Archive for the ‘Common Sense’ Category

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

March 26, 2019

short url to this post: https://wp.me/pGfx1-Gl

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

By Dahni
© 2019, all rights reserved

The Mueller Report, no matter what it contains or what is released to the public, should be rejected by all, for it is, “Fruit of the poisonous tree.”•

•source link: Cornell Law

“Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” Legal Doctrine

“The exclusionary rule mandates that evidence obtained from an illegal arrest, unreasonable search, or coercive interrogation must be excluded from trial. Under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, the evidence is also excluded from trial if it was gained through evidence uncovered in an illegal arrest, unreasonable search, or coercive interrogation.”

source: legal-dictionary thefreedictionary.com

Perhaps another legal doctrine may be familiar and similar to you, your Miranda Rights.

“Miranda Rights are named after the landmark US Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona. Ernesto Miranda was arrested for stealing $8.00 from an Arizona bank worker. After two hours of questioning, Miranda confessed not only to the robbery, but also to kidnapping and rape. When he was brought in for questioning, he was never told that he did not have to speak to police, or that he could consult with a lawyer; he simply confessed to the crimes. He was found guilty.”

“Miranda’s conviction was appealed to the United States Supreme Court. The Justices ruled that the statements Miranda made to the police could not be used as evidence against him because, he had not been advised of his Constitutional rights. Since this decision, police are required to recite the Miranda warning to suspects before, any questioning is conducted.”

“The Miranda case did not establish new rights, but rather instituted further protection of Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.”

source: Legalzoom.com

WOW, from a known criminal and for an initial charge of just $8.00 theft, but who also confessed to kidnapping and rape, we have this namesake legal doctrine of Miranda Rights! What happened to him?

“Ernesto Miranda did, indeed, get a new trial based on the Supreme Court ruling, and his original confession was thrown out. However, based on the evidence, Miranda was again convicted of kidnapping and rape, and served 11 years in prison before being paroled in 1972. In 1976 at the age of 34, Miranda was stabbed to death in a barroom brawl. Police arrested a suspect in the killing who, after choosing to exercise his Miranda Right to remain silent, was released without being charged for the crime.”

source: Legalzoom.com

Now don’t you wonder how the prosecution ever knew about “evidence” to look for in this second case? I do. Technically, Miranda should have only been charged and convicted, for the initial crime and charge of $8.00 in theft!

Exceptions (loopholes) to the Miranda Rights? But of course (sarcasm). Each state must follow the four points, but each state writes their own rules, for applying them. One exception is…

“We have no way of giving you a lawyer, but one will be appointed for you, if you wish, if and when you go to court.”

used by:  Some police departments in Indiana, New Jersey, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Alaska

In other words, we are not going to pay for your attorney, you the interrogated or charged are. We will appoint one (our choice as to which one), IF you wish and IF you go to court. This exception gets the taxpayer off the hook and it’s good for lawyers that are are all generally paid, win or lose. And it could be good for the prosecution too.

Unfortunately, for certain people, these two legal doctrines (Miranda Rights and Fruit of the Poisonous Tree), though designed to protect individual rights, have exceptions (loopholes). Law, which is supposed to protect the law-abiding and punish the lawless, is so constructed that often the lines between guilt and innocence are blurred. Exceptions (interpretation of law), are often just a tool of government, to circumvent constitutional rights or to shield and/or justify its own actions. In other words, if it is in the government’s best interest with exceptions, it can interpret the law and seize constitutional rights, as if it is their property or not prosecute at all, if it is one of their own or not in their interest. Does a counterintelligence, an FBI investigation or did Mueller’s investigation, support or seize the individual’s rights? There can be no silence or opposing counsel to help those being questioned, by the government and this should be illegal! Neither is it legal to require sworn testimony of some, but not of others. These exceptions to the law, makes law, useless in our Republic!

The special counsel (Mueller Investigation), was begun without legal precedent. It only had the appearance of being legal. It never met the legal requirements, for a special counsel to operate. It only had the appearance of a legal operation. The named individuals on the counsel were openly and blatantly chosen, despite bias, partisan politics and many of its lawyers conflicted or known to have corrupt practices of their own. There is simply no way this counsel could muster public trust and is but “fruit from the poisonous tree.” It was hidden from the public, it was empowered to serve. The scope of its power, its tactics, its randomly veering off its mandate (at its own discretion), its refusal to release certain information and it leaked information as it suited them while ruining lives. And it prevented even Congress charged with judicial oversight and other investigators from interviewing potential witnesses and documents non-redacted, keeping it to themselves and secret, all in the name of national security or not compromising an on-going investigation. Charged to look into one thing, they looked into many other things. This is just, “fruit from the poisonous tree.”

Some of the “fruit of the Poisonous Tree”

However, after nearly two years, countless hours of investigating companies, countries, private individuals and public officials; after the near constant media and public distraction, all who waited in mistrust and fear or waiting with bated breath, for the release of what many already believed was true, before it even began, it has been released to the Attorney General (AG). After untold millions of dollars paid for by the United States Taxpayer, The Confidential Mueller was ended.

By law, it has been delivered to the deputy attorney general, who authorized the investigation. The investigation was to determine whether or not, the Russian government, working with certain US citizens colluded with and conspired with, to influence the 2016 presidential election. By law, the deputy attorney general immediately delivered this report to the US Attorney General. By law, the AG immediately delivered a letter to the Chairman and ranking member of the House of Representatives, Judicial Committee, and the Chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judicial Committee. And the same he released to the public. By law, all were notified that the AG was in receipt of the Confidential Mueller Report and that:

1. The investigation had ended and no new indictments would be coming or are left hidden.
2. More information to these individuals of the two judicial committees was promised to be forthcoming and perhaps as early as, the following weekend.

The above, by law, and as promised, more information was delivered by the AG (signed by both the AG and the deputy AG), to the specific four members of Congress and simultaneously to the public.

This summation stated:

1. No collusion or conspiracy was found
2. The AG and deputy AG concurred, there is no sufficient evidence to pursue obstruction of justice

But this summation by law, is not good enough for many and they clamor loudly, daily and incessantly, for the release of the full report and all documents, which were used to make up the Mueller Report. Without the patience, for the release of as much as possible and as promised, foolishly and ignorantly they are distrusting the integrity of the AG, and in essence, are inciting him to break the law and to commit perhaps multiple felonies, in releasing information which may contain:

  1. sealed Grand Jury information
  2. classified information
  3. presidential privileged information

The damage already done to our Republic is so great, as it is now, it will take a long time to repair it!

Though the length of this investigation is not the longest one on record, but because of its almost endless and daily coverage by most of all media, blinding our eyes with it and blaring it in our ears daily, it certainly seemed like it was! For no other reason, I am relived, it is now over!

I am relieved…

…not to rejoice in the vindication of the president and anyone associated with him.

I am relived…

…not to criticize, condemn or complain about anyone whose expectation was that collusion, conspiracy and/or obstruction of justice, justified this investigation.

I am relived…

…I am just relived that no foreign power colluded, conspired and obstructed justice, to interfere with, the 2016 presidential election of, WE the People!

It would be apropos if WE the People could now focus our efforts upon matters of great importance to the Republic of, The United States of America, But this report, no matter what it concludes and whatever is released to the public is, but “fruit from the poisonous tree.” It should be rejected by every individual in our Republic. One cannot obstruct justice from collusion/conspiracy, which does not exist. Sadly, I suppose, this is just the end of the beginning?

But just because someone (anyone), appears to be guilty or is made out to be guilty, charged as if they are guilty, and convicted in the court of public opinion, does not make it so. To usurp an individual’s (any individual citizen of the United States), constitutional rights is, “fruit of the poisonous tree!” Any results (consequences meted out), by anyone; from any such manner or method is, “fruit of the poisonous tree!” Perjury traps violate constitutional rights. Gather the evidence legally. Indict or charge. Convict or dismiss. Acquit, set free and make whole. There should never be an exception to anyone, for any reason or under any circumstance, for the use of, “fruit of the poisonous tree!” 

Anyone (any citizen), charged and found guilty, by way of “fruit from the poisonous tree,” should have all charges dismissed, their rights restored and restitution made to them, for any loss. Anyone that relies on or uses “fruit of the poisonous tree,” should suffer the consequences and/or be made to pay, for using “fruit of the poisonous tree.”

Without exception (without interpretation), I do not want the guilty to go free, but neither do I want the innocent to be bound due to, “fruit of the poisonous tree!”

The damage done to our Republic and to individuals these past several years is innumerable and not because of the doctrines to protect the individual’s (all individual citizens) rights. It is the exceptions (interpretations), in using, “fruit of the poisonous tree!”

Advertisements

Truth and Reason and appetite (an Intro.)

February 25, 2019

Short url to this post: https://wp.me/pGfx1-FO

Truth and Reason and appetite (an Intro.)

