harvey Weinstein, Keven Spacey, James Toback, Ben Affleck…. high profile, big named targets that were expendable.  Then came the politicians.

In politics the CNN article http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/25/us/list-of-accused-after-weinstein-scandal-trnd/index.html only mentions President George HW Bush, it should have mentioned Wesley Goodman, Steve Lebsock, Paul Rosenthal, Dan Schoen and John Conyers…Accusations only, some are more credible than others but, no due process has been allowed or considered, only the accusations. 

The left has taken a very strong and moral stance against these accused but the left fails to mention the associations they had and the excuses they made over the years that allowed these, presumed sexual predators to exist.  The point of all this is credibility.  With that new-found credibility, they will demand that President Trump also step down due to the “seriousness of the accusations” and “for the good of the country”.

None of it has to be true, none of it has to be proven, it only has to be said and repeated for the seriousness to trump the truth.  This is just a theory, a theory that I hope is wrong.  It makes me shudder to consider the possibility that we have leaders that will stoop to something so low and dramatic just to get their way.  This theory does have some basis from past performances by the left, and the right, the end justifies the means and in the case of our current political leadership that means getting rid of Donald Trump.

Please follow, I'ts in your best interest...

The Follies of the Foolish

While visiting England in 1976 I was sitting on a bus, lower deck and an old man sat down in the spot next to mine.  He looked at me for a long 30 seconds, his eyes unblinking, red and tired looking.  I tried to hold his gaze, but I had to blink and then with a wry smile his eyes blinked and with feeling in his voice he said, “There is nothing so great as a well-conceived folly”

 I gave him a quizzical look and stammered out a polite thank you, but he was already on the move to his next objective.  For years I have kept that statement in my mind, often wondering why he sat next to me to impart those words just to leave.  It was only the ramblings of an old and seemingly addled man, so most of the time I only remembered the words and very rarely considered the meaning.

Perhaps it’s because I am getting older, but the meaning of this phrase has started to coalesce in my mind as well.  As we age we start to see life in the frame of what was rather than what it could be.  It is the ability to look back that expands our perspective of what was. We reach a level of clarity and focus our attention on what matters rather than what is right in front of us.

A well-conceived folly is the same as purposeful foolishness.  The examples of government spending billions for foolish ideas, foolish programs are apparent and mindboggling.  The amount of planning required is often well-conceived and purposeful with the intent of creating a burden or obligation that promotes the idea of a bureaucracy as great, so that it lives to sustain itself, at our expense.

This is perhaps the foundation of Socialism and global Tyranny (a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.) The problem with me saying that is that the socialist believer actually believes their perspective.  They think they are reasonable.  What we need is a new way to measure the outcome of differing social-political movements.  The problem with gauging one form of power over another comes down to the perception and ideology of the believer, which means that the only way to quantify one over the other has to be outcome-based, or in other words the end result of the entire economy, the people, their freedoms and free will, mixed with opportunity.   

The reason I mention personal liberty is primarily due to the effects on society that occur when those personal liberties are replaced with societal needs only.  You may want to ask yourself what good are freedoms if they are not available to you personally?  Also, the overall precepts of freedom mandate that if freedom is the goal then everyone must be equally available to those freedoms or by logical sequence the freedoms not given to some will eventually be taken from everyone.

There are serious concerns and problems with allowing everyone to exercise their rights of freedom, especially within those who only want to use those liberties to enhance their power over another.  Can you say political exceptionalism?

The folly of our current state of politics is in the power imbalance between those that govern and those who do not.  I am not suggesting that we convert to a purely democratic electorate, that would be a disaster.  Our Founding Fathers understood the need for representation and hoped that the Republic would continue to flourish through the process of elections based not on popularity but principle and ability.  We are a representative democracy, that ensures that the ebbs and flows of popularity are measured and tempered by a less volatile electorate.

This folly continues in the rampant abuses of those in power with a stark difference between those in politics and those who are not.  The politicians learned from Bill Clinton to hold their line, never admit or never give in, even if the accusations are true.  Morality, honor, integrity?  Who cares, as long as you can retain your position of power.  Judge Moore has decided to follow that lead.  He may be guiltless but in the past, those with morals would have decided to leave the party rather than tarnish it with the innuendo of a scandal.  Therein lies the difference between those with morals and integrity and those without.  I am not suggesting that Judge Moore is immoral only he knows that.

The well-conceived folly is the support for those behaviors and the silent acquiescence that allow those activities to continue and in many cases, expand.  “There is nothing so great as the well-conceived folly” but only when it is surrounded by those who profit or benefit from it, and there are many who turn a blind eye for their piece of the pie.

I feel for the old man who sat next to me years ago.  He had a vision of a despicable time.  He had the courage to speak out, but no one would listen, no one understood.  We are starting to understand now.  Let’s hope it’s not too late…

The blessing of Gratitude

For many of my readers, the Thanksgiving Holiday means nothing more than overstuffed bellies from overcooked turkey and a day off from work to fight against and compete with ravenous crowds looking for a deal at Wal-Mart, or it's simply a day away from the daily drudgery that is our lives.

For those around the world, Thanksgiving holidays are generally a celebration of harvest, of the bounteous fairs from mother earth.  A few are religious in nature but all have succumbed to the ravages of modern cultural relativism and the United States is no different, having mostly lost the initial meaning of why we celebrate and why we devote a single day to giving thanks.

