Archive for the ‘Restoration’ Category

November 8th, 2018

November 8, 2018

Short url to this post:

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—


1 of WE

Wear Your Button Proudly!

#Musketeer Day
#WEPeopleTogether Day

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?


Happily Ever After Constitution Day!

September 17, 2017

short url to this post:

By Dahni

© 2017, all rights reserved

Happily Ever After Birthday Constitution!

Today marks two hundred and thirty years since 1787. It is Constitution Day! Today commemorates the formation and signing of the U.S. Constitution, by thirty-nine brave souls, on September 17, 1787, recognizing all who are born in the U.S. or by naturalization, have become citizens. It was signed in Philadelphia, PA, the city of “brotherly love (and sisters too). For better or worse, indifferent or just different, WE’re still here! That in and of itself is a reason to celebrate. That’s it for history today. Rather than a lengthy essay or a long drawn-out post, let’s us just take some time today, to consider:

  1. How far those original 13 colonies had come in 1776
  2. How far those sovereign 13 states had come, from being so anarchistic and so un-united, in 1787
  3. How far this republic has come since 1787
  4. How far you and I have come in 2017
  5. How much further, are WE willing to go

How Much Further?

Happy Birthday!










1 of WE,





WE the People

May 31, 2017

Short url to this post:

By Dahni
© 2017, all rights reserved

This September 17, 2017, We will celebrate the 230th birthday of the signing of, Our Constitution. Whether WE are history buffs or not, most will know the following quotes:

“WE hold these truths…”

excerpt from: The Declaration of Independence July 4th, 1776


“WE the People…”

excerpt from: The Constitution of the United States of America, Signed, September 17th, 1787

These two documents represent our founding. The first, declaratory of such things as equality and unalienable rights and etc. Those signing, represented the People of the thirteen colonies which were declaring their god-given right to be free and independent states. Please note, no court in our country recognizes this as a legal document which has no standing and no state, according to, Our supposed-to-be-serving US, judicial branch. But that is WRONG! The same WE that held those “truths” are the same “WE the People” in the Preamble to Our Constitution, and the same “WE the People” of, The United States of America today. But please note again, no court in our country recognizes the Preamble as having any force or effect in legal matters as pertaining to Our Constitution. And again, that is, WRONG, so very, very, WRONG!

There is a familiar expression that those who live under a monarchy either in ceremonial or actual power understand. It was familiar in the times of King James, the namesake of the authorized King James Version of the Bible, in 1611. It was familiar to and in the writings of, a contemporary then, William Shakespeare. And it was familiar to King George of Great Britain in, 1776 and to our founders. The phrase was and may still be used today, “WE the King” (or Queen or other ruling monarch), “of England” (or other kingdom – rule by a monarch). These words are a figure of speech. A figure of speech is a legitimate grammatical usage of words that are truer to truth than the literal statement of fact. This figure of speech empathizes the nearest noun as its antecedent which, in this phrase, would be the word, “king.” The power of the King is emphasized by including every person and even all the property and all resources of the kingdom.

Our founders were rejecting the rule of a monarch and the dominance of any religion in their desire to be free and independent states with each individual having equal and god-given (Laws of nature and Nature’s God), rights. “WE hold these truths” emphasizes the signers of the Declaration that behind them is, all of the people and all the property and all the resources of the thirteen colonies and not just their pledge of their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, but all of Ours too! “WE hold these truths,” was then and is now, in direct opposition of and in contrast to the words, the meaning and the monarch of, “WE the King!”

“WE hold these truths” in essence is, repeated and made specific in Our Constitution in the opening of its (Our) Preamble, “WE the People!” “WE the People” emphasizes all of the people and the property and all of the resources of the Free and Independent States of 1787 and not just the signers of the Constitution of the United States of America. “WE the People” was then and still are, in direct opposition of and in contrast to the words, “WE the King,” the meaning and the rule of any monarch, even a democracy (rule by majority) or any of the three branches of Our government, THEN and still TODAY!

“WE the People” are, the authors, the writers, the signers, the power and the authority and hold original jurisdiction over all our property and all of Our resources, Our Constitution, and Our Republic. “WE the People,” are, the rule of Law (the Republic), the Law of the Land! Never, Ever forget this!! WE made the government to serve US! We do NOT serve the government!

So, in preparation of the signing of Our Constitution’s 230th Birthday, September 17, 2017, How about baking a cake?! 🙂

Happily Ever After Birthday Constitution— Love, WE the People


For Instruction on how to bake this cake, see:









For her recipe and how to make Our cake see:

“Get A Rise Out of Baking”

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

Please note, it is my purpose and intent to repeat the entire Preamble word for word throughout this series. Perhaps WE all will have it memorized at its conclusion and keep it!


