Archive for the ‘Liberal’ Category

Order of Court

February 9, 2017
Short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-zA

 

By Dahni

© 2017, all rights reserved

orderofthecourt

 

What the immigration stay really means

(Or what it should mean to the country and to you and I)

 

To begin, let me make it perfectly clear that the words I write are mine and what I truly believe. Call it my opinion if you like, unless I am to be accused of purposefully and intentionally reporting fake news. Although I have been previously a member of the press and may still be technically and to be specific, an investigative reporter, it is not with this title or in this capacity that I write these words. Keeping this firmly in your mind, look up the information I present to follow, on your own as to whether or not it is true.

Before the current status of the temporary immigration and refugee pause and its present stay, it is awaiting the decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals as to whether it will remain a stay or overturned and allowed to continue as was originally written, for limited days. Yesterday, 2/9/17, The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals  unanimously (panel of three judges) decided in favor of the Washington state judge’s ruling. The ‘stay’ is stayed.  But either way, it will likely go forward, to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Over the last eight years, the seven countries temporarily denied from coming to the United States, have been considered to be potential threats to the US, and have insufficient vetting policies. Six of these seven countries have been bombed over the last eight years with over 100,000 bombs. Our country has a long-standing history of not allowing immigrants or refugees from countries, we are at war with. Since FDR, there have been many more pauses of immigrants and refugees by Democrat presidents, than Republican presidents. But also this power to protect the citizens of the United States by the president as Commander and Chief, is both granted by The Constitution and given him or her by Legislative authority of the Congress, regardless of which party has been in the majority. The years 1952, a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1953 and another law passed by Congress in 1965 have been the precedents. Search this information for yourselves.

“Our country has a long-standing history of not allowing immigrants or refugees from countries, we are at war with.”

As a writer, I am employing and providing, any reader here, with back-story. If necessary, you may look that term up. To often see where we are or where we are going, it is important to see where we have been.

Search the recent private donor party of the founder of Media Matters and a recent disclosure of a confidential memorandum of how it and it’s entities seek to delegitimize the current administration with ways to impeach, impede or prevent its agenda from moving forward by way of the courts and reassert the present gurgling and on life support, Democrat Party, by 2020.

Enter, the George W. Bush appointee, a federal court judge in the state of Washington. His appointment, by a Republican president, neither make his rulings Republican or conservative, but should not control the outcome of the other 49 states and our territories. But this is how it has shaken out. One state judge has affected the rest of the nation. Research it for yourselves.

So the Justice Department acted to overturn this stay and its present status sits with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Although I cannot prove this, I really do believe that Media Matters searched out this judge on purpose, knowing full well that it would lead to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is known to be a progressive and liberal court, whose decisions are often struck down by the US Supreme Court. Search these things, for yourselves.

Meanwhile, in Washington DC, the Democrat Party continues to block, obstruct, resist, or call it what you will, slow the confirmation of the United States Attorney General. The US attorney was confirmed and sworn in yesterday, 2/9/17.  Had he already been confirmed, he would have most likely presented a more excellent argument at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, but I am doubtful that the decision this court will rule on (as it now has), would have been any different. That should’ve been, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should’ve never even heard the case and the judge in Washington, should’ve never challenged it in the first place and especially with words such as causing, “irreparable harm.” Those are the Washington state judge’s words that this so-called ban has produced, “irreparable harm.” One of the current countries is Syria and recently,  after this order was signed by the president, a Syrian was allowed into this country, for emergency medical treatment, which could certainly be argued that had they not received it, it could have caused irreparable harm. Inconvenience to businesses, workers and families are not the same as irreparable harm. And whether or not that this order was rolled out properly, is not as important as national security, national sovereignty, and the protection of its citizens. Search for this, the research has already been done. Make it your own.

The likelihood of the presidential nominee to the Supreme Court, will be slowed and prevented from being confirmed, for as long as possible is, very likely. I suspect it is not only for the prevention of nine judges being seated on the Supreme Court or overturning what the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will likely decide shortly. If there are not nine justices seated, the case goes back to its last court, which in this case would be, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The research about this exists. Search for it.

The Supreme Court is supposed to be apolitical and that sounds great on paper, but many would argue that it is equally divided with four conservatives and four more, liberal judges. The presidential nominee if confirmed is, considered to be a conservative judge and his decisions aligned with four others, would overturn the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals if so they decide and the order would be left in effect and the stay lifted. You search and research these things.