There must be things that each of us is grateful, small things perhaps, a little smile from a child or an adoring touch by a loved one.  This holiday regardless of where you’re from should be more than epicurean gluttony and sporting events; more than waiting in long lines for bargain shoppers.  The ability to give thanks is being lost during the very time we should be devoting our thoughts and actions toward magnanimous endeavors and introspective gratitude

Like so many others I am having some difficulty in defining gratitude.  Complaining is so much easier and garners the sympathy, if only for a short time, of others while creating a bubble of indifference between your personal problems and the not so obvious opportunities that surround us all.  Like the air we breathe, we are inundated with beauty and bounty and obvious greatness all around us.  Blindness and stubbornness cause an impaired inadequacy to see what is right in front of our eyes.  All we have to do is open our eyes and we shall see.

“When upon life’s billows you are tempest-tossed,
when you are discouraged, thinking all is lost.
Count your many blessing; count them one by one
and it will surprise what the Lord has done….”

This is a challenge in our day.  We are inundated with negativity, passiveness and an overall deleterious demeanor, making the good and beautiful hard to see.  One by one, one at a time is all it takes to change that negativity to opportunity and gratitude, a thanksgiving for what we have.  Difficult as it is the rewards are endless.

Wherever you may be, whatever your countries customs the cultural attitudes that created the Thanksgiving festivals can be recreated.  If not nationally, individually, the benefits of giving thanks can be accomplished one person at a time.  Open our hearts and our minds to the possibilities of gratitude, start with one, list it as a blessing and others will follow, filling your life with the reality of the gifts of life so abundant that you will not be able to count them a

Judging Moore or less

Judge Roy Moore, the embattled Senate Candidate may be guilty, and he may not be.  His behaviors when he was younger were at best marginal.  No one, in a stable and right state of mind trolls for teenage girls at the age of 31.  Despite the laws of Alabama that allowed for consent at the age of 16 the decisions that Judge Moore made during those years brings his entire life into question.

What Roy Moore is being accused of, within the law, is not the question.  There is a morality, a societal expectation that has been crossed and Judge more has yet to explain his actions in a way that helps others to understand his reasoning, but the larger issue is when do we, all of us, forgive or start to forgive the actions of another?  I am not talking about the Weinstein’s of the world, for their actions fall into the category of unforgivable to such an extent that trusting them in almost every regard is beyond our ability, but forgiveness perhaps is not.   It is also apparent that we, the public, care very little about the rule of law when those who rule portion out to some and excoriate others not based on law but on whim and self-pleasure. 

There is a larger issue here, an issue that has transformed the face of this nation so profoundly that the very threads that hold us together are being systematically unraveled.  Thread by thread the standards that were once understood have become tattered to the point of shredding the tapestry that is America.

Determining the truth, about anything, has become a marginalized exercise of opinion, feelings and a situational, shifting paradigm.  Those that benefit from these variances of fact are those who do not want to be judged by what they do, what they’ve done or what they plan on doing in the future.  But they do want a continuation of the dismantling of what our Founders created so they can continue to act immorally and illegally; when there are no laws then no laws can be broken, that seems to be their justification and purpose.

I have no idea what motivated Judge Moore to date young girls, even if he did ask the parent’s permission, or what motivated the parents to agree.  I also wonder about the ideals of those who want to destroy him without the benefit of what he has accomplished in his life after those early years.  Is what we negatively do in life a permanent spot on our total existence, or is there a way toward forgiveness?  Are we so jaded and biased politically that regardless of what good a person has done, the negatives will always outweigh those good acts, leaving that person, or any of us stripped naked before the judgment bar of society with only our bad deeds emblazoned before us? 

It is this current political trend, a practice perfected by the Liberals to destroy the character of all who profess, act or live by moral standards.  There is a simplicity to standing on the sidelines screaming obscenities and accusing or condemning the actions of another, based on their standards, while others absolve themselves from any self-incrimination from their own malevolent actions.  Life should not be that simple.  It takes an effort to do good, it takes purpose to act responsibly and it takes a deep seeded desire to overcome the natural tendencies of Man.

The people of Alabama will decide if they want Judge Moore to represent them in the Senate.  The current polls tell us that he has a chance to overcome the seemingly negative smears on his character.  He may yet prevail but again the question of his innocence and culpability and the timing of these issues need to be considered.  

We have morphed into achieving our gains at any cost.  The Democrats are masters at achieving their goals by any means.  The Republicans are learning these tactics as well, creating an imbalance between the lives of their constituencies and their own selfish desire to remain in power.   The problem, however, is the trickle-down effects that eventually find their way into the minds and hearts of the general public.

We have already seen the effects of those from Hollywood as they accused their perpetrators of gross sexual misconduct.  These are powerful people who found it easy to exploit the often-misguided desires of others who wished for fame and fortune for their own base desires, with many others remaining quiet as they continued their lustful pursuits.

None of us are perfect and none of us should judge to such a degree that perfection is required.  But we should not be silent, we should not blindly move through life, ignorant of the dealings of others, pursuing our own goals despite the damage our inaction causes others.

We have lost our goodwill towards others who disagree with us because we have lost our will to do good.  Selfishly we align ourselves with others who agree with our short-sighted motivations and only do so as long as they agree.  This isn’t about compromise, this is about confrontation and victory and not just a victory but a total annihilation of opposing ideas, thoughts and any rules or laws that curtail their illicit and immoral actions and desires.