By Dahni
© 2019, all rights reserved

Latin—

Order— “A Reasonable Introduction”

Our species was originally created as Tripartite beings (sharing 3 parts). Each was to have a body, formed of the same elements found in common dirt or soil. The soul was “made” of “breath life”. Whereas the brain is part of the physical “body”, the mind is part of the soul. Whereas the brain is the organ of physical perception (via the five senses), the mind (reason), is the organ of mental perception. The spirit was created.

To restate, the body was formed from “the dust of the ground”. The soul was made. The spirit was created. Body, soul and spirit are, the original intended parts of our species as, tripartite beings.

Each of these three separate parts are unique in their scope and activity. It is common sense to understand that to maintain order (whenever there are two or more parts), something or someone, must be in charge. When spirit rules the soul (the mind), and the soul (the mind), rules the body, this tripartite being has the most optimum opportunity to become its whole and best self. Any other way will always end in the consequences of error, disarray and disorder.

The ancient Greek and Roman philosophers such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle alluded to this hierarchy of life. Truth and reason were valued above the appetite.

It is NOT my intention to either diminish or elevate the body, soul and spirit (truth, reason and appetite), beyond or below their purpose, but only to show their individual and willful obedience by choice (free will), the proper arrangement to the order and unity of this tripartite being’s wholeness. In contrast, I will endeavor to show, the consequences of disrupting order, unity, balance and wholeness.

For simplicity’s sake, each of our three parts requires “food” to live and thrive. The body (“appetite”), requires physical food (and water). Emotions, passions and desires are its drivers. So the soul (the mind), requires the thinking of thoughts (reason). It processes the physical stimuli from the five senses. The spirit needs, truth.

Even Jesus Christ, after a forty day fast and his temptations of the devil implied these things, when he answered the devil. The very first question he was asked was about his obvious hunger (appetite), in his body, having not eaten, for those forty days.

“Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”

Matthew 4:1-4 King James Version (KJV)

First off, it was not the body (appetite), or soul (reason), which led him to the wilderness, but spirit. There is no indication that he had physical hunger until, it was written in verse two. Without getting into many health benefits of fasting, for many of our species, our normal fasting only lasts, for about an eight-hour period following sleep, when it is then broken by hunger pains at breakfast (breaking fast). But Jesus, was obviously hungry after forty days. How interested would you or I be about truth and reason when appetite is raging? But, when answering the tempter (the devil), he did not deny the need of the body, for physical food. He did not deny the mind’s (reason), recognition that the body needed food. In contrast, he placed appetite and reason into their proper places, for the unity, balance and order of all three, by truth!

By truth must be understood as the truth or simply truth, not your’s or mine personal truths as is popular today, but truth. Our differences may be varied as we may not all have the same appetite or reason, but truth is (or should be), the same for all. And if truth is subjected to appetite or reason, imbalance and disorder will always be, the consequence. All things should be decent and in order!

An analogy for our tripartite beings could be illustrated by a computer. Spirit (truth), could be the operating system. Programs and applications, the soul (reason). Body (appetite), would be physical hardware and the gates or switches, normally opened or closed. The one thing which connects these three (makes them all work together), is electricity (life). If our computer is not plugged in, turned on or has crashed and burned (no life), it is dead or just will not work. If the operating system (spirit-truth), is corrupted or non-existent, it will not work or at least not properly. If the programs and applications are corrupted, neither will the operating system (spirit-truth), or the hardware (body-appetite), work properly, if at all. If the hardware (body-appetite), is corrupted, the entire computer (body-appetite-hardware, soul-reason-programs and applications, and the spirit-truth-operating system will not work properly, if at all.

All three parts of this tripartite being are independent, but all three are designed and purposed to work together interdependent, NOT solely independently or as dependents. Body, soul and spirit  in order was, formed, made and created. Thus a unique tripartite being was in harmony with, in balance with and unified with, appetite, reason and truth!

Although there are many differences in the scope and activity of the body, the soul and the spirit, this is by no means an exhaustive, thoroughly researched or a complete list here. But for illustrative purposes I would like to share a few examples to hopefully make these clear.

Imagine you were stranded in the dessert, hungry and thirsty with no food or water. You are obviously hungry and thirsty and your body (appetite) responds to this stimuli. The soul (reason), reacts and seeks these needs. Do you turn left or right, go forward, back, up or down to find these? It is your choice and you could be right or you could be incorrect. Now let us suppose you see what appears to be an oasis and you head towards it, hoping for needed food and drink, only to discover that the oasis was a mere mirage. The oasis does not exist, the soul-mind-reason only thinks or believes it to be true, and the body’s need (appetite), is driving.

Have you ever observed railroad tracks from a distance where they appear to converge (come together)? As you walk down, you discover that this sensual information in the body (appetite), is not always reliable. The soul-the mind (reason), solves the apparent contradiction or at least alludes to  appetite, requiring more information.

Now memory could assume that every time you see tracks appear to come together in the distance, (reason), would reject what your eyes (appetite) demand. But what if at sometime in your future, those tracks were actually built to have come together (truth)? Do you now see all our parts (body, soul and spirit) are important, but must be ordered properly to make the whole tripartite being (appetite, reason and truth), a unified whole. And if in disorder, they will NOT serve us properly!

Having laid this foundation of this tripartite being’s common order, next time in Part I of this series, i will offer a reasonable explanation, for the current political culture of the United States of America. With the intent to show a reasonable explanation, for the tripartite beings disrupted, out-of-order and in disarray.

The following three-parts to this series will be:

(Part I) – Disorder— “A Reasonable Explanation”
(Part II) – Disorder— “A Reasonable Hypothesis”
(Part III) – Disorder— “A Reasonable Theory”

Next time: Truth and Reason and appetite (Part I) – Disorder— “A Reasonable Explanation”

November 8th, 2018

November 8, 2018

Short url to this post: https://wp.me/pGfx1-EX

By Dahni
© 2018, all rights reserved

Eight denotes the number of a new beginning. In music there are a series of notes, one through seven. Then it starts anew with the eighth note (an octave). All the music ever, is written with a total of 88 keys as on a piano. What looks like an 8 on its side is the symbol of infinity, it just continues. Everything in life has a beginning. Let this be Ours today, on this eighth day of November, 2018!

All great literature is like this too, it just continues, even though it may be fiction. The great thing about fiction, besides its passion is, it can invoke in us a great sense of adventure. It ignites our imagination to lead us to find new discoveries. Fiction can give us rest or pause or enjoyment, in the midst of our everyday toils. And fiction is, often based on facts or at least plausible possibilities. Fiction can cause us to believe so deeply and completely that we accept it being either real or attainable.

Such are the works of French author, Alexandre Dumas. Among his many works, perhaps the most famous, most known and most often read are: ‘The Count of Monte Christo‘, ‘The Nutcracker‘ (yes he revised an original story which became the ‘Nutcracker Suite’, with music composed by Tchaikovsky). And Dumas penned ‘Prince of Thieves’ (about Robin Hood). Then, this famous French author wrote, ‘The d’Artagnan Romances’ (series) which include, ‘The Three Musketeers’ and ‘The Man in The Iron Mask’, among others.

In the 1998 movie adaptation of Dumas’ work, ‘The Man in The Iron Mask’, we see the characters of the four Musketeers. One was d’Artagnan, as captain of The Musketeers. His character was based on an actual man with that name. And that man was also, really, The Captain of The Musketeers.

The man in the iron mask is portrayed as the identical twin brother of King Louis XIV. But did you know that there is evidence to support that there really was a prisoner that some say wore an iron mask, while others say his identity was hidden for years, behind a black velvet mask. His identity has long been argued and disputed. But the point to all of this here is— there was, a man behind a mask, d’Artagnan was, a Captain of the Guard, Musketeers existed and their famous motto has been around, for many years, before Dumas wrote it in his ‘Three Musketeers‘! So, we see how just enough factual information, can capture our attention and the characters are turned into heroes and heroines, the stuff of legends! And we so often want to be them or at least, be like them.

In this story, the ruling King Louis the XIV was, a corrupt and cruel dictator. To protect his perceived right of rule, Louis kept his identical twin brother Phillipe, in prison for years and his true identity hidden, behind an iron mask.

The Four Musketeers conspired together, to replace Louis with Phillipe. Out from behind his iron mask and with the Four Musketeers together, they now five, do one thing as one and say all together their famous line.

What was that famous motto? “One for all, all for one”. The phrase is from Latin “unus pro onnibus, omnes pro uno”. Symbolically raising or lowering and crossing swords while saying this, marked it.

All for one, one for all”!

The phrase was likely, first used in 1618, in a meeting between leaders of the Bohemian, Catholic and Protestant communities, resulting in a letter in, ‘Defenestrations of Prague’.

Next it was used by Dumas in, ‘The Tree Musketeers’ – 1844.