1 of WE,






Next time: ‘In order to form a more perfect Union’
Last Time: ‘Ambling the Preamble’

Ambling the Preamble

May 31, 2017

short url to this post:

By Dahni
© 2017, all rights reserved


Preamble — an introductory statement; preface; introduction.
Ambling — to go at a slow, easy pace; stroll; saunter:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

This is what I am proposing to do with these next few posts. Before WE can amble, this here is the preamble. 🙂

Out of many WE the People are!


1 of WE,






Please note, it is my purpose and intent to repeat the entire Preamble word for word throughout this series. Perhaps WE all will have it memorized at its conclusion and keep it!

Next time: ‘We the People’

Class Action Lawsuit

July 8, 2016
short url to this post:

By Dahni
© 2016, all rights reserved


If pure law was made to protect the law-abiding (and it was) and not the lawless (and it wasn’t), why does it seem that the law-abiding are punished (and they often are) and the lawless get off FREE, (and they often do)? What is the problem? Is it the law or is it the lawyers? You can answer that for yourself.

But whether you intend to break the law (have criminal intent) or just break it because you are ignorant, unknowing or just incompetent, does this mean there should be little or no consequence? And please do not use the Bill Clinton (lawyer) response, “That it depends on what is, is.”

Dotting all the i’s and crossing all the t’s might be useful (but not necessarily, necessary to understand, in writing sentences and reading them, but it appears to be absolutely necessary; a requirement in legal terms, as is punctuation, capital letters or not, certain words, keywords, and all kinds of extraneous and a superfluity of bullshite loopholes. Lawyers make these legal terms or direct them.

I can certainly understand that punishment for ‘intent’ would be greater than the punishment, for just breaking the law, but because ‘intent’ has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, does not or should not mean that no charges are filed, there should not be a jury, or a grand jury, or judge only, should NOT hear the case, try the case and judge that consequences of breaking the law applies, convict if proven guilty and mete out a just punishment, swiftly!!!!

“Justice delayed is justice denied”

The quote above is a legal maxim— an established principle or proposition. Just like lawyers, and congress and government in general can’t agree on much of anything, no one seems to agree on where this quote came from either.

‘Respectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations, attributes it to William Ewart Gladstone, but it CANNOT be verified.

Some believe it was first used by William Penn in the form of, “to delay Justice is Injustice,” according to:

‘Penn, William (1693), ‘Some Fruits of Solitude, Headley, 1905, p. 86.

Mentions of ‘justice delayed and denied’ are found in the Pirkei Avot 5:7, a section of the Mishnah (1st century BCE – 2nd century CE): “Our Rabbis taught: …

“The sword comes into the world, because of justice delayed and justice denied…,”

10 Minutes of Torah. Ethical Teachings Selections’ from Pirkei Avot.

The Magna Carta of 1215, clause 40 reads, “To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.”

Martin Luther King, Jr., used the phrase in the form, “Justice too long delayed is justice denied,” in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, smuggled out of jail in 1963, ascribing it to a “distinguished jurist of yesteryear”.

Chief Justice of the United States, Warren E. Burger noted in an address to the American Bar Association in 1970:

“A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people and three things could destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgment of its value; that people who have long been exploited in the smaller transactions of daily life come to believe that courts cannot vindicate their legal rights from fraud and over-reaching; that people come to believe the law – in the larger sense – cannot fulfill its primary function to protect them and their families in their homes, at their work, and on the public streets.

Burger, “What’s Wrong With the Courts: The Chief Justice Speaks Out”, U.S. News & World Report (vol. 69, No. 8, Aug. 24, 1970) 68, 71 (address to ABA meeting, Aug. 10, 1970).

The courts are made up of judges and judges are first, lawyers. Lawyers graduate from law schools. Law schools are supposed to teach law and many of the professors may be lawyers or former lawyers that also, graduated from some law school. Sometimes, presidents are lawyers or have a law background. Congress has many former lawyers. The supreme court judges are all, first and foremost, lawyers. The entire government is riddled with lawyers.

Our biggest problem is not with the law per se, it is with the lawyers or the executives, legislators and the judiciary that make the laws, enforce or not enforce them and are more prone to NOT seek justice, but to win their cases, make their arguments, profit from them, protect themselves and their profession; their intuitions of law, and rather than protecting the innocent, they protect the lawless. Loopholes and interpretations, legislating from the bench and not whether one is guilty or not, but what can be proved is, their training and their focus.