This is truly about Good vs Evil, not Democrat vs Republican.  We see similarities in both parties and an inexorable shift by both parties toward the outskirts of human decency.  What we need to do is fight back by creating in ourselves a strong desire to do good, to be honest, and kind and strong against the pervasiveness and rampant immorality. 

We need to think like warriors who are faced with overwhelming odds of a greater force, but with the knowledge and understanding that if we remain true we will be victorious.  We do not fight alone, and this battle will not be lost but we must stand and fight or else we have no chance to save our souls or our families.

Diversity

Diversity is a mix of things, a variety, a mélange, it is a difference from the norm.  Diversity has become the variance that others are using to push their agenda, making the word diversity an encapsulation for politics, all we do, the jobs we seek, the way we talk and the opportunities before us.

Diversity sounds like a perfect precept for all to follow; who can disagree with wanting to live in a diverse and open culture?  Who wants to be accused of being the same as someone else or in agreement with the past, and who in their right mind would want to be accused of a singularity of thought or a desire to live in a certain way with others that feel the same? 

Diversity may sound like a utopian Shangri-La, that when achieved nothing is wrong, all opinions are accepted and no one’s actions are questioned or judged.  While being diverse in some situations is vitally important the same is true for homogeneity and equality.  Making a distinction between future events and actions based on one word is always a mistake and always leads to greater confusion and disagreement.  Using the word Diversity as a rallying cry against the sameness that has existed for millennia will cause serious repercussions from those who want to stay the same and for the sameness that will come from the common actions of those toward unseating our present system. 

This is less about the word diversity and more about those who want to control through intimidation and continue to demand changes to a system that works and has worked for over 200 years.  This country is not strong because of its diversity, it is diverse because of its strength and associated skills that all derive from the commonality of what we are and what we have achieved together by accepting and living within the confines of those endowed freedoms and rights.

The differences we have with others in this nation are also not the issue.  Those differences have always been here, we have always had some who disagree and want to overhaul the system, to replace it with something else.  Some move toward greater government control, some to a more anachronistic model but overall most like what we have and eventually push the others aside toward that model of sameness and consistency.

Wanting diversity as the end goal and the foundational principle of a society is like wanting a football team where all the players can choose what they want to do for each play.  All the talent combined on that team without the guidance of a unified voice would be ineffective, similar to the desires of those who proclaim that Anarchy would be needed in order to gain more organization. 

Having a diverse financial portfolio is probably a good thing but having diversity in who manages that portfolio is probably not.  We may like the diversity of our neighborhood or at our schools but without the commonality of the system that organizes the lessons, the police who watch the streets and the many other, daily functions that create a system of society, society could not function.  Diversity without order is chaos, which opens the discussion of why some are pushing diversity as a singular need within our society.

In the 1960’s our country faced a crisis like what we are seeing now.  Racial tensions were high, the Viet Nam War was raging, and the lack of leadership helped to propel this country away from the norms by those demanding more of this or less of that.  The entire country was embroiled by others moving in no direction accept away from where they thought they were.  This country’s very identity was in question.  Diversity was not the word of choice at that time.  Words like love and Peace were bandied about in response to the view of those who felt like there was not enough love or not enough peace.

The problem of the past and as it is now is in how the words are used and through the inadequate educational process that relies on standards and accepted practices to advance a scenario where standards and acceptance are not understood or used.  Diversity is only a word, but its current meaning encompasses an irrational acceptance of anything different and a refusal to accept the diversified opinions of those outside of a finite list of self-imposed standards, a term that is contradictory. 

The hypocritical stance of those who demand diversity and then impose penalties or establish laws is beyond comprehension.  These tactics are similar in almost every way to the Terror groups who proclaim peace but bomb their neighbors for believing differently. They are nothing more than a force of action to gain control through the process of terror and intimidation, followed by violence. 

This is not diversity, this is a singular ideological movement to limit the opinions of those they do not want to hear.  This is a group at war with the goal of total control and annihilation of all those who disagree with their singular message of hate, clouded by the flowery language of liberalism and more specifically the divisive words of inclusion by means of exclusion or in other words, diversity if you agree with them.

I personally like the idea of controlling everyone who is not, just like me. It’s so much easier to govern that way, don’t you think?

Love and Hate

Driving through the waning fall colors of Northeastern Ohio with its tranquil brilliance I am prompted toward an emotional conclusion that true love is an essential component of happiness and joy.   Not easily defined or quantified, nor are those deductions the same as the others who drive the same streets, move in the same direction or even share a similar outlook on life.  I have been to this part of the country many times and each time, I am in awe over the grandeur that is this State, regardless of the weather.

Why do we Love, or why do we Hate?  I love Ohio, but do I want to live here.  How can you love something but not want it all the time?  The answer to that question depends on a variety of criteria that also seem to fall within the terms that assist us in determining whether we love or hate or feel something between those two diametrically opposed emotions.

Love is often a misunderstood feeling, being combined with pleasure and sex without the requirement of devotion and joy.  True love does not happen overnight, trust cannot be bought or sold it requires a measure of time and circumstance in order to flourish.  Love without trust and commitment on both sides of the equation is only half fulfilled and does not meet the requirements needed to sustain or satisfy love. 

Can we fall in love or fall out of love without actively working toward either result?  Love takes effort.  The amount of effort is dependent on the motivations of the individual and the motivations of the other party involved.  Too often we use the word love to describe the unhealthy motivations in order to selfishly profit from that relationship. 