In 1874, it became the official motto of Switzerland.

Dumas draws us in to his works, by building his characters and making them come alive. In, ‘The Man in the Iron Mask‘, Dumas not only etches the reader’s mind with the specific characteristics of the Four Musketeers, but gives enhanced meaning, to their crossing swords with their spoken motto—

One for all, all for one”!

The virtues of the Musketeers, are virtues we should all strive for:

• Aramis— for his faith (believing), in a cause
• Porthos— for his Passion, for Life
• Athos— for Love, his love of his son and the love he bestowed upon Phillipe, all without reservation or hesitation
• D’Artagnan— for Devotion to something greater, than his own life
• Phillipe— for the potential of us all, to be Great and Kind, Merciful and Forgiving.

There’s nothing so kingly as kindness, and nothing so royal as truth!”

Alice Carey, (April 26, 1820 – February 12, 1871), American poet, educator, librarian, and civil rights activist-

How powerfully these all combined, to make something even greater in, “All for one, one for all”!

Does all the above, remind you of something equally, as powerful?

In signing the Declaration of Independence in 1776, unanimously, they all together, for each and all pledged themselves, to what George Washington often referred to as, ‘The Cause’! They pledged— their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. Benjamin Franklin said that if they did not all “hang together” (unite), they each, “would hang separately” (by the neck literally).

Even while the words were being signed in 1776, work had already begun on a motto and designs for a seal. Should their seemingly impossible and far-fetched vision be realized, they would need to rely upon divine intervention, “Divine Providence” (favor)! In hope, they prepared and they planned a Great Seal, for official documents. Does this not also, sound like a great work of fiction?

This design, for a great seal, was based on another Latin phrase:- E pluribus unumOut of many, one

It is interesting to note that in 1776, there were 13 colonies and there are 13 letters in this Latin phrase!

By an act of Congress in 1792, the Great Seal and E pluribus unum was, the de facto motto of, The United States of America. This stood, for over 100 years. Then, in 1956, it became and now is, “In God WE Trust.”

Note again: Even in our present motto, unity is still implied by the word, “WE”!

The opening of Our Constitution begins with this unity by one word, “WE” Next, it defines who, “WE” are, not a few nobles or the elite, but “..the People”. Finally, Our Constitution defines under whose authority this government may serve and operate, but also, for whom, for “The People of the United States of America”.

The unity of WE is, applied and connected to Our Constitution, our Great Seal, Our Motto, and inextricably bound to the “WE” of, The Declaration of Independence, in 1776.

These are not mere ideas and ideals of past real people or fictional characters. These are virtues, proven time and time again, to exist. And in reality, where they thrive— Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, all flourish and nourish the entire world!

The words and writings of our founders were not mere words, but histories of these virtues— applied and realized.

Life is a series of challenges, victories and defeat. It is full of sorrow and grief. WE have WEPT individually and together. It is full of laughter and joy. WE have WEPT, one by one, and all together.

Each of US is, wholly and totally unique! There never has been; there is no one anywhere on earth and there never will come anyone, exactly like You!
Each of US are equal! Each of US is, independent! Each of US is, independently responsible! You are strength, without measure! But WE are, even stronger, TOGETHER!!!

So, my Brothers and Sisters, let us take off the masks of our individuality, which keep us hidden and separate, from one another. Let US rely upon Providence (Divine Favor). Then, let us each individually, use the full measure of our individual greatness and let US draw swords of our individual hearts and cross them and together, stand unified, Out of many, one, as WE the People, all for one, one for all!

All these things considered and on today, November 8th, 2018, I do hereby proclaim this, the first annual, National Musketeer Day, or WEPT (WE People Together) Day, or WE Day or, WE The People Day!!! Happy New Beginning!  🙂

By the Authority Vested in Me—

Dahni

1 of WE

Wear Your Button Proudly!

#Musketeer Day
#WEPeopleTogether Day
#WEPT Day
#WEThePeopleDay
#WeDay

WE the People are, The  Apple of Gold in a picture of Silver. The Silver (government), WE made to serve US (The Apple), and not to serve the picture of silver (the government)!

Behold, WE, WEPT (WE. People Today), with tears of Grief and Joy! What is, reflected in the Apple of Your Eye; for what virtues do you cry?

“Nature’s God”

May 15, 2017

short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-Aj

by Dahni
© 2017, all rights reserved

A friend of mine recently said, “I can’t seem to find any reference to Nature’s God prior to the time of Thomas Jefferson. I’m trying to figure out exactly what he meant by that term and where he picked up the concept.”

The words, “the Laws of Nature” and “Nature’s God,” appear in our founding document, The Declaration of Independence, in 1776.

“When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Opening of: The Declaration of Independence, 1776, 1st paragraph

The idea that the United States of America is a, “Christian Nation,” has been argued since likely, our beginning in the years which led up to 1776 and ever since. You might be surprised as to its true origins?

We know from basic U.S. history that Thomas Jefferson (one of the youngest, if not the youngest earliest representatives to the 1776 body, The Continental Congress and other patriots), was tasked with the writing of, The Declaration of Independence. It was so because of his skill with language. But even so, it may be understood that there was one writer, but many authors. This is clearly seen in the opening of the second paragraph of ‘The Declaration,’ We hold these truths…”

Let us examine the writer, Thomas Jefferson.

Thomas Jefferson was basically a deist, although the term in his day had negative connotations such as being heretical or being an atheist. As revolutionary as it was to revolt against their mother country, their king ordained by supposed divine right, the greatest standing military and naval force of the times, words such as “the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature’s God entitle them,” were just as revolutionary!

Thomas Jefferson lived during the ‘Age of Enlightenment’ 1715-1789. In France, the central doctrines of the French worded, les Lumières (the lights), were individual liberty and religious tolerance in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church or of any one church, for that matter. The Age of Enlightenment was marked by an emphasis on the scientific method and reductionism along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy—an attitude captured by the Latin words, Sapere aude, “Dare to know.”

Reductionism is the theory of reducing complex data down to its basic elements to understand and apply that knowledge. An example of reductionism may be better understood from the Bible?

“Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:”

I Corinthians 10:32 KJV

Whereas we may view the complexities of humanity with its many races and variations, according to what we just read, the God of the Bible reduces this complex data down to there being just 3— Jew, Gentile or the Church of God (which is made up of both Jew and Gentile).

Jefferson also lived during the ‘Age of Reason.’ It follows in the tradition of eighteenth-century British deism, and challenges institutionalized religion and the legitimacy of the Bible. It was published in three parts in 1794, 1795, and 1807. Jefferson died in 1826, but these two ages” shaped his thinking and that of our other founders and their manner of life. When Jefferson wrote our founding document, The Declaration of Independence, agreed to by all the signers of all 13 colonies, he and our founders, believed in a creator whom created all equal and endowed them with certain unalienable rights. Some of the signers were Christian and some held other beliefs. Jefferson’s belief in God the creator was not revelatory. He did not believe in miracles. He believed in the value of the moral code of Jesus, but not necessarily that he was God’s Messiah. God, Jefferson believed, was known or could be known by design in the laws of life, hence, “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.” He believed in ethics and morals and science and reason and he believed this is how the creator was made known. This was believed possible by exercising the Latin term, Sapere aude, “Dare to know.”

“Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.”

Thomas Jefferson

It was believed that this was not only the right of all to know, but the responsibility of all, in order to realize and live them – “We hold these truths.” But where did such ideas come from?

“The ideas that inspired them [our original founders] were neither British nor Christian, but largely ancient, pagan, and continental:”

excerpt from a description of: ‘Nature’s God,’ The Heretical Origins of the American Republic, by Matthew Stuart © 2014

Now this is interesting and it may or may not have been the origin of Jefferson’s belief and even it were the belief of every other signer of ‘The Declaration,’ it is, Christian, in that it is written in the Bible and specifically, in the New Testament and even more specific, in the first doctrinal (how to believe rightly) epistle, to the Church, the Book of Romans.

Please note: All scripture references from the Bible herein are from, The King James Version, KJV.

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
“Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Romans 1:18-20 KJV

Without controversy, those three verses basically describe, “The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.” Now lets look at more of this chapter to see in contrast to “The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” what the God of the Bible (His revelation of Himself) has to say.

1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel
[good news] of God,
2 (Which he [God] had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)
3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:
7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith [Greek pistis believing] is spoken of throughout the whole world.
13 Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.
14 I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise.
15 So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. [Greek pistis believing, a verb which connotes action or if you will, the exercise of the right to, the Latin term, Sapere aude, “Dare to know.”].”
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [shown] it unto them.”
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature [created thing] more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Romans 1:1-8, 13-25 KJV

Whether you or I believe as did Jefferson or in any of the beliefs of our original founders is not what is most important. For one thing, they believed that equality was created in all and rights were given to all by the creator, the “Laws of Nature” and “Nature’s God.” There is no contradiction if you believe God is made known by nature or revealed by His Word, the Bible, Himself the Word or His namesake and only begotten son, Jesus Christ the Word. These all agree. They conciliate in The Declaration of Independence. It is concluded in, The Declaration of Independence. There is no contradiction that our Republic is indeed, based on Judeo-Christian principles. Even if one is an atheist, and believes in the theory of evolution (the big bang theory), there is no contradiction because, equality and rights are a gift of this life force, “The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God, a “creator,” a design and etc. otherwise, there is no equality and no rights, only inequality and privileges. Look at the final sentence in The Declaration.