No matter what side you may be on with the latest FBI conclusion that no criminal charges against the former Secretary of State and presumptive Democrat nominee for president of the United States, Hilary Clinton, with her mishandling of classified material and the Justice Department accepting that recommendation and no criminal charges will be filed, it’s not the law which is troubling, but the lawyers that wrote, write, interpret, defend or prosecute them, apparently at their discretion and their benefit.

If this is purely political theater (as was said by those who seek to keep this matter going), the Republican Party response seems to go to yet another law and associate it with what the FBI and the Justice Department views as, a closed case. And what law is that? Did the former secretary lie to congress, but not the FBI? But the FBI did not include that testimony in their “comprehensive” investigation. When asked why not, the Director of the FBI said that Congress had not sent them a formal request. To this the person asking said, “You will have one shortly!” So, if this continues, it could only end in a charge or charges of perjury. But perjury will be difficult to prove. The entire matter is laden with corruption and perversion. If the “careless” mishandling of classified material were not concerning on its own, as it is, the lawyers or lawyer-directed legalese that have corrupted and perverted the intent of the law, the law of the land— which is, to protect US, WE the People, from the lawless and punish  the lawless, to me is even more egregious an a threat to national security!

I will give you an example of this corruption and perversion from my own state of New York and my own personal experience.

About a year ago, I was pulled over on the ramp of an entrance to a highway. It was an obvious traffic stop, looking for drunk drivers or to see if people were wearing their seat-belts, I supposed. This was, seat-belt related. After I stopped, an officer approached me and gave me a ticket, as he was told to do, by his supervisor. His supervisor said, that he saw me NOT wearing a seatbelt and to ticket me. Now of course, I would, as most people charged with anything would say, “I’m innocent.” And it does not matter if I really was or not, as you will shortly understand. But I had two choices. I could pay whatever fine was required by my state and county and etc. or try to fight it in court. I decided to go to court.

On my court date, I was given two more choices. I was to either plead guilty and pay whatever the judge said or I could have a trial. Ooops, and I thought I was at trial and the officer would be there? Nope.

OK, I wasn’t there because I was guilty, but before I said I wasn’t, I asked the judge a question, which he allowed. “If I come to trial and plead innocent and win, will they drop all charges and any costs to me, except for my time wasted in coming to court twice? Well the judge informed me that there are no court costs, but there is an administrative fee, which I would have to pay, one way or another. Sure, label that jar of peas, peanut butter, but it’s still peas! Costs or fees, it’s still monies. That’s legalese and PC (political correctness) all rolled into one lump court cost that’s not?

So, let me see if I have this straight? Plead guilty to something I did not do. Pay whatever fine the judge decides. Points are deducted from my license. Enter a plea of guilty that become public record. My insurance most likely will go up. AND I still have to pay the (about) $100, the administrative fee? Yes. And if I go to trial and lose, I may have to pay a larger fine and the $100 administrative fee? Yes. Oh, and one more thing. The police can give me a ticket, even if they know I’ve done nothing wrong because, one way or another, I’m going to have to pay that $100! Is this messed up or what? Does this sound like extortion, racketeering and collusion to you? Is it the law or the lawyers that wrote it or directed it? Well, my prosecution rests! 🙂

WE the People, should ALL file a class action suit against the law profession?! WE the People should just sue the legal profession, sue the hell out of them! But who would do it for US? Who could WE get to represent US?????


click image to enlarge

Another maxim—

“He who represents himself has a fool for a client.”

A supposed quote by Abraham Lincoln?

This proverb is based on the opinion, probably first expressed by a lawyer, that self-representation in court is likely to end badly. As with many proverbs, it is difficult to determine a precise origin, but this expression first began appearing in print in the early 19th century. An early example comes in ‘The flowers of Wit’, or a choice collection of bon mots, by Henry Kett, 1814:

…observed the eminent lawyer, “I hesitate not to pronounce, that every man who is his own lawyer, has a fool for a client.

In the play, King Lear, by William Shakespeare, In Act I, Sc. 4, the king’s fool makes a lengthy rhyming speech, containing a great many trite, but useful moral maxims, such as:

Have more than thou showest,
Speak less than thou knowest, &c.,

The king found that testy and flat and tiresome.

Lear. This is nothing, fool.
Fool. Then, ‘tis like the breath of an unfeed lawyer: you gave me nothing for it.

Representing oneself in Latin is, acting pro se, which means, for oneself.