True Love must include an unselfish desire to help, bolster, support and improve another.  There are no time constraints, no conditions, no scenarios that can interfere.  If we truly love something we sacrifice for that love by engaging positively in all respects for that individual.  The problems generally arise when the other party does not reciprocate in like manner, but our positive affirmations are not in vain and regardless of what the other party does, or feels our love grows and our capacity for love grows with it.

Like the winters of Ohio; they can be severe, unforgiving and miserable.  Love also is not always the tale of dreams and happy endings.  For in the reality that is our life we must acknowledge the possibility and promise of more to come.  Love does not die when we die, nor do we fail to exist.  But love is the power of remembrance and a connection to the faith that is our existence before, during and after this life.

Hate is opposite to Love in every way.  There is no support, no desire to see improvement, nothing but a selfish desire to use another for one’s personal pleasure.  The incremental step leading to love or hate will ultimately fill our lives. How we decide which to choose is often the difference between how we love or how we hate, how we progress or how we fail as human beings. 

In short, if we love someone we act on their behalf and for the purpose of expanding that love.  Hate is what occurs as a result of not loving. 

When I first met my wife, 37 years ago I thought I was in love and to a degree, I was, based on my understanding of what I believed love was.  37 years later I am more in love with my wife than I could have ever imagined possible when I was young.  Life has not always been easy, but we were both committed to the process of love and each other.  Like a muscle love grows, expands and changes as we change with it.

Hate also grows, expands and changes in severity as it is fostered and fed.  Those who promote hate do so from a selfish core, spreading their own hate to the heart of others to further feed their own needs toward control, inflicting pain, suffering, and misery. 

When we look at our politicians, our leaders and those who govern our affairs, who among them act out of love?  Even from an incremental manner, who have forsaken their selfish, hateful desires to serve those they represent? 

The problem with answering that question is in being able to discern our own motivations.  Do we act like our politicians, do we strive for loving relationships or are we more prone to selfishness and a hateful attitude of mine before theirs, or me over her, us over them?  It is obviously a trend to move in egotistical circles, demanding rather than sharing, shouting instead of listening or hating instead of loving.

The solution to these problems are not found in strategies, or manipulations or control, the solution has to be within the heart and the mind deciding to accept love as the motivator of all we do.  This does not mean that we become victims, powerless or we subject ourselves to the will of others.  Meekness is not weakness, it is not submissiveness to the hate of others.  Meekness is a strength, it is a resolve based on the power of love to do what is right so that others see the expansion of choices for all.

Politics has become the breeding ground for selfish motivations with politicians not serving those who elected them, but they serve themselves and get rich in the process.  They pass laws for us but are not subject to those same laws.  The entire system of checks and balances have been pulled off the scales and are no longer a reliable template for us or the world to rely on.

If the leaders fail to lead, we must lead for them but for that to happen we need to get our houses in order.  Our lives must be transformed from selfishness and greed to love and opportunity.  Our every choice can be expanded when we chose correctly.  Like the love I have for my wife and children, and sometimes for the beautiful state of Ohio, we all need to choose to love one another and that starts by understanding the difference between love and hate.

Making the right choice.

When change is upon us, as it is throughout the world, how does one sift through the rhetoric of both sides and glean what little truth remains?  There is extreme hyperbole on all sides and I think the same is true of every community in America.  Consensus is not the answer; remember that most people are wrong about most things most of the time.  Choosing a path that is an agreement of direction based on a compromise from those who all want to move in a different direction only serves to ensure that no one is moving in the direction they wanted and in fact relegates the masses into a role of subservience rather than the goal of living by the truth, even if you don’t know the whole truth.  That is why we don’t live in a Democracy, ours is a Republic.

Why would we consider our politicians and leaders any less susceptible to that reality than the rest of humanity when they fall prey to evils of Democracy and gauge their actions as a leader based on the focus of a group or the winds of change?  In fact, I would postulate that those who profess to lead us are more prone to the hyperbole they create, believing the magnification of their own contrived data and the ever-present yes-men that surround them.  They may even believe they are offering us options for a better life but their opinion of what choices we should have are based on their faulty perspective, a perspective that is constantly clouded by their myopic judgment and clouded view of themselves and their self-importance.

This is not a purely American phenomenon, every country, every nation and kingdom has its own self-perpetuating, in-doctrinal mechanism designed to forestall the rise of truth over promise Hyper -Governmental Mitosis that is continually separating facts and truths and expanding like a cancerous growth.  As we listen to the promises given by those who profess to lead us, our lives should be perfect.  There would be no hunger, no war, no poverty and no reason to worry about anything, our lives would be idyllic and flawless, remind you of anyone?

Combating ignorance must be an individual effort designed in part to overcome the witlessness of those who promise perfect skies forevermore.  Our need to stand united for the truth is perhaps more important now than ever before. The escalation and division of what is considered right and wrong have never been wider or more intense and our ability to choose has never been so narrow.

This is not about being liberal or conservative, though I wish it was that simple, it’s about acting and doing what is best. There are truths to live by that need to be agreed upon and followed.  Our leaders should be better than us, not examples of the excuses we all live by or the reflections of what we see every day.  Our responsibility is to foster those who are capable, better than us and follow those precepts that our Founding Fathers established in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, not their own personal aggrandizement or self-worth.  We want leaders who lead and not just make laws that separate them from us.  We want leaders who live better than us, giving us examples to follow so that our lives can become better.