“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

Except from: The Declaration of Independence, 1776, last sentence

This ‘Declaration’ of equality and rights from “The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” which relies on “Divine Providence,” the creator, is equal to and…

…as The Declaration is Declaratory of “Nature’s God,” so are the heavens

“The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth [shows] his handywork.”

Psalm 19:1 KJV

Thomas Jefferson, our founders and our founding documents were not anti-God or atheists. All were anti-divine right and anti-religion. From since the fall of Adam and Eve in the first book of the Bible, Genesis, our species have tried to dominate by force of arms or religious dogma. They have tried to un-separate or conciliate (bring together), Church and State. Kings, Queens, emperors and etc. from ancient times, were thought of as gods or as God’s representatives on earth. This is called, “divine right” and may be thought of by expressing— rule from the throne. The church and specifically, the Roman Catholic Church, uses a Latin phrase, ex cathedra “from the seat of authority” or simply, “from the chair.” I like to think of that as, from the toilet because, it is just crap. 🙂

There is one problem with this concept, Biblically.

”When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?  And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter [Greek petros, a small grain-like stone that can be blown about, with every wind of doctrine], and upon this rock [Greek petra, a large unmovable rock or stone] I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

Matthew 16:13-20 KJV

In English, what this verse seems to say is that Jesus Christ would build his church upon Peter. This is the verse used to promote and substantiate the concept of apostolic succession. Please note that this verse says absolutely nothing about apostolic succession. But if you look in the Greek translation from which the King James Version came, just knowing and understanding the definition of two Greek words, this verse says something entirely different. The name Peter (petros in Greek), is very similar to his personality. One moment he was ready to die with Jesus and the next you can’t find Peter (a little grain of sand), anywhere. Jesus Christ used the word “rock” which again, is the Greek word petra, an unmovable stone. Jesus Christ simply said [my paraphrasing], Hey, look Peter, you are like a tiny grain of sand. You blow hot and cold and blow about at the whim of the wind. But on this rock (Jesus pointed to himself), I (Jesus Christ), will build my church!

So much for certain ones dominating over the church or of apostolic succession. 🙂

Throne or chair, take your pick or as it was or is, as to whomever in actuality, is in control of the rest of the population. These beliefs were rejected by Thomas Jefferson and our original founders and in our original documents.

From the throne of a king, queen, prince, princess and etc. or from the chair of a Pope or head of some other religious order, both have one thing in common, genealogy or privilege. Whether by birth or royal blood line, this “divine right” is equal to the pedigree or some spiritual association like apostolic succession. This belief was that from the line of the Apostle Peter of the Bible, all true authority of God on earth, being infallible, is thought to be the legitimate authority over all others. Thomas Jefferson, our original founders and our original documents rejected these ideas!

In their day and time, Thomas Jefferson, our original founders and our original documents were revolutionary because, they rejected the “divine right” of the king, the rule from the throne and the rule of the church (any church), “from the chair,” or the toilet. This established the concept of separation of Church and State, but certainly not, the separation of God and State. This is clearly seen in the words, “The Laws of Nature” and “Nature’s God.” As The Declaration Declares, “All men [a plural noun inclusive of all men, women and children], “are created equal…” “…that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Any religion that is contrary to these universal truths would be unequal and would be based on privileges, not rights, and the divine right of royalty or spiritual authority, based on some pedigree of even ANY moral and ethical church, from dominating the affairs of our republic. However, this would not prevent any of the “Free and Independent States,” by “consent of the governed,” of that state, from having a state religion. But among the other states, their state religion would not/could not prevent the rights of any other state or any other individual. But the United States, interdependent, would not/could not have either a dominating governing force (see checks and balances in the Constitution of the United States), or religious force.

“The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” clearly declares that we are all created equal and are all endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights. And though it does not declare whom this God is, whether by what is known from the study of these universal laws (Sapere aude “dare to know”), or what is revealed, it does not prevent God, a creator from revealing its self (male or female) in its manner and provides for, the Freedom of religion which includes, the truth! In other words, religious freedom or religious liberty, allows anyone to worship or not, as they deem appropriate, as long as, their liberty and their rights, do not prevent those of any others.

In 2015, Chris Cuomo, a lawyer, son of Mario Cuomo (former NY governor a Democrat candidate for president), brother to Andrew Cuomo, the current governor of the state of New York, is a paid contributor and host at CNN. He interviewed the then Alabama Chief Supreme Court judge, his honor, Roy Moore. The following picture is a quote from that interview.

Our rights do not come from God?

Cuomo is lecturing a Supreme Court judge, the Chief Justice at the time, of the State of Alabama and addresses him with an air of respect in calling him, “your honor.” But the insulted Chief Justice, respectfully, did not agree with Cuomo. In contrast and in direct contradiction to Cuomo, this is what the writer of The Declaration, Thomas Jefferson said,

Our Equality and Our Rights come from God!

Does it matter if Jefferson was a deist, a Jew or a Christian? No it does not. Does it matter if any of our founders were deist, Jewish or Christian? No it does not. Does it matter if any were Jew, Gentile or Church of God? No it does not. Does it matter if our original founding documents were based on ancient, pagan, continental, desist, Jewish or Christian principles? No it does not. “Nature’s God,” in concept or in reality is not contradictory, but is conciliatory. Our equality and our rights do not come from man, mankind, humanity, collective agreement or compromise, but from, “The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” from the creator, however you freely choose to believe in one. What really matters is not what we may or may not believe, but that “Nature’s God” gifted us with equality and rights!

“Nature’s God” allows for the free choice, or religious freedom or religious liberty, to believe as one sees fit, provided that it is ethical, moral, is equal to all and does not prevent the rights of all, of every individual!

There are two compound words that are now, much easier to understand, inspiration and enthusiasm. Inspiration is made up of in + spirit or in spirit action. Enthusiasm is made of the Greek preposition en meaning, totally within as opposed to, from without and the Greek word theo, which is, God. Combined, its meaning is, in totality or wholly within God, the origin or power of God. “The Laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” are equal to a “creator,” all people being “created equal,” and the “endowment” “of certain unalienable rights.” Things equal to the same thing, are equal to each other!

In conclusion, “Nature’s God” are words written in our original declaratory founding document, The Declaration of Independence. Though equality and individual rights are inclusive or universal, they are written and authored by Free and Independent States that have the right to govern their own affairs, as does any other Free and Independent State or country. We have the right to allow in or remove anyone or anything which is contrary to universal rights and the privileges of citizenship we hold together, as Free and Independent States! And we also, have the responsibility of both now and in the future, to prevent anyone or anything from dominating our republic and any church from dominating our United States, religious liberty.

If these things were not so, there would be only inequality and privileges; no equality and no rights! “Nature’s God” is, the origin of equality and of our rights. And this equality and these rights did not come by humanity, but by the creator and these rights can therefore, not be bought, sold, bartered, traded, surrendered or taken by force from anyone, by anyone or anything, under any circumstances! The Constitution of the United States is the second, but equal part to our republic. Whereas The Declaration declares the origin of our equality and our rights, the Constitution is, for the defense and protection of this equality and these universal rights and our “collective agreement and compromise,” as to our privileges as citizens and how this republic is to be served— of the people, by the people,  for the people and to the people! And this is the responsibility of every one of us, to protect and defend against all enemies, foreign or domestic!

For more information about the beliefs and times of Thomas Jefferson see:

http://www.constitutionaleducation.org/index.php?page=Jefferson&loc=fathers

 

1 of WE,

 

Unalienable or Inalienable

April 19, 2017

short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-A4

by Dahni

© 2017, all rights reserved

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” 

The Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776, 2nd paragraph

 

Does it matter if your rights are unalienable, inalienable or alienable? Many have no idea what these words truly mean in context of what was written in the Declaration of Independence. Look at the article from the following link.

https://fee.org/articles/why-it-matters-that-some-rights-are-inalienable/

Although the link above is an interesting read (and I did read it word for word), it fails to use the word as written, in the familiar clause of the Declaration of Independence. That word is, “unalienable” and not “inalienable” as used in the title of the afore mentioned and linked article. It fails to define the word “unalienable” and like our rights, it cannot be separated from the source from which they are derived which is, “their [our] creator,’ God. And finally, the article fails in that it does not show original intent of our founders that authored it (WE the People are the authors), and written by, Thomas Jefferson, one among us, WE the People.