But there is something else to consider or I should say, someone else. Supreme Court judge Kennedy, resides over the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. He is often a swing vote as his record shows, he is highly resistant of anything which prevents or lessons judicial power and especially, judicial review. Judicial review, in my opinion, is unconstitutional and only came about because, judges did not feel they had enough to do in the Supreme Court. Since adoption of the Constitution in 1789, courts have played around with the idea. In 1803, a law was struck down as being “unconstitutional” for the very first time, by the Supreme Court. Ever since that case, the Supreme Court seems to believe that judicial review is their constitutional right. Even judges are human beings, appointed for life with passion, political leanings and etc. but judicial review sets the precedence that it is the judiciary which determines what is or what is not law and has led to the idea of, “legislating from the bench.” Research it yourself.

“ You seem … to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps…. Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.”

-Thomas Jefferson 1820-

The US Justice department, now with Attorney General Sessions sworn in, could request an en banc. In law, an en banc session (French for “in bench”) is a session in which a case is heard before all the judges of a court (before the entire bench rather than by a panel of judges selected from them. Supreme Court justice Kennedy has a choice: He can either decide the appeal on his own or refer it to the full court of all 29, 9th Circuit Court judges to hear arguments from both sides. In a case of such national gravitas, he’ll probably chose the latter. Feuer says if Trump’s lawyers do appeal to the Supreme Court, “they’ll probably ask for an emergency stay of the Seattle judge’s nationwide injunction” Research these things and perhaps the unfamiliar terms here, for yourselves.

All three branches of government are supposed to be, equal branches and yet history has shown that each branch has tried to garner more power, for themselves. So, Justice Kennedy could side with the other liberal judges and the opinion could be decided 5 to 3, in favor of overturning the executive order. This of course depends on whether or not the Supreme Court hears this case, before the ninth Supreme Court justice is seated. And even if the ninth judge was seated, Kennedy could still side with the other four liberal judges and the outcome could be, 5 to 4. I would hold Media Matters accountable, for orchestrating this, as there are odds in their favor of success, with either the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals or the United States Supreme Court. Then, there are all the other pending lawsuits, basically about the same thing and basically orchestrated, by Media Matters. Research these things, for yourselves.

How would they or could such as Media Matters be, so calculating, devious, intentional and corrupt. They would argue that their efforts are in resistance to others which are, calculating, devious, intentional and corrupt. Call this the Hegelian Dialectic or order out of chaos, when your efforts pit the very institutions and its own people to accomplish, whatever is their intended end and by whatever means. Research these things and perhaps the unfamiliar terms here, for yourselves.

What could this all mean to you and I??? Does this mean our rights do not come from God, they are not protected by The Constitution, they are not executed by the executive branch and legislated by the legislative branch, but only exist, as what the judicial branch says is law and what is lawful or unlawful and of, to, and by whom????

orderofthecourt2Contrary to what many people believe, we are not a democracy. We are a representative republic. If We the People do not reform our government to be of, for and by the people, having three equal branches, we are not even a democracy, which is, the rule by a majority nor would we be a republic, which is ruled by law, but we would be ruled by an oligarchy, the rule(s) of a few, for all of the rest of us. That is not freedom, it is enslavement!

And the protestors deceived with good intentions, co-mingled with rioters that are often paid, and the media complicit in failure to report, and education failing to inform, are unraveling the very fabric of the Stars and Stripes of our Republic, whose flags they fly and trample beneath their feet.

And did you think this was just a mean-spirited, religious-banning executive order? Was it to protect our rights? Or will it be the end of, the United States of America, by order of the court?

 

1 of WE,

MySignature_clr

 

 

 

 

1 of WE

Advertisements

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

 

Why I’m Not Liberal; Not a Liberal, Not Conservative or a Conservative, just an Independent 4

July 27, 2015

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

by Dahni
© 2015, all rights reserved

PART 4 of 4 FINAL

AppleEye3

I would like to be liberal; a liberal, but I CANNOT be now or in the future! I may have thought I was liberal; a liberal in the past, but I CANNOT be now or in the future!

A belief which is followed by actions where the word “liberal” has been hijacked and re-defined that in practice means something different or that it is something which it is NOT is, nothing less than, THEFT! How can anyone be set at liberty when to do so, others are enslaved? How can one’s “free” choice be really “free,” when it holds others captive? How can anyone be made free by taking from someone else? How can one be paid from funds they have not earned and that were taken from others without their permission, their will; their choice? How can anything that is bankrupt (non-existent) be given to anyone by borrowing it against the future of those that will be bound to even more lack-ah-nuttin’? How can your choice make me “free,” when it takes from others, burdens them, enslaves their futures and robs me from ever being free, to help make free, anyone else?