 It’s not about choosing the right; it’s about the right to choose and then choosing the right.  When we take that fundamental right and portion it out to only those we think should have those rights, everyone rights are ultimately diminished as what is happening with free speech.

There are so many variations of what is right, who is right, that the decision regarding what is right falls into the category of let’s agree to disagree.  But in the realm of the right to choose the value of choosing for choice only grows more influential as others partake.  With each choice, the inalienable right to choose continues and grow allowing others the same privilege.

 Populations are controlled primarily through fear and the limited choices forced upon them.  Through our Republic, we have the right to choose those who will represent us as we believe we should be represented.  The problem is that those who currently hold those positions are less capable than those they represent.

The litmus test for voting is not listening to the promises made but to delve into the background of the individual and see what they’ve done to promote those freedoms to choose.  A note to the pro-choice crowd:  choices are essential, but the timing of each choice is critical.  We need to all make choices that expand our ability to choose not to limit them.  A good example is a man standing on a bridge wanting to die.  As long as he stands and contemplates his position he always has a choice, once he jumps the choice is gone, never to be regained.  

Choices are very much like that man.  With each choice we make we either expand our choices or limit them.  Gravity, in this case, would be the consequence of his actions.  No matter how much he wishes to change his choice the instant he decided and acted upon that decision the consequences take over, as it is with all of our choices.  Most are not so dramatic or clear but nature, God, Kismet, whatever you want to call it has placed an irrevocable effect on each and every choice we make.

Whether at an election for political leaders or a simple choice of right or left the choices we make have consequences.  Making the right choices is a mind-boggling exercise but If we try to choose choices that give us more freedom to choose than our choices will be the right ones.  Choose correctly now so that your choices and the choices for others will remain intact.  

Fatty's failure

We should all be screaming in fear as we are forced to endure the daily media onslaught of fake news, just like Fatty Arbuckle had to do in the 1920s.

Rosco “Fatty” Arbuckle was born in 1887 in Kansas and yes he was fat.  His early life was filled with violence from an unloving father who believed that because of his girth the baby could not be his.  Both of his parents were slim and Rosco’s birth weight was a whopping 13lb.  His father named the baby after a notorious philandering politician named Rosco Conkling of New York. There is no proof of his mother’s infidelity but because of her husband’s mistrust and the complications from the birth, she died 12 years later.

The name “Fatty” was given to him in elementary school and the producers liked the moniker so it stuck, but Rosco never liked it and often stated, “I have a name you know.”  

Rosco Conkling Arbuckle was described by his friends as a shy and quiet young man who was polite and regarded in Hollywood as the “most chase man”, that’s saying a lot when you consider Hollywood in the 1920’s. 

The Roaring 20’s was a time much like our time today.  The media was mesmerized by the events of the day and used any means to popularize or destroy.  The Radio was the primary source for news and the expansion of news broadcasts exploded and so did the sensationalism of the media in general.  

The profits available were no longer related to a simple news story and the related advertising, the story was the profit line.  For the first time, Radio created a sensationalistic and unrestrained source to say whatever you wanted about whoever you wanted and those forces coalesced on Rosco “fatty” Conkling Arbuckle. 

The truth of the events that inspired the three trials of Rosco Arbuckle were all well-known and provable.  They were so obvious that his defense team failed to provide the basics of the case and the first trial was hung in favor of acquittal.  The second trial was even worse with his team thinking that the facts would speak for themselves and the jury hung again but this time for a conviction of manslaughter.  The third trial was a slam dunk for Arbuckle and he was released from custody but he was in debt and disgraced, not from the trials but from the Radio and the printed media that lambasted this most popular comedic actor of the 1920’s.

We may think we have it bad today with all the fake news and hyperbolation (I know, another made up word) of virtually every spoken word and action of anyone who is not within the fair graces of those who write, report or influence the media.  There is, it seems, a pattern that has been going on for quite some time with the media promulgating and disseminating “news” that is not true, often blatantly untrue, like with Rosco Arbuckle. 

I haven’t delved into the political leanings of the media of the past but I suspect that the politics today was like the politics of the past, with the philosophy of profit being the primary motivation and a subcategory of ideology developing over time as seen in our media today.  The enormous profits amassed by the Harold Examiner and other papers owned primarily by Hurst were enormous,

 “The Hearst papers had a field day with the story—the publisher would later say the Fatty Arbuckle scandal sold more papers than the sinking of the Lusitania.” www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-skinny-on-the-fatty-arbuckle-trial-131228859/#w9hq8hflJ2eSBvVj.99

Truth is not the issue, I don’t believe it ever really has been, it’s about how to sell the story and the profits that can be made from selling it the right way.  The media of today is no different than the media of the 1920’s, profit is the key and whatever has to be done to increase that bottom line, will and has been done.

Rosco Arbuckle was 100% guiltless but as a result of the media sensationalizing and promoting the innuendo of hearsay, his career was over.  Arbuckle was the highest paid actor in 1921 and had signed an extension to his contract worth millions more, but overnight he was in jail, on felony row, on charges of manslaughter for a woman, a model, actress, prostitute, he had found collapsed in his bathroom who the medical team discovered was hemorrhaging from a chronic bladder condition, not in any way related to any contact with Arbuckle. There is more to this story that explains his innocents completely from a number of sources.