Our founders, many of which were from England and influenced by the work of John Locke, English jurisprudence (English Law) and were familiar with the words “inalienable” and “alienable” as they relate to property rights, to rights of property. But this was not, absolutely not, what their intentions were, in the Declaration of Independence or how the words were used, in the context of this document. “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness,” are certainly not referring to mere property rights.

Very, very simply, the words “unalienable” or “inalienable,” which as defined in most any dictionary are, exactly the same. Both can be understood by the root word, “alien.” Basically, something or someone that is “alien” or is, an “alien” is, foreign or just not from here. What separates us from any other foreigner or alien? These “truths” were written down, put into and left, in our founding documents. It is a record. It was recorded. It is a recording and like a sound recording, is considered more permanent than having to rely on the fragility of memory which is prone to leave out, put in or change things over time. Let me say that again in another way. The only thing that makes us UN-aliens any different from any other alien outside of this country is that we put our rights into writing. They are the laws of our republic. We are all aliens, but our rights are unalienable and are given by “their [our] creator,” God. If they are given by people, they are not rights, but privileges and could be bought, sold, given away or forcibly taken. They would be then, alienable privileges, but they are not. One cannot separate another from their unalienable rights, any more than they can separate the source of Him, “their [our] creator,” God that gave them, gives them freely to all, for all are, “created equal!”

Having written those things, I will leave a link below, which digs into the depth of these two words, “unalienable” and “inalienable.” Even though they are defined the same in a dictionary today, were both understood as the same in the 18th century and there were even drafts of the Declaration of Independence that used the word “inalienable,” before the final document which used, “unalienable,” most courts, corporations, and even state constitutions, only recognize inalienable rights. According to their interpretation, those rights are separate from unalienable rights and can be transferred with your permission or without it if, the court, corporation, and/or state decides it so. This is a perversion, an interpretation, a corruption; a usurpation of our unalienable rights, given freely by “their [our] creator,” God, for those rights cannot be bought, sold, bartered, transferred or taken away, with or without our permission! Why not? Because we are all aliens or foreigners in a strange land. We are pilgrims. We are just passing through. We and our unalienable rights will all one day, return to the source that gave them, “their [our] creator,” God.

Understanding of these things is of paramount importance! In addition to separating the words “unalienable” and “inalienable,” though they are defined as the same, there are those which believe the Declaration of Independence, has no place in our government nor standing, in any court of Law. There are those which believe that the preamble to our Constitution, has no place or standing, in any court of law.

The We that hold “these truths” are, the same WE behind, “We the People.”

The “We” that hold “these truths” are, the same WE behind, “We the People.” The Declaration of Independence cannot be separated from, The Constitution of the United States of America. And the preamble to the same, cannot be separated from the document including, the ‘Bill of Rights.’

To separate unalienable from inalienable, seeks to separate rights from “their [our] creator,’ God, whom gave them, from  “their [our] creator,’ God, God, being just a figure of speech, a legal fiction when in fact, it is humans (governments) that give us those rights (privileges) and can therefore, take them away? As no one can separate the Preamble from the Constitution from or the Bill of Rights, no one can separate the Constitution (a more perfect union) from, the Bill of Rights, all which are given limited power by consent of the people, to protect the rights of the People. And no one can separate the Constitution (the protector of these rights) from the Declaration of Independence (the declarer of those rights and from whence those rights have come (“their [our] creator,” God.

There are those that believe we are a democracy (rule by majority) as opposed to a republic (rule by law, a representative government). There are those that believe the electoral college should be eliminated and presidential elections should be decided by popular vote. Popular vote is, democracy, rule by majority. This is not the same thing as a republic, the rule by law, a representative government.

Nothing could be more clear in understanding the failures of democracy and the intent of the republic, than a map of the United States showing by county and by colors red or blue from the national election, November 8th, 2016. The popular vote (majority of votes) is in blue and the electoral college votes, in red.

The popular (majority) vote is in blue and the electoral college votes are in red

 

Votes from the areas in blue above show both where the majority of the votes were received and are where the majority of the people live in the USA. But it is obvious that not everyone lives in the blue areas. To control the government in this manner, all one needs to do is to receive the majority of the votes from where the majority of the people live. Now I ask you, which color (blue or red) truly is more representative of the United States? If you ca see red, then this is indicative of a republic, a representative government in action and our founders original intent. If you still desire the blue, a majority, a democracy, this was not our founders intent and you should seek to legally amend our Constitution.

There are those which believe as the times have changed, even our Constitution is subject to change. The Constitution may be amended, but it cannot be changed. We the people have the right to:

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Excerpt from: The Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776.

Separating unalienable and inalienable is to separate rights of all to the priviledges of the few. Separating the Bill of Rights from the Constitution, the Constitution from the Preamble, The Constitution from The Declaration of Independence, rights from “the [our] creator,” God, reduces all to a democracy instead of a republic and robs every man woman and child from their equal rights that among these are, “Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” These are all very dangerous ideas. It is only WE the People which consent to those powers which government may by only specified limits, execute on our behalf. We the People have those rights because, WE the People are all and each, equally endowed by “their [our] creator,” God, whom gave us these rights! These rights which cannot be bought, sold, bartered, transferred or taken by force, with or without our permission! Government is neither an individual or a person (corporation), it is just a servant, our servant, the servant of WE the People.  Government’s sole function is, to protect and defend our unalienable rights from all enemies, foreign (alien) or domestic (from within us).

I offer the following link to a PDF file for your consideration. It is an except from my book of 2012, ‘RESET “An UN-alien’s Guide to Resetting Our Republic”

 

I of WE,

 

 

 

 

 

“UN-alien” or “Inalienable”

 

 

The Ideal Liberal

September 1, 2016
Short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-yH

By Dahni
© 2016, all rights reserved

In a video I posted on my Facebook page by KC Kerrie, ‘You Move’, she clearly showed her deep wound from our country being so divided.

With often tears pouring, voice quaking and hands trembling, she visibly put on display the wounds from political correctness, being told what to say and think or NOT, and to tolerate anyone and anything and from being pushed and pulled to apologize, for love of country and belittled, for her patriotism.

The WHY of our present division can clearly be understood by how the viewer sees the following video. She is either a crying, whiny, intolerant woman; unbending that will not move anymore and that in the name of progress, she is one that stands in the way of liberalism and progress. Or, she is, a woman who has been deeply wounded, but will no longer just ‘take it anymore,’ and has taken a stand, for loving our country and that those that have wounded her are “concrete blocks,” which are in the way of a united people, who love this country and the republic in which it stands. To those blocks she yells, “Get out of our way! You Move!!!”

Strip away every issue, distraction and cause and all can clearly see WHY, WE the people, are so divided! And from just this video and just this one woman, WE the People can see the consequences of this division!

If to separate love for country from tolerance and progress and being liberally minded, what are these voices and who is, the ideal liberal?

Political correctness pretends and contends that nothing said or done should ever offend anyone. It is illogical because, it is impossible! For just one reason alone, we are imperfect lifeforms. For another, it was never our differences which united us, but it is our differences, which divide us even now.

Differences from our ages, sex, sexual preference, culture, color of skin, education, economics, politics, laws/rules/regulations, privileges and religion and all other differences are supposed to be lauded, applauded, celebrated, accepted, and tolerated. There is nearly an organization and a champion(s), for almost anyone and anything it seems, today. Now here is where this all falls down upon itself and will implode.

In the name of tolerance and acceptance of all, and in the name of equality and freedom of expression, if anyone does not accept this, then they are intolerant, without empathy and unpatriotic. This is illogical and impossible because, if you are not tolerant then you are intolerant. This is group or herd mentality. How can you be tolerant, if you do not tolerate anything and everyone?

And this has been pushed and shoved down all of our throats, for perhaps our entire lives. It has a single name and it is, democracy. Democracy may simply be defined and understood as, the rule or the will of the majority. But WE are supposed to be ruled or held together by law, by a republic.

Freedom of expression has become the freedom of suppression, tolerance intolerant, equality unequal and political correctness, politically incorrect.

But all these opposing forces need causes and champions. Beyond the small, the weak, the different, the disenfranchised, those in the shadows and the silent, what better spokespersons could be asked for, then the super intelligent, the rich, the powerful and the celebrities!

The old adage comes to mind, “The squeaky wheel gets the grease.”

If the most educated, the richest, the most powerful, the most popular celebrities come together in one voice, surely they will grease, the rest of us?

But why would they fear any outcome, but their desired outcome? Why have many threatened to leave the USA if, they do not get what they want? Or do they want us to be afraid that we may lose them, to another country?

Many of these have said they would leave this country, if the presidential nominee of their choice, does not win this November.

In a recent post, there was a video interview with “Babs,” “The Voice,” Barbara Streisand. In it, she didn’t know what she would do if, Trump won. “Either,” she said, Australia or Canada, she may move to.