Today’s “liberal” is NOT free and cannot therefore, make “free,” anyone else! It is nothing more than like a carrot on a stick. The poor, brute, bridled beast keeps reaching for the promise of “freedom,” but will never taste that “freedom” nor eat of “liberty!”

Both the binder and the bound, dependent upon each other are, all in bondage!

Both the binders and the bound, dependent upon each other are, all in bondage!

So, I’m NOT liberal or a liberal! I must then be a conservative? I would like to say YES, this is true, IF by the meaning of “conserve” it would mean, “for ALL to enjoy the fruits of Liberty, for as long as possible! But, the words “conserve” and “conservative” have also, been hijacked by another political party, the Republican Party.

Poll after poll suggest that WE the People do not trust Congress and it is made up of many parties, but mostly and always and usually controlled by just 2, the Democrat and Republican parties. Only the media has just a slight edge above Congress, in these LESS THAN, UNFAVORABLE POLLS!

The facts are, WE are divided and perhaps more so now, than at any time in the history of the artist formerly known as, “The United States of America.” It seems that WE use our lives, liberties and happiness to pursue HOW to insult our political opponents like good ol’ Mer-cuns’ (Americans).

“A Pew Research Center report released this year concluded that “Republicans and Democrats are more divided along ideological lines—and partisan antipathy is deeper and more extensive—than at any point in the last two decades.” As anyone who has ever looked through comments on a political blog can attest, this polarization often translates into venomous language, with Republicans and Democrats slinging insults at each other over the partisan divide.”

“American English has a specialized vocabulary of insults based on party affiliation. For instance, a Democrat deriding a Republican might use the term wingnut, combining the notion of right-wing extremism and irrational nuttiness, or Rethuglican (Rethug for short), a blend of Republican and thug. The lexicon of Republican insults for Democrats includes moonbat, which the late William Safire traced back to libertarian blogger Perry de Havilland in the fuller form “barking moonbat”, suggesting  ideology-crazed partisans howling at the moon. Even more common than moonbat in Oxford’s tracking corpus is the schoolyard-esque slur libtard (from liberal and –tard in retard, an offensive term for a person with intellectual disabilities). Liberal neologists have gotten in on the –tard act too, but Teatard (with reference to the conservative Tea Party movement), conservatard, and Republitard have thus far failed to achieve widespread currency.” 

excerpts from: How to insult your political opponents like an American

http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2014/11/political-insults/

Liberal8

How can anyone be “free” by insulting or putting down others? It CAN’T BE DONE! It is neither logical nor possible. Those negative terms from the chart above are NOT coming from as you would expect, little children. And they are not just coming from Mr., Mrs. & Ms. John or Patty Q. Common Public. Oh no, these words often originate with and/or are coming from our supposed servant/leaders. These insults are coming from, men and women highly educated and even financially successful (at least after they get their claws on other people’s money and resources) that are acting like, little children! Remember the Latin word, educatus? It means to lead out. To educate (“to lead out”) aligns, meshes or lines up perfectly with the words, “free” and “freedom” and page, pages (Latin liber a collection of books, hence Library) book, books and what liberal arts were supposed to be for, to make people “free!”

It is this two-party system (corrupt system), the Democrat and the Republican parties that have each and both and together, hijacked our liberty! As an expression goes…

Liberal9

…”there’s not a dime’s difference between them!”

Why a “dime?” Well, it is pretty thin and in fact, it’s not worth much; can’t buy much and is, the thinnest of all our current metal currency that presently, still, reads,

“In Congress the Media (oops sorry about that) “God” (soon to be crossed out too?) “We trust.”

This two-party is more like some big inverted V (^). Down shere,’ they look like Dumbo the Elephant and Buffo the Jackass. They’re miles apart in difference or so it seems. But way up yonder,’ there’s “not a dime’s difference between them.” Up there, they’re BFF’s and thick as thieves. Down here, we would just like them to get along and get things done. They will, if they have to, I guess? They call it, “The Compromise.”

Liberal10

“OK, today, you get the right pocket and I’ll take the left!”