For years we have assumed that the press was the 4^th branch of the government, a stalwart appendage to help balance the other three branches.  The news was supposed to keep the politicians and bureaucrats honest but in like manner and throughout the history of the media they have sold us all a bill of goods.  They have never been honest, they have never acted responsibly (some do, but not many) and they continue to corrupt every issue, turning the news into a media frenzy that serves their profit-seeking and putting their maniacal ideology at odds with the obvious truths that are in evidence and indisputable.

The solution is a difficult one indeed.  Like many are doing in response to the NFL antics, they are deciding not to view.  We as well should decide what it’s worth to regain our morality, our foundational principles and our sanity, we need to unplug, disconnect and turn off the media, stay away from the lies and rebuild our lives without the smog-filled bubble that clouds our judgment, alters our perceptions and destroys our common sense. 

The media and its associated devices demand a tribute to their evil incarceration into their world and reality.  It is time for us to escape, stop paying them for protection, we can protect ourselves. 

Fix the constitution by following it

20 Unheeded Warnings in Washington’s Farewell Address

President George Washington

1.        Be vigilant, people will seek to use the government for selfish ends.
2.       Avoid overgrown military establishments; they are hostile to liberty.
3.       Prevent all obstructions to the execution of the laws.
4.       Control bureaucracies; make sure they all work together.
5.       Avoid political parties; they will cause divisive factions and unscrupulous men will use them to undermine the government.
6.       Give allegiance to the Constitution; improve it as necessary.
7.       Do not alter the Constitution lightly, or based on hypothesis; apply the experience applied when it was created.
8.       Be suspicious of administrators; they may serve themselves rather than the people.
9.       Watch for consolidation of power in any department of government.
10.       Preserve existing checks and balances and add more where power needs to be checked.        
11.        Religion and morality are essential to create the virtue necessary to preserve the ion.
12.       Promote widespread education; democracy requires literate citizens that understand the system of governance and take responsibility for themselves.
13.       Avoid debt, and immediately discharge any debt created by war.
14.       Taxes are unpleasant; government spending should be candidly conducted.
15.       Cultivate peace and justice toward all nations.
16.       Avoid alliances and maintain neutrality among nations.
17.       Avoid dependency; a weak state that allies with a stronger state will become its servant.
18.       Real patriots will resist intrigues, while dupes will surrender to interests.
19.       In trade, give no nation a favored nation status.
20.       Be guided by principles, not interests.

The truly inspired mind of George Washington warns us to be careful of many of the issues we currently face as a direct result to not heeding his warnings.  If we want to make this country Great Again, we need to institute and revitalize these foundational principles.

Let Boys Be Boys

One of the worst experiences of my life, at that time, was showing up for a camping trip with my scout troop and realizing that it was a cycling trip and I didn’t bring my bike.  The adult leaders scrambled and found me a bike and off we went.  It started out fine but soon devolved into a nightmare, at least it was for me.

After driving for over an hour to our destination we unloaded the bikes, strapped on our gear and started to ride.  The scenery was breathtaking, the weather was cool and brisk but my seat was loose and I kept sliding forward as the seat swiveled.  Just when I thought I had it under control the bike would hit some stick on the road and my seat would jump and jab at me in that one particular area of the male, human anatomy, making me flinch and squeal in discomfort.

Our first leg of the trip was only ten miles but after five my entire neither region was numb and hurting at the same time.  When we finally stopped I almost fell off my bike because I couldn’t feel my legs or anything else that was starting to matter in my life. 

The problem was I was ashamed of not having my own bike and not wanting to tell the adults that the bike they gave me was causing me embarrassing discomfort.  I tried to get some help through other means, like trying to tighten the seat bolt with my fingers, I know that was lame, but I was only 14 or 15 years old, I was the definition of lame.

My butt (a euphemism of course) was really sore, but I set up my tent and immediately went to bed.  The next morning, it felt worse and I really thought I was going to lose what the good God had given all males but when I looked at my borrowed bike, the seat was stable, someone had fixed it.  All I had to do was get back on and continue to ride.  Not an easy thing to do, I assure you, but with each mile, we road the feeling and the relief returned.  I still think of that anonymous leader who fixed that bike and sustained my manhood, as I understood it at the time and have realized he acted like a man when the boy didn't know how.

The problem today is that too many misunderstand the true nature of what it is to be a man as opposed to a male.   This disconnect often starts at a very young age with mixed messages and improper guidance by well-meaning but unaware teachers, leaders and dare I say it, with most women who try and do their best but do not have the foundational skills to fully understand the male psyche. 

This is not an attempt to place blame but the realities of our society and the actions of many males give rise to the question of why?  “Boys are more likely to be suspended, retained in grade or placed in special education. They are less likely to graduate from high school or enroll in and graduate from college than girls are” www.usnews.com/opinion/knowledge-bank/2015/04/02/education-gender-gaps-how-big-are-they-and-can-they-be-fixed, 

I have a theory and it has to do with the gentrification of gender or in other words, the emasculation of society.  Gentrification is the process of improving something to conform to the general tastes of those who are forcing the change.  Schools, for example, have limited the recess time with the hope of making all students conform to a higher standard of academia, great for girls, not so great for boys. 

Another example is found in a school’s desire to curb negative behaviors by imposing “zero tolerance” rules.  Boys often find these rules impossible to follow. You may have heard of the young boy who fashioned a gun by chewing the corners of his pop tart, he was suspended for being a boy and for liking his pop tart.