If WE could find among US, a lawyer(s) that could and would represent US, would they be a fool, in representing themselves as well? And their profession might think them a fool, if they dare go against them? Are WE then just shite (old English term, you figure out its current meaning) out of luck? Are WE, without representation? Are WE, without a prayer? Are WE, up a creek without a paddle? NO!

WE the People have two, to represent us— The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America. One these two documents, all the law and all the laws of the United States are supposed to be based on. The legal profession does NOT view them like that!

Regardless of what the courts might rule, the Declaration of Independence is not some past historical writing of its time and just some relic to be archived in a museum. I was then and remains a legal document, an affidavit  of fact and conclusions. In logic, it presents its factual premises (whereas) and its conclusions (therefore). It is the the foundation of Our Republic. It is Our raison d’être (reason to be). It is (WE are), The Apple of Gold in a picture of silver. It is Our Constitution which is the picture of silver, made of , by, and for WE the People, to protect, defend and preserve for ourselves and our  posterity, Our unalienable rights! The picture was made to serve US, WE the Apple of Gold, and NOT US, for the picture of silver!

Regardless of what any court might rule, the preamble to Our Constitution and the entirety of Our Constitution is relevant, essential and inseparable to the Declaration of Independence and to US, WE the People, the Apple of Gold! WE the people do have standing, and state, and original jurisdiction, to bring this case before them! Consider the following excerpts.


“The word “Unalienable” appears in one of the greatest phrases of The United States of America’s history.”

“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men [all-inclusive noun] 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

“The Kansas City Court of Appeals for the State of Missouri quoted verbatim the above language of 1776 with approval in Morrison v. State, 252 S.W.2d 97 (Mo. Ct. App 1952), and then went on to say (also quoting):”

Inalienable is defined as incapable of being surrendered or transferred, at least without one’s consent.”

Webster New International Dictionary, Second Ed. Vol. 2,
Page 1254. 252 S.W.2d at 101.

Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred.”

Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:

“You can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and can not under any circumstances, be surrendered or taken. All individuals have unalienable rights.”

Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights. Morrison v. State, 252 S.W.2d 97 (Mo. Ct. App. 1952).”

“You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government. Persons (not individuals) have inalienable rights.”

“Most state constitutions recognize only inalienable rights. Here we have the so-called same defined words of unalienable and
inalienable being separated, not as the same thing, but differently and by an appellate court judge.”

“You and I may think inalienable and unalienable mean the same thing, but apparently, courts and states do not. Therefore, what is unalienable cannot be taken or transferred and relates itself to rights, and what is inalienable, could be surrendered or transferred if by consent and relates itself to privileges. Words have meaning and carry rights and results or privileges and consequences.”

“In U.S. vs. JOHNSON (76 Fed, Supp. 538), Federal District Court Judge James Alger Fee ruled that,”

“The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, not to the person who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one who is indifferent thereto. It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be retained only by sustained combat. It cannot be claimed by attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in person.”

McAlister vs. Henkle, 201 U. S. 90, 26 S.Ct. 385, 50 L. Ed. 671; Commonwealth vs. Shaw, 4 Cush. 594, 50 Am. Dec. 813; Orum vs. State, 38 Ohio App. 171, 175 N.E. 876.

Here again we find a federal court judge using both the words “privilege” and “rights.” From the context, this is referring to the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Did you ever think that a judge would make such a ruling?”

“OUR privileges and inalienable rights could be taken or transferred, but if you or I want OUR unalienable rights protected, WE have to fight for them and become “belligerent.” WE out of necessity, to protect OUR rights, must stand in contempt of court. Words have meaning and they carry results or consequences.”

Here in the ruling is, but one example of division, or separation and in essence, an adversarial relationship.”

“If WE the People do not know OUR rights and fight for them, who will?”

Excerpts from: ‘RESET’ (An Un-alien’s Guide to Resetting Our Republic)
Copyright © 2012 by Dahni & I-Magine – All rights reserved.


Just imagine, just suppose we were able to actually get a court to hear this case. What do you think their decision would be? Yes, for themselves, the defendants! OK, so what if we get it appealed, all the way to the United States Supreme Court? What would be their decision? Would they allow US, WE the People, to RESET our Republic or rule in their favor, to keep their jobs appointed for life? Most likely to keep their job, but for US? Probably— NOT!!!!

Let’s sue the Legal Profession? Let’s bring a class action suit against the legal profession? Let US, WE the People, sue the legal profession, sue the hell out of them? Probably NOT!