Perhaps like you, I’m just an independent? No, I’m not a member of the Independent Party, just an independent. For myself anyway, I am an independent because, that’s what it says in the Declaration of Independence, the ‘apple of gold!’ This is what the Constitution, the ‘picture or frame of silver’ says. The picture or frame is, made for the apple and not the apple for the picture! And it is ALL, to protect and preserve. every single one of, WE the People! Oh, but what am I saying? The Declaration of Independence? That’s old school; just a dead and dusty parchment? And the Constitution, well, that’s just a flawed document anyway? But I’m just naive  enough, stupid enough and foolish enough to think, I’m one of, WE the People; I’m an independent. And besides all of that, I have never been invited to anyone’s party! 🙂

WE NEED TO RESET_but!

1 of WE the People,

MySignature_clr

Why I’m Not Liberal; Not a Liberal, Not Conservative or a Conservative, just an Independent 3

July 24, 2015

short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-q7

by Dahni
© 2015, all rights reserved

 

 

PART 3 of 4

Liberal2We heard about the unfair advantages of the 1% at the expense of or on the backs of, the 99% or the rest of us. We are told it’s the mega-n-aires’ (mega million-aires’ and mega billion-aires’) and BIG OIL, and BIG BUSINESS that have taken advantage of the ‘system’. But who wrote, writes, controls and benefits the most, from the ‘system? Who writes all the laws, enforces all the laws and interprets all the laws? The legislative, executive and judicial branches of government – POLITICIANS, that’s who! Yes, even the judicial branch has become political! Who gets to decide what their rules and regulations are? Congress. Who gets to decide when and how much to raise their own salaries and benefits; the salaries and benefits of the other branches and even if or if not that the minimum wage gets raised, for the rest of us? Congress. They ARE, the way less than the 1%, for the rest of us, the 99%!!!

forcing the breaking of the chains that bind…

under the all-inclusive warm blanket of tolerance…

Why do they do this? Why do they seem to champion everyone and every thing? Could it possibly be, to win votes and maintain their control? Why do we continue to let them do this? Could it possibly be, for the promises they made? How well can one keep a promise, when there really is NOT enough to fulfill them? And the promises are made with full knowledge that it can NOT be fully, fulfilled! Still, I guess people want to believe in magic, fairy dust, hitting the lottery and all manner of fantasies? And in practice, they pit all of us together against each other because, we must be tolerant and accommodating of all people? So what if some lose and others win? Actually, there are no winners in this model, EVERYONE LOSES something, a little or a lot!

…Liberty is smothered

…Liberty is smothered

Now along with taking from the haves and giving to the have-nots, this liberal thinking NEVER takes into consideration, what happens to those that much is taken from. It’s one thing to want to help people and to save this or that, but what are the ramifications of these choices? How do good intentions, negatively impact others? You might want to save the great white sharks, but how does this impact my right to swim in the ocean?

You might want to protect chipmunks, but how does their increased population effect the integrity of my concrete sidewalk and the crawl space underneath my porch, where they tunnel constantly and live? Well sure, I have one of those ‘Have-A-Heart’ traps. What am I supposed to do with them after, I catch them on my own property? Let them go? Then why catch them in the first place? Transfer them someplace else? Sure, allow me to force my problems onto others? Oh, and if caught, I’d get fined, for moving them in my area, more than 3 miles because, their diseases (if they have any) might be different from those over three miles away. And did I mention, most likely they will come back if left, less than five miles away? And I would have to pay for and have to have a permit to transfer them. Am I then therefore, being forced to destroy them? And if I did or do, am I forced to run the risk of being reported, for animal abuse?

Just so you know, I put myself in this position, all by myself because, we just wanted to feed the birds. Birds? Oh, so many I can’t count them and cannot afford to feed them, but once a week. I made them dependent along with the chipmunks, birds of prey, foxes and coyotes that are now attracted because of, the abundance of birdseed and birds! Apparently I, I have screwed up the entire Eco system, where we live! 🙂

But YES, your desire to help others; save stuff and your freedom of will, deprives me of mine as well as all the critters I have kept from independently, fending for themselves. I have become a horrible and despicable person just because, I like watching the birds and wanted to feed them in exchange for my enjoyment of them.  🙂

Under the banner of non-offending and political correctness…

Under the banner of non-offending and political correctness…

Oh, I should not be allowed to express my opinion, UNLESS IT AGREES WITH YOURS? I shouldn’t use the word “liberal” as if, it were a four-letter expletive? I am probably offending someone? I am not not being sensitive or politically correct?