We have concluded that boys and girls should be treated the same, with some believing that they should learn the same way and be interested in the same things.  Boys like to do things that girls don’t. In our understanding of how to teach and raise our children, we have decided that being a boy is no longer relevant.  Our schools demand more feelings, more introspection and they demand that the boys sit quietly and learn.  The girls can do it, why not the boys.

We have discarded the family unit and replaced it with a homogenderized (made up word) familial facsimile where true gender is meaningless and the roles of a male have been replaced with unclassified expectation and variable standards that make it impossible for a boy to develop those foundational skills that transform a boy into a man. 

The Boy Scouts have recently abandoned the “boy” for the grandeur of political acceptance.  The NFL is filled with fatherless boys who make millions but have never learned to be men and our schools continue to move toward the feminization of learning, expecting everyone to learn the same, despite the rhetoric of multi-modal learning, ignoring the specific needs of teaching the boy how to learn and grow not just academically but within the very important aspects of learning how to grow into a man. 

Girls seem to grow this way more naturally than boys but they are also affected by this new paradigm of learning.  Both men and woman have suffered severe identity disassociation from the lack of gender specificity.  We need to move our society back toward those moral absolutes and allow both girls and boys to learn in the environment best suited for their needs.

I am grateful for my experiences as a scout, getting dirty, farting in my tent and laughing at each other for the dumbest things.  I liked starting fires and learning how to control those urges.  I enjoyed fishing and hunting and shooting, building things with my hands, seeing who amongst us was the strongest and fastest, who was the tallest.  I looked forward to summers where I often got so bored we did things we shouldn’t have and I liked throwing rocks.  I was a boy who learned to be a man, I am still learning but I feel sorry for those who will never learn because of some feminist ideal of what a boy is supposed to learn or feel or think, you’ll never get a man that way…But that seems to be what they want.

Put it off

There is a huge difference in appearance between my front lawn and my back lawn.  I spend much more time in my backyard than I do in my front yard but spend more time cutting my front lawn and trimming the edges, or weeding, spraying for weeds than I ever do with my back lawn, if you can even call what’s in my backyard a lawn.

It seems counterintuitive and in some respects illogical to worry so much about the looks of an area that I don’t seem to enjoy as much.  I do like the way my front yard looks.  I like the expansive lawn area, (the word expansive is a relative term used in comparison to other lawns in the area and does not denote any attempt to outdo the neighbors or to suggest that my lawn is better than your lawn, it’s actually filled with weeds, but their all the same shade of green, so it looks good), I like the way it complements the house. 

But I spend hours in the backyard, sitting on the patio, under the patio cover, gazing across the open field, just enjoying what I have and not being that concerned that the weed infested area that is my backyard is not up to par with my front yard.  There is so much that I could do to make it better, make it more pleasing to the eye but since it’s not a priority, very little gets done toward that end.

I’ve looked at others backyards and it seems to be an acceptable pattern for many of us to be more concerned about what others see rather than what we choose to live with.  As long as my front yard is in shape I really don’t have to care about the junk pile in the back.  The problem arises when there is nothing of value in the front or the back. 

Also like many of you, I get pangs of guilt, most easily set aside, regarding what I should be doing to improve my entire life but the rationalizations and excuses are always more accessible than the motivation needed to act; my backyard stays the same.  And as a true measure of my inability to focus my attentions where they need to be, I am in my scruffy looking backyard, sitting under my dirty patio cover, writing this blog about not wanting to do what I know I should.  Talk about a rationalization. 

But it is a nice day, perfect Fall weather in Southern California, I did cut the weeds this morning, so I am not a total ne’er-do-well.  I can get to it tomorrow, maybe…The question that needs to be asked is, how many tomorrows do we have left?  Does it really matter, especially in the grand scheme of things? 

I think it does matter.  it seems to matter to our politicians and actors and it matters to all those who have nice front lawns.  But since no one can really see my backyard, I can let it slide, living in a façade, as many of us do, spending our time to impress people we don’t even know so that we can hide away in the weeds, blogging and telling everyone else what to do.  I just realized I have a perfect life, that is until my wife gets home and notices that I haven’t done a damn thing all day, I guess I better sweep away some of the cobwebs, or pick up last weeks trash that escaped from the bin… but not now, maybe in an hour or so…

Loss of life

To the individual who lost a loved one during the horrific shooting in Las Vegas the only perspective that matters is how to they feel and how are they are going to cope with this loss and the unanswerable questions of why?   

Their feelings have nothing to do with politics or even the motivations of this now dead, severely troubled individual; this is a deeply personal matter of grief, born of tragedy and culminated in the final loss of a loved one.  To humans this is the ultimate source of grief, the supreme sacrifice of self to have to go on living without the connections and physical presence of the other. 

This is a time for selfishness and introspection, with a good measure of self-pity and deep sorrow.  Most, if asked, have little understanding of what happens after death with only a slim hope of what might be waiting for those who have passed away.  This sorrow, this grief and this selfishness is a measure of that lack of understanding and our deep hope that we will not be left alone, nor those who are gone will not be forgotten.

 Already the press reports are insinuating toward one type of ideology or another without much sincere emphasis on the mental instability of the individual.  We so want our side to be vindicated that we overlook the feelings of those affected. Theirs is a real loss, a tangible separation, an intense sense of loneliness and sadness.  In contrast ours is mostly the desire not to be blamed. 

This issues advertised from the media will include, as it always seems to do, Gun Control, Liberalism vs Conservatism, the Right or the Left, Free Speech and the need for more intensive laws to stem this tide of violence as blamed on either side of the political spectrum.  But what of those who suffer now, what of those that fail to see a way forward or those that are consumed by guilt or sorrow, what of them? 