Now you may not like her type of music and that’s OK. But she still has an incredible voice and is still, very, very talented. I have not liked her politics, for many years, but I can still appreciate her talent. I have supported her lavish lifestyle and contributed to her wealth, by paying for her movies and music. And by default, it could also, be said that I have indirectly, supported her politics and her causes.

Though I do like her music, I am seriously considering ending my support, but not because I disagree with her politically. To threaten to leave, even to consider the possibility of leaving or to actually leave, if she does not get her way, does not appear to me, to be a person that really cares about this country or me or those I love. Even children know they can’t always get their way, but they get over it and keep on going.

Why do our choices always seem to be, fear motivated???? Can there never be any other emotion or reason?

I have also wondered, for many years, WHY is it that it seems like so many of the artist types are all Democrats? I am an artist type, although no one famous or anyone you’ve most likely, ever heard of, but I had to grow up in my home, to be able to think for myself.

Before my change to just an independent, non-party person, as a matter fact, I grew up in a family that were pro-Democrat. But long ago I changed. Maybe it is the coming of age thing, the cutting loose from my home, the rebel, the independent desire most young people experience? Perhaps this is why I never became a successful artist-type? But I will answer as Ronald Reagan did, “I didn’t abandon the Democrat party, the Democrat party abandoned me.” And as another matter of fact, not the Democrat, Republican or any other party, has ever invited me to their party. I guess I’m just socially unacceptable? 🙂

But the only thing I can figure out is, the artist-types must just believe in something so strongly, something they so want to be true, something so idealistic that it is unrealistic that it becomes next to impossible, for them to actually see what is happening. They are maybe just living the persona or the character of some script. In the land of fiction, detached from reality they are, I suppose, perpetual believers in the land of OZ, instead of the land of, WE the People!

All these many causes and these many outspoken uber intelligent, super rich, almost all powerful and the popular celebrities are WHY, WE the People are divided. They are the idealistic, ideal liberals, who are in the way of our real liberty!

IdealLiberal2

The True Picture of Tolerance & Political Correctness

But despite all these things and the people who divide us, it and they are all a smokescreen, an illusion, a mask; like characters in a book, a play or a movie of fiction. Though the consequences of our division are real, HOW WE the People are being divided is, being purposefully and intentionally hidden from US (all of US). Virtually no one sees it because of, a veil of secrecy and the many distractions by which we are kept blind to the truth. But if the cause is discovered and removed, the symptoms will disappear.

Next time, I will show HOW WE are being systematically divided and what the real cause, really is!

 

 

1 of WE,

 

 

 

MySignature_clr

 

Good Afternoon USA What are WE having for Dinner?

July 1, 2016
short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-xM

By Dahni
© 2016, all rights reserved

Good Afternoon USA, what are WE having for dinner? Would it be from the melting pot, a lunchable or a salad?

Why does it seem that often our comics, dead foreigners or even hundreds-of-years old dead presidents seem to have a better grasp of what WE are than WE do? Could this be that WE have forgotten or have never been taught who and what we are?

I’m not sure, but I think the words, “The American Dream,” may be familiar to most of us and might still be used currently? I grew up with this saying. It might just mean having your own home? The apparent confusion as to who and what WE are has been around for quite some time. Years ago, way, way back in the 20th century… 🙂
…one of our comedians said:

“The owners of this country know the truth: It’s called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.”

George Carlin

Growing up and for as long as I can remember, WE the People have been referred to as the ‘Great Melting Pot.’ Consider the following:

WhatRWE

If we were all metals and all our individualities melted in one pot to become some new metal, this new alloy might not even be compatible. It could be weaker and not last very long.

If the melting pot were different cheeses melted together, the blend looses the distinct characteristics of each one.

If the melting pot were a soup or a stew, often it is overcooked and loses a lot of its nutritional value and its flavor.

A melting pot or ‘The Melting Pot’ is, really NOT a good description of who and what WE are nor what WE should be having for dinner.

Another current comedian thinks of US as more like:

“America as Lunchables, plastic wrapped, distinct entities thrown together, unified more by geography than conflicted cultural and political assumptions.”
.
Stephen Colbert

WhatRWE2

These may be somewhat delicious, but nutritious? Most are made by additives, over-processed, and so screwed up, vitamins and minerals have to be added back into this dead stuff, just to call it legal food, I guess? We the People remain separate and only ever get eaten together (unity or unified) if the eater so chooses. Not a very good analogy of who and what WE are supposed to be!

Well, as it happened, we had salad last night and one of our grandchildren ate with us, along with his Papa. Just like every one of US, children need to be taught what they need. Everything mixed together in a salad might be an excellent way to get kids or US to eat the whole thing, but still, we do have our favorites. This does NOT mean everything in the salad is NOT proper nutrition and a well-balanced meal, all necessary for our well-being. Think of US each as an individual piece or part of the salad. WE are unified. WE have the Liberty to eat the whole thing. Or like a child and all of us can pick and choose what we want to eat. You might like this and I might like that and a child or someone else, might like something else. So what am I saying here? A consequence of liberty could mean inequality. Inequality? But I thought –

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men [women and children] are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Excerpt from: The Declaration of Independence, 1776

Well, WE each are equal, in the sense that WE each have the same rights and the opportunity or the Liberty, to be all that you can be individually, but only IF WE are together in this as a whole. Others have thought on something else. Like what?

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” is, a French slogan first used by Louis Blanc in 1851 (French: De chacun selon ses facultés, à chacun selon ses besoins;

An earlier version of the saying appeared in Étienne-Gabriel Morelly’s, ‘The Code of Nature’ in 1755. According to ‘The Code,’ “Sacred and Fundamental Laws that would tear out the roots of vice and of all the evils of a society” including:

I. Nothing in society will belong to anyone, either as a personal possession or as capital goods, except the things for which the person has immediate use, for either his needs, his pleasures, or his daily work.

II. Every citizen will be a public man, sustained by, supported by, and occupied at the public expense.

III. Every citizen will make his particular contribution to the activities of the community according to his capacity, his talent and his age; it is on this basis that his duties will be determined, in conformity with the distributive laws.

The slogan of 1851 was popularized by Karl Marx in his 1875, ‘Critique of the Gotha Program.

The principle refers to free access and distribution of goods, capital and services. In the Marxist view, such an arrangement will be made possible by the abundance of goods and services that a developed communist system will produce; the idea is that, with the full development of socialism and unfettered productive forces, there will be enough to satisfy everyone’s needs.

Marx’s statement of the creed in the ‘Critique of the Gotha Program’ is as follows:

“In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”

Consider the following that predates either of these two beliefs.

“And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

Acts 4:32–35, The Bible King James Version (KJV)

This I would refer to as ‘Common Living.’ There is a HUGE difference between socialism/communism – communal living and ‘Common’ Living. But both recognize there is an inequality among us as our abilities and our needs. In socialism/communism – communal living, it is the government which decides what is taken and what is given. There is no individual. But in common living, each individual, willfully gives of their abundance and NOT out of their needs. Each individual did their best to contribute freely. Each individual determines what their needs are. Of this collected abundance, the excess was distributed to those that were also freely giving, but had lack and they were to receive according to their individual needs that there would be no lack of necessaries to anyone!

It’s like a salad!

WhatRWE3

A salad is not perfect, but it is certainly far better than a potential blah, melted pot of some new blended taste or individual kept apart lunchable, preserved and over processed and Yuk-Yak and on and on, all left to the whim of the eater’s choice. But it works far better as an illustration of who and what WE the People were supposed to be. It still allows for individual participation, according to their ability and to receive, according to their their need and would allow for choosing their favorites. Just like our grandson, we hoped he would eat the whole salad or at least more of everything good that education can provide, but he still did a little picking and choosing. 🙂

I do however believe, our grandson ate more of the individual ingredients in the salad, than he would have if just giving him the liberty to choose whatever he wanted. No matter what, he still had some liberty to choose and as said before with liberty, there is at least the potential consequence of inequality. If  WE all had the same thing and ate the same thing, it takes away from from our individual rights, our individual choices and our individual potential for greatness and innovation. Call that so ordered from a monarch, tyrant, an oligarchy, socialism, communism and even a democracy, but that’s not Liberty. No, not liberty, it’s bondage or slavery, whichever term communicates the best to you. But in this, WE all would be equal. WE just would not be free.

In the affairs of men and women, as Thomas Paine stated in his 1776 work ‘Common Sense,’ “government is a necessary evil.”

Our form of government is based on ideas and ideals, not by force or even perfection. WE are not like the Democratic state of ancient Greece or the Republic of the Roman Empire. We are not great because of some divine right, geography or even our incredible natural resources. Our greatness comes from the idea of Liberty and it was written in the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and, “In order to form a more perfect union,” in The Constitution of the United States of America, in 1789. The early one declares our rights and the latter was purposed to preserve, protect and serve those rights. There is nothing more perfect or less than perfect than what is perfect. “More perfect” is a figure of speech. It is a goal and an idea to strive towards.