 

…Freedom of Speech is gagged

…Freedom of Speech is gagged

Perhaps the worst thing of all, is that if they do not help or “free” or “liberate” others, the deprived and down-trodden would not be able to do this for themselves? Somewhere in the twisted mind of the liberals, they must actually believe they are better than and smarter than, those they want to help? They surely must believe that without them, others cannot raise themselves up or “free” themselves? Surely they must feel quilty that they have so much, when others have so little? Giving out of guilt especially with someone else’s money or stuff, does not sound too “freeing,” to me!

This whole B.S. robs people of their initiative, their spirit, their confidence and from ever realizing their full potential! Generation after generation are born into and enslaved to, social programs, public assistance and welfare! Month after month, people are paid not to work and are paid more than they could make on their own, without the necessary specialized skills, training and education. There is no incentive to rise up and out of bondage. Instead of a hand up, people are given an almost endless supply of hand outs. Instead of teaching people how to fish that they would never starve a lifetime, the hungry are fed a fish, for the day and day after day. That is until, the fish run out or there is no more means (money and etc.) to acquire the fish or the fish become extinct. You know, this whole things sounds like a virus. It takes and destroys everything in its path and eventually dies off itself, due to, not having anything left to destroy.

 

continue to Part 4

Why I’m Not Liberal; Not a Liberal, Not Conservative or a Conservative, just an Independent 2

July 23, 2015

short url to this post: http://wp.me/pGfx1-q5

by Dahni
© 2015, all rights reserved

Liberal3

PART 2 of 4

The word “liberal” has been associated in politics with a particular political party, the Democrat Party. It has been tied to socialism. But those in the party, do not like to be referred to as socialists and prefer to use the word “progressive” or our word, “liberal.”

But as a political ideology, being a “liberal” would include social and economic theories and practices. On the surface, a “liberal” champions all those that may seem to have no voice, minorities, the poor, down-trodden, the all-forms-of-challenges, the disenfranchised and etc. This certainly sounds like me! I mean, I’m for helping people who, for what ever reasons, cannot help themselves. Sure, I’m for everyone having the same opportunities in order that every one of us, WE the People, can enjoy our inalienable rights. Such rights as: Life, ‘Liberty’ and the right to, Pursue whatever makes us individually Happy, without burdening anyone else or depriving them of their same inalienable rights! But in practice, “liberalism” and “liberals” fail! It is like the true words of “liberalism” and “liberals” have been hijacked! The words have been re-defined and made into something in practice, something that they are, absolutely NOT!

The People of the United States have long been one of the most charitable people in the world! I believe current data would show that this is still true today. People do want to help others! Parents want to help their children and they want them to have more, be more and do more with their lives than what was available to them! On the surface, what’s wrong with any of this? Nothing, absolutely nothing! But we as a people have, a tendency to give out of our need. This can be argued as NOT being such a good thing. Consider instructions given to the passengers on a plane by the attendants. Do they not instruct, in case of an emergency, to first take care of yourself with say, the oxygen mask and then to help your children? Yes, of course, every airline tell us this! Common sense explains why. If we cannot breathe, we can’t really help our children can we? NO, we cannot! As to giving and receiving, isn’t it or wouldn’t it be better, if we all had more than we needed and that we give from our abundance and not out of our need? Sure, you know this is true. But still, many of us, maybe most of us are, often willing to give out of our need. And here is where the current words of “liberalism” and “liberal” break down and fail as, they are defined and practiced today. The key word is, “willing.”

forcing the breaking of the chains that bind…

forcing chains to be shattered just to make more…

 

 

Liberal3

…bind all to bondage

If you decide and are willing to give to someone or to something out of your need, it is your choice. You are “free” to do so. But “liberalism” and “liberals” remove this choice; this freedom of will. A certain percentage of the population decide, for the good of others, to take from them that have and give it to them that have not. In a court of law, this is a crime and it’s called stealing or theft. The fictional and romantic deeds of Robin Hood and his Merry Men/Maidens might sound good on paper, or view well at the movies, but they were still thieves, robbing from the rich and giving to the poor. Now one could argue that the king stole all the money from the poor in the first place, but how does the same crime, justify the ends?  Oh sure, morally, to take back what belongs to you may be argued as NOT stealing or theft, but legally, and yes, we are still technically a republic and based on laws, it would be breaking the law. Stealing is, still stealing! Stealing is stealing and theft is theft!