The future will progress, one way or another, but for now, for the living, surviving individuals, not the 58 or so that have perished, but the one, pick one, he or she that is left behind, they need our help now. 

Do not let the Press tell you what to believe, I think they have proven their unworthiness enough to know that their motivations are not ours.  Choose one to help, help in any way you can.  The Media will not help, they never really help, they only profit from these tragic circumstances.  It is these, the survivors that need our help, they all need our help, choose one who you will help and forsake the political efforts to sway this tragedy one way or another for ratings or profits or political gain or anything other than the needs of those who are directly affected.

Send a flower, a card, a note of sympathy.  Send a dollar, cut their lawn, or wash their car, do something, anything is better than watching the Media bend the reality of this tragedy into something that it is not.  When we Serve those in need we gain our own perspective and insight into the lives of those who needed our help, and in so doing we are made better, stronger and able to withstand the inevitable tragedies of life as they are forced to do now.

Our Country, this Country is at its best when we are faced with challenges.  We put aside our religious differences, our political ideologies and our personal feelings and simply, without question move to help.  We decide. We move. We act. We serve those in need and those in need are our neighbors, our relatives, our friends, but even if you don’t have any association they are your fellow countrymen and brothers and sisters under God. 

Down on Taxes, Up on Revenues

Raise the Taxes, lower the taxes.  Every few years we are faced with the same cries from our leaders, they either want to raise our tax burdens or raise the spending on increased revenues because of lower taxes.  Like some Evil YOYO ebbing and flowing up and down, spinning it’s influence over the rest of us as a few at the top wield their control, laughing and complaining as needed to sustain their power over our lives.

The evidence of the benefits of lowering the countries taxes is beyond debate, kind of like the global warming, cooling, climate change, fixed science “debate”, except this science has real, duplicatable and verifiable evidence to support that science.  Since 1918 the tax rates have risen and dropped significantly and in each instance the results have been the same.  When you lower the tax burden the revenues increase for everyone, including the Federal Government.  http://www.heritage.org/taxes/report/the-historical-lessons-lower-tax-rates

It sounds counter-intuitive but the economic principles are sound, as the following graph illustrates:

 

President Kennedy said “that lowering taxes was the surest path to full employment and lower deficits.”  His efforts were politically motivated due to tensions with the business community and within his own party and not entirely altruistic but he was able to secure the tax breaks and the economic windfall was staggering. 

Lowering taxes works to stimulate the economy, raising taxes has the opposite effect.  The science behind these duplicatable results are so profound and clear the question is raised, why do we alter the tax burden so often and for reasons that are not supported by the economic science?  The simple reason is politics, the more complex answer is within the politics of power and control, who wants the power and how to they control? 

When the supposed motivation of the Liberal Left is to provide for the needy and downtrodden, the less fortunate and those who need a step up out of poverty, then you would think that improved economic conditions would be their seminal cry but it’s not.  If it were, than a decrease in the overall tax base would have direct beneficial effects on their claimed constituency, bridging the gap between the rich and poor, while providing greater resources for increases in government funded programs.  We all know that the politics of the left has changed and the poor are no longer the motivation for their services but their desire to maintain control is directly tied to higher taxes, that has not changed.

By lowering taxes both parties get what they want, if what they want is to help us be more independent and financially secure; there is serious doubt on that level of motivation.  The problem with this scenario is in not in what our politicians say but what they do and not do.  A great example is the newest round of Health Care debates.  Conservatives in Congress have promised for eight years to REPEAL and REPLACE Obama Care but now are for some unknown reason are unable to deliver, even with a majority in the House and Senate.  Their words mean nothing but their inability to act is beyond question, their motivation is not within the realm of a statesmen but falls squarely within the negative political arena of self-interest and egotism.  Both political parties have fallen prey to the trappings of power, succumbing to those accessories without regard to the needs of those they represent. 

Taxes, health care, race relations, inner city progress, NFL, and a score of other issues that could be improved through the ongoing commerce of words but instead these issues and the plight of our country have been reduced to the divisive rhetoric of self-interest over the substance and importance of the individual.    Taxes, lower taxes, help the individual directly by improving funding through increases in revenues to not only the federal government but to virtually all areas of funding need.  Less taxes means more opportunities for self-determination and greater outlook on life in general. 

The statistics of Tax decreases are unsalable, but the effects of those decreases on the theology of the Left are devastatingly obvious.  From the position of power, high taxes fit the profile similar to those of  both the drug addict and the despicable supplier.  Both are caught within the web of dependency with the addict dependent on the supplier for his daily fix, the supplier for the income and power he has over those who are his customer base. 

Politics, like the drug trade has focused their attention on how to maintain their power and more importantly how to increase that level of power through whatever means possible, even when their own freedoms will be placed at risk.  The drug of power is absolute and too many of our elected leaders and those appointed are addicted absolutely. 

Lowering taxes has always been a temporary remedy.  Taxes can be altered when any party has control, which incidentally is why we have the statistics to prove that lower taxes helps the country and the individual, if spending is kept under control that is.  What we need is a standard, a set pattern of taxation that does not change, is not altered by each party’s whim or desire, maybe a constitutional amendment?

What we need is a consistent process of responsible and reliable representation, um, yah, good luck on that one.  For now, I guess, lower taxes, even in the short term are better than nothing at all…