“Europe was created by history. America was created by philosophy.”

Margaret Thatcher

“Our government is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction; to wit: by consolidation first and then corruption, its necessary consequence. The engine of consolidation will be the Federal judiciary; the two other branches the corrupting and corrupted instruments.”

Thomas Jefferson

40 years later, what Jefferson warned about became a reality when Abraham Lincoln consolidated all powers to himself. It has remained this way ever since! More is being taken from US, WE the People, almost every single day!

Returning briefly to the idea of the ‘American Dream,’ back in the eighties, our all wise and all knowing and benevolent government 🙂
decided that everyone should be able to purchase a home. The government forced the banks to provide these loans to anyone and guaranteed the loan repayments at the expense of US, WE the People. Well, no banker in their right mind is going to loan money unless:

1. They can make money (a lot of money) on loaning it
2. Without collateral or knowing it would be paid off

But since the government guaranteed the loans, they decided to get creative (or greedy) to make as much as they possible could, knowing full well, eventually, by sheer mathematical certainty, it would eventually end. So, they packaged a bunch of prime salad loans, with sub-prime salad loans (like some hidden wilted lettuce property) thrown in to make them more attractive to buyers that might not see the wilted sub-prime salad loans. This is exactly what was done. It did come to an end. WE the People had to pay for this and we still are! And many of these people, even those that could afford the repayment, lost their ‘American Dream.’ See, salad is not perfect, but the idea can be imperfectly used to our peril and unintended consequences.

Are our youth no more taught the Declaration of Independence, about what are our rights (equality) are. Have the rest of us forgotten? They and WE (those of us that have forgotten), are taught (or we assimilate with) privileges (inequality). Our youth and WE that have forgotten are not taught and do NOT understand the Constitution or how our government works (is supposed to work).

So what is this idea. What is this salad supposed to be. Who and What are WE the People and what will WE have for dinner?

It began with individual rights wherein lies liberty and where there is liberty, there is freedom. From this, WE the People formed and limited the government to be, remain or return to being small. In order for us to have a free economy, there must be capital or capitalism. These two things put into writing = Liberty. Liberty is to be protected, preserved and served by a small government. Liberty allows for the inevitable consequence of inequality. But without liberty, none can be free. Then it beckons to us from our equal and endowed unalienable rights, to be or return to, a God-centered population, rooted in Judeo-Christian values. This allows for a moral society which is formed by citizens exercising freely, self-control, rather than government forcing us to accept the privileges it bestows, through regulations, taxes and control.

Please note: I wrote “God-centered.” This does not mean that everyone has to believe in God, but it does mean that it is necessary to be rooted and centered in Judeo-Christian principles!

In order for this salad to work for one and all of US, each of us as individuals must choose to participate and freely share with others of our abundance (not our needs) that none of US, WE the People lack anything. This is Liberty. This is our salad and there aint’ no FREE lunch (breakfast, lunch or supper either)!

Until together WE become better, we’re stuck with perhaps bland, poor, and tasteless soup from the melting pot or pre-packaged, boring and poor quality lunchables either/or until we run out of other folk’s food. And there is no incentive for anything better! I’d rather pick and choose from a large quality, full of variety and color and texture, delicious and nutritious salad! Give me Salad (Liberty) or give me death! I aint’ eating porridge and plastic wrapped crap! 🙂

So, what are WE having for dinner? 🙂

 

1 of WE,

Dahni

Common Sense

June 28, 2016
short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-xt

By Dahni
© 2016, all rights reserved

This is a followup to the previous post ‘No PC just CS’: http://wp.me/pGfx1-xg

 

Note: For several days, I made a series of updates to my ‘status’ on my Facebook page. Today (6/28/2016), it was concluded with the following as the final post in that series.

DO WE (You and I) HAVE NOTHING (or ANYTHING) IN COMMON?

You know, I’m just a little disappointed. 😦

For the last several days I’ve shared images of chalkboards. I tried to make them with different colors to make them not identical, but more interesting.

CC_grp1CC_grp2

They each had the same three questions, every day, which were associated with the quoted text of that particular day of the week:

1. Who said it?
2. Does it make sense?
3. Is it current?

Was this too hard? There were clues everywhere: my cover picture with the words “common” and “sense” and the title used on each image each day, “Common Sense 101.”

Out of all the people listed as my ‘friends’ on FB, only about 3 people ‘liked’ (or just clicked the ‘like’ button) any of my status updates, left comments or attempted to answer any of the questions and I responded each time. This series of statuses these past few days were not just because I am interested in common sense, but I honestly thought, YOU were or would be too? Was I; am I wrong?

So, what’s the problem here? No time? According to the New York Times article May 6, 2016, the average time we spend on Facebook each day is 50 minutes. Do you listen to talk radio (hours)? Do you watch the news on regular TV or cable TV (1-several hours)? Do you still read a newspaper (1/2 hour – to several hours)? Where do you get your information?

It might have taken you maybe less than a minute per day to read, think about and respond to my status.

Sorry about this post today, it might eat up around 5 minutes of your day to read it all the way through and respond to it? No, I’m not really sorry.

Not interested in common sense?

Is history or American history too boring?

Did it appear political and do you avoid anything political? Sorry, regardless of your PP (political persuasion) or lack of desire to participate, you ARE political, whether you realize it, admit it or not!

Was it that I failed to share some “feel good,” a shocking video, ‘click bait,’ what I had for breakfast, a recipe, something Pinterest or some cutesy animal thingy?

Do you not care what I have to say about anything? If that’s the case, why don’t you just go ahead and un-friend me right now. Or as in the case of this blog, unsubscribe from any future posts I make here.

Do the chalkboards remind you of school? Did you have bad experiences in school, or just don’t want to be reminded of school?
Do you not like to read or cannot read?

Do you not like to think or know how to think? Or perhaps, you’d just rather avoid the pressure, pain and toil it could require, for you to pop a neuron?

Do you not know what common sense is, could care less or don’t have any?

I’m not angry, I’m just upset. I’m not upset that you might not care about me or what I might have to say, I’m upset that so few seem to care, even ask a question, try to answer any questions, post a comment, like or dislike or participate. I don’t get it and I guess, I just don’t understand, what makes you tick! And if that be the case, I sincerely beg your pardon for not being always, 100%, 24/7, attuned to you!

But here are the answers that you may not even care about?

The quotes were all (except for the last one), all from the same person and from the same written work. They were written by Thomas Paine in 1776, from a 48 page pamphlet called, ‘Common Sense.’ This little book would be equal to selling around 50,000,000 copies in the USA in one year today and around 2 billion the world over, for the duration of its publication. It went through about 20 editions. As a comparison, a NY Times best selling book needs to sell between 3,000 and 9,000 copies to make their list.

NoPC2

Did the quotes, do the quotes make sense, absolutely, to me anyway!

It was written in the language of the common folk of its day. Have we become dumber in all all our modern-day advances to even understand these words without a dictionary? Are we just too busy to look up words we do not understand?

Is or are, these quotes current, to our day and time? Some things NEVER change! Not only were the words of Paine apropos to the times in which they were written, they still apply today and were almost prophetic in nature with regards to our year of 2016, 240 years after they were first written! Like what?

For just one, “government is, a necessary evil!” For another, how should we vote (and we should vote), not for what party or person, but HOW to vote! I don’t care if your candidate did not win, or if you “felt the Bern” and it may now have become ‘Bern-t out,’ common sense says it’s irresponsible to stay mad and stay home and pout. Get off your duff and participate, else you are complicit in the anger, the divisiveness and apathy that seems to be spreading!

WE the Weeple, a zombie, clueless herd, aimlessly wandering around in the dark with no 'Common Sense'???

WE the Weeple, a zombie, clueless herd, aimlessly wandering around in the dark with no ‘Common Sense’??? So, Baaaaaaa-d? 🙂

And HOW should we vote? We should vote and vote for the “lessors of evils!” We should vote for those least likely to screw up even more of our rights and security, than they already have or will! I’m not with her or him! Both, and all in the political process, in government or seek to be a part of government are by nature evil! Or, they will become corrupted by it because, government is EVIL, even if it is necessary! Do not be deceived! This was true and 1776 and it’s still true in 2016! Only the true God can change the nature of the heart that is set on evil continually (a little good followed by a little evil and on and on). Self-willed ethical behavior is what people turn to when they reject God. Ethics and morals classes and self-determination cannot change the heart! Only God can do that! Just my opinion? Have you ever been sick, had a cold, been fired from a job, not gotten the dream job you wanted, forgotten something or someone, broke a heart or had your’s broken? HAve you EVER made a mistake? Well guess what? Neither you nor I nor is anyone else perfect! We all are corrupt! Something greater than ourselves must empower all true change! As we think so will we do! It’s just common sense!!