Modern-day liberalism borders on “taxation without representation.” Sure, we supposedly or technically have representatives or representation in Congress, but who gets to decide who gets what, who gets taxed, how much you are taxed, where your money goes and who benefits from it? Certainly NOT the individual! But 435 representatives, 100 senators, 9 supreme court justices, 1 president and perhaps, a few thousand bureaucrats make most of the decisions, for over 300 million of the rest of us! Not only that, there is really NOT enough to go around, to meet every need. We know this is true because, we are in debt to the tune of trillions of dollars and we are borrowing money, not to pay off any of this debt, but mostly just to pay the interest, on servicing the debt. And speaking of debt, why do WE often hear about “raising the debt ceiling?” Would not a better and more accurate analogy be, digging a deeper hole?

Modern-day “liberals” and “liberalism” might have good intentions, but it removes from every individual, the “free” choice. It forces us to pay beyond our need, forces us deeper into debt, forces these debts upon our children, their children and on and on, way into the future. IT CANNOT BE SUSTAINED! If it cannot be sustained, there goes the future! If I am broke, you cannot get anymore from me and that’s just a fact. Forcing you to fill my lack will eventually make you go broke and that’s a fact. This is what is called, ‘redistribution of wealth.’ Nothing is ever made nor is wealth ever created, it’s just redistributed, somewhere else to someone else. Now why would any intelligent person (and most of our politicians are, if not intelligent, they are, highly educated) want to continue such an idiotic ideology and practice?

continue to Part 3

Why I’m Not Liberal; Not a Liberal, Not Conservative or a Conservative, just an Independent

July 22, 2015

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

by Dahni
© 2015, all rights reserved

 

To begin, though this post may appear to be lengthy, it has taken me years to be able to understand my own personal feelings about this subject and to articulate it or put it into words. Perhaps for some, I am merely “preaching to the choir,” as it is already something you agree with? To others, no matter how logical it may be, if I try to convince you beyond your will, won’t you remain of the same opinion still? But to those that are open-minded, unsure or are, “on the fence,” perhaps it will be of some benefit to you? That is my intention!

But to understand why I am not a liberal, we need to understand what a liberal is. One would think that the dictionary would be the best place to define the word, but it’s not! According to dictionary.com, there are 13+ definitions. No help! So let’s look at the origin. Again, according to dictionary.com which gets its information from the following:

 

Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 2012 Digital Edition
© William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins
Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2012

We read—

 

“1325-75; Middle English < Latin līberālis of freedom, befitting the free, equivalent to līber free + -ālis -al1”

 

So, līberālis basically meant “free” + “all” or “free all.” This was what it meant to be liberal or to be a liberal. OK, now we are getting somewhere. Hmmm, is the word ‘Liberty’ a derivative? I wonder if there is an association with the word, “library?” In fact, just a small accent mark is all that separates the root words of say, ‘liberty’  [Latin – līber] and ‘Library’ [Latin – liber] which is a collection of books. ‘Liber (without the accent mark)  from Latin is, defined as —”of a tree, the inner, bark: Because dried bark was anciently used to write on, a book, work, treatise:

 

“In ancient Roman religion and mythology, Liber (“the free one”; Latin: Līber [ˈliː.bɛr]), also known as Liber Pater (“the free Father”) was a god of viticulture and wine, fertility and freedom. He was a patron deity of Rome‘s plebeians and was part of their Aventine Triad. His festival of Liberalia (March 17) became associated with free speech and the rights attached to coming of age. His cult and functions were increasingly associated with Romanised forms of the Greek Dionysus/Bacchus, whose mythology he came to share.”

Grimal, Pierre, The Dictionary of Classical Mythology, Wiley-Blackwell, 1996,

 

Liberal arts were taught and practiced in the ancient world. Perhaps at sometime, I will write a post about ‘Liberal Arts’ as it is, really, very interesting! The ancient Greeks and Romans likened these arts (7 total) as (knowledge/wisdom/understanding) being like, ‘ways’ of water, rivers flowing that would make one “free.” Now the 20th century only ended about 15 years ago. That’s not too long ago. For most of its 100 years, there were liberal colleges, liberal arts and a degree in liberal arts, used to mean something; it mattered; it was important. Liberal arts were to “broaden” the student’s understanding and make them able (“free”) to make a greater contribution to society as a whole and make them each, more successful, for themselves, their families, friends and again, society as a whole.

The Libertarian Party and I suppose to some degree or another, the Tea Party, has its roots in the Latin root word of līber, which means, “free.” On the surface, all this “free” stuff sounds great! Who wouldn’t want to be “free” or made “free” by knowledge, wisdom and understanding? No one right? Oh sure, everyone wants to be “free.” But the problem is, the word “liberal” does not mean what we think it means, as it is used today.

Liberal6

continue to Part 2