The following link is to various formats for you to FREELY download a copy of the original and full text of Thomas Pain’s work, ‘Common Sense.” Or you can search for this online yourself. It is available FREE of charge.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/147/147-h/147-h.htm

I would you all, peace and clarity!

1 of WE,

Dahni

P.S. I received the following comment on my Facebook page today (6/28/16). “that may or may not be an accurate assessment… 🙂

My response: “that may or may not be an inaccurate assessment… 🙂

No PC just CS

June 17, 2016
Short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-xg

By Dahni
© 2016, all rights reserved

“These are the times that try men’s [and women’s] souls.”

Thomas Paine

NoPC1No PC just CS Here?

The first image, a red circle with a red angled line is a familiar visual word meaning, “not” or simply, “NO.” The letters PC could have different meanings, but here its meaning is, Political Correctness (PC).

I have become weary in bending my ears and having to hear it. My eyes have lost their focus and left them cloudy and bleary and hazy and teary-eyed, to have had to look upon it. My lips have become locked to speak of it ever again. Instead, I will return to CS which is, Common Sense. If you need to know what this is, there is the likelihood that you may not have any or political correctness (PC) has driven it far from memory? If I could teach it I would. I know no other way to define it or to share with others how it could possibly be imparted, than by what was written, well over 200 years ago.

NoPC2

Although this was originally published anonymously and first on January 10, 1776, it is no less relevant today, June 17th, 2016, 241 years later. It is almost prophetic in light or in the darkness of our present situation. It was originally titled ‘The Plain Truth,’ but was changed to ‘Common Sense’ and was written in the simple language understood by anyone and especially common folk. It was first published as just a 48 page pamphlet, but it went through many editions and was probably purchased or gifted and read by nearly 20,000,000 (TWENTY MILLION) people in its day. That is saying a lot, considering that the population in the original 13 colonies was only around, 2,500,000 when it was written. For comparison, multiply these numbers by a factor of 10, then do it again. This would be almost 2 billion copies read in a population of the USA at 250,000,000. But really, we are over 300 million.

What is really significant about this book besides its commonality with our present day, the very words were considered seditious and if the author was discovered (now we know it was Thomas Paine), he would have been hung as a traitor to England. The popularity of his work could have made him a tidy sum in his times, but he donated every penny to George Washington and the cause of Liberty. Just forty-eight pages was in essence, the call to revolution for liberty!

If like me, you feel immersed in, drowning in filth and stuck in diseased and life robbing muck of political correctness that is promoted by over-educated idiots that say-nothing and do-less, that cannot discern the difference between a fact and an opinion, I highly recommend reading, ‘Common Sense.’ If you would just like to know what common sense is, to recall it or just be healed by it, I greatly suggest you saturate yourself inside-out with it by reading, ‘Common Sense.’ I am almost nearly 100% sure that if you just had a printed copy lying unread, but in close proximity to you, you might get healed by absorption or as if by osmosis! I will in conclusion to this post, provide you with links whereby you can read it for yourself and/or download it to be viewed on your computers, laptops and/or other digital devices, at your convenience and OFTEN and to share it OFTEN!

 

My suggestions for reading ‘Common Sense’:

Get a good unabridged dictionary and keep it close by. An unabridged dictionary will show origins of words and perhaps explain words as used in the day of its writing that may be unfamiliar to you. And of course, it will define words you may not know. It is interesting to note from the language that if it was common in that day, many of us might think it above our current level of education? We have certainly dumbed down in many ways since 1776.

Read ‘Common Sense’ as if it were being written today, in the time in which we live. Change words as England with perhaps, the United States. Replace the word ‘king’ with say, the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government locally, state-wide or the federal government. Change names to people living presently.

If you will read ‘Common Sense’ as if it were written in 2016, you will be amazed how it speaks to you, to me, to US, WE the People living now.

 

The Present Truth:

We do not have a king in title ruling us, but political correctness has divided us, government has and is dividing us; the media is; education or the lack thereof is dividing us. Politics divide us. Money out of your pocket into that of others with or without our consent divides us. We are divided from one another, from our friends and even our own families. This is the exact opposite of our founding, our purpose as a republic with a constitution written to preserve and protect our unalienable rights as penned in the Declaration of Independence, in 1776. We revolted against tyranny of the day and secured the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, NOT because we were divided, but because WE the People, were— UNITED!!!

Today, we are ripe for a takeover, not merely from some visible external force, but our enemy comes to us from the outside and are among us. The enemy within and the enemy without, have ideologies which are absolutely contradictory to our Constitution as ours is, to theirs. There are only two choices. They either assimilate with ours or we must assimilate with theirs. There is NO other way for the Republic of, by and for the people to remain. If you do not understand this, you have no common sense and are as Joseph Stalin said, “useful parrots,” to the divided-falls-for-everything!

It was Thomas Paine in ‘Common Sense,’ that wrote, “government is, a necessary evil.” Yes, it is necessary, but do NOT for a moment forget that it is EVIL.” It is NOT our friend, our savior, it is force. In the name of division and political correctness, this force which was purposefully limited has because of its nature of EVIL, divided us and deprived us of our unalienable rights such as: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Little by little our freedoms have eroded and continue to erode, amassing the power of WE in the name of some national security or some national crisis into the power and control and redistribution of, by and for the few!

If John Dickinson was the pen of the revolution see: http://wp.me/pGfx1-wy, Mercy Otis the Conscience see: http://wp.me/pGfx1-x0, Thomas Jefferson was the writer declaring our Independence, Thomas Paine with ‘Common Sense’ was the case for liberty. and Patrick Henry was the shout, heard all around the world—

“Give me Liberty or give me death.”

 

Yes, as Paine wrote, “These are the times that try men’s [and women’s] souls.” But for me, I will no longer accept this or political in-correctness. Un-friend me, do not follow me or subscribe to my posts. Divorce me, ban me from your home, kick me out of even my own family if you must. Disavow me and do not allow comments from me, if you deem this necessary. I am weary of dividing and political correctness! If you have no ‘Common Sense’ or refuse to even read ‘Common Sense,’ as linked and provided to you below FREE of Charge, by the way, then depart from me and I will from you! If departing it must be, I would you peace and clarity. I will count you as a brother or a sister. I hold onto hope that one day we could be friends and family. If we are not united, then we are divided, and if we are divided, then I must count you as mine enemy, though it be intentional or not. I am no soldier. I am no eloquent speaker or succinct, clear and popular author. I have no great sphere of influence, no wealth, no sacred honor to pledge, or life that may seem to matter much, but I matter because, I exist. But I can with equal resolve as any and by ‘Common Sense,’ yell to my dying breath just as Henry did, “Give me Liberty or give me death.” I am just me, but I am—

1 of WE,

Dahni

 

NOTES:

The original publication of Common Sense consisted of approximately 48 pages

Thomas Paine began work on Common Sense in late 1775 under the working title of Plain Truth. With the help of Benjamin Rush, who suggested the title Common Sense and helped edit and publish, Paine developed his ideas into a forty-eight page pamphlet. Paine published Common Sense anonymously because of its treasonous content.

Printed and sold by R. Bell, Third Street, Philadelphia, it sold as many as 120,000 copies in the first three months, 500,000 in the first year, and went through twenty-five editions in the first year alone. This would be roughly 20,000,000 million copies being sold today on Amazon dot com.

It was first published anonymously on January 10, 1776, during the American Revolution. Common Sense, signed “Written by an Englishman”, became an immediate success.[1]

In relation to the population of the Colonies at that time, it had the largest sale and circulation of any book in American history. Common Sense presented the American colonists with an argument for freedom from British rule at a time when the question of independence was still undecided.

Paine wrote and reasoned in a style that common people understood; forgoing the philosophy and Latin references used by Enlightenment era writers, Paine structured Common Sense like a sermon and relied on Biblical references to make his case to the people.[2]

Historian Gordon S. Wood described Common Sense as, “the most incendiary and popular pamphlet of the entire revolutionary era.” [3]
Paine donated his royalties from Common Sense to George Washington’s Continental Army, saying:

“As my wish was to serve an oppressed people, and assist in a just and good cause, I conceived that the honor of it would be promoted by my declining to make even the usual profits of an author.”

Thomas Paine

[1] Introduction to Rights of Man, Howard Fast, 1961
[2] Gordon Wood, The American Revolution: A History (New York: Modern Library, 2002), 55-56.
[3] Wood, American Revolution, 55

Links to ‘Common Sense (the full text):

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/147/147-h/147-h.htm
http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/
http://www.calhum.org/files/uploads/program_related/TD-Thomas-Paine-Common-Sense.pdf
https://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/paine-common.asp
http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Thomas_Paine/Common_Sense/