Do you know why Lady Justice is blindfolded? Well, I used to believe she could see, but she blindfolded herself on purpose or purposefully, for equality; for equal justice. Now, I’m really starting to think the legal profession poked her eyes out so, she would not know the scales were being tipped (imbalanced) and the whole legal profession rigged the system, for their exclusive benefit!


There must be a better way? There is! It involves bypassing the legal profession entirely, but it is legal and the legal profession must YIELD, to the authority and power of, WE the People! Another Blog post on another day. Look for, The Thirteen Coming Soon!
1 of WE,


Lie to the Stupid American Voter

November 11, 2014

by Dahni

© 2014, all rights reserved


Well, if the title of this post does not make you want yell and scream and break something, what does it take? I’m not the one that said this. Who did? Oh, you probably never heard this from the media ANYWHERE in 2013. And you probably have not heard it from the mainstream media recently. I wonder why that is? But here it is before you right now. What are you going to do about it?

Jonathan Gruber  is, a professor at MIT, a professor of economics.  He wrote both Romney Care and he wrote the Affordable Care Act (Obama Care.)  In October of 2013, he was in Philadelphia speaking at the 24th Annual Health Economics Conference, and he spoke about the Affordable Care Act (Obama Care) and how and what they had to do to make it a reality.

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO (Congressional Budget Office) did not score the mandate as taxes.  If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies, okay?  So it’s written to do that.  In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said healthy people are gonna’ pay in… If you made it explicit the healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed, okay?  Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.  And basically, you know, call it the stupidity of American voter or whatever. But basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”

 Jonathan Gruber

Annual Health Economics Conference, Philadelphia, PA, October 17, 2013


In defense of the Affordable Care Act (Obama Care), he admits that there are problems with this law, but his last words at the end of his little speech are, repeated twice, “I would rather have this law than not.”

Don’t take my word for this, let his own words and in his own voice speak.


I don’t care how smart Gruber is, thinks he is or how smart anyone else is or think they are! When did it ever become the right thing to do, to get your way (your law passed) by lying about it? Hell, the road to hell is, paved with good intentions. So don’t give me this necessary evil crap, like, we had to lie in order to help you the people.  And remember, the Congress was told to pass the Affordable Care Act bill, in order to, “…find out what’s in it”  – Nancy Pelosi

“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill … What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?'”

John Conyers on the Health Care Bill, which he voted for:

When did transparency get renamed as non-transparency? And exactly how far do you think you’re going to continue doing whatever you do, when you call the American voter stupid?

WE the People might be the most generous people in the world (and we are) and patient (and we are, very much) and trusting (or at least we give others the benefit of the doubt, A LOT), but WE are not stupid! WE have been like lambs. It is time to roar as the Lions WE are!

The parties will not! Our founders NEVER mentioned ANY political party when they wrote the Constitution of the United States of America. In the farewell address of George Washington, he warned us about polpars (political parties). Government will not and cannot. Therefore, WE the People need to –



click that reset!   🙂




1 of WE,

an Amer-I-Can Eagle

The Minorities

August 6, 2014

I’m just one person, what can I do?


In fact, we all are just one person. This makes each of us a minority. If you really think this through, it is minorities that usually run and ruin everything!


mi·nor·i·ty   məˈnôrətē/


1. the smaller number or part, especially a number that is less than half the whole number.


Against monarchs, despots, tyrants and tyranny, minorities REbel. Minorities REvolt. Minorities REclaim what is lost, forgotten, taken and forfeited. Minorities REgain and REestablish universal rights. Minorities REwrite history and change the course of politics, beliefs, art, science and culture. Minorities REwork the laws of lords and made it the law of the land. Minorities REkindle the hopes and dreams of all. Minorities RElinquish their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, for something greater than themselves and that is, for the rest of us! Minorities REach for equal rights and equal protection under the law. Minorities REinvent the public democracy. Minorities REpublic, with a written constitution, protecting the public from the government sworn to protect all those it is intended to serve. Minorities RElax when challenges are not present. Minorities REtreat when they are afraid or when they do not believe they matter. Minorities end up Running government, business, finances, education, labor, religion, art, science, and culture and the world. Minorities Ruin everything, for the rest of us. Minorities REbel.


All we need is a minority to REset and REstore our REpublic, for the REst of us and that would bring REst, to the REst of the world!

Note: It was only a minority (about 13% of  the population in 1776), which brought us from a monarchy to a REpublic!

Which Party in November?

April 5, 2012

By Dahni © 2012 all rights reserved

Which party are you attending in November? What’s is the dress code? I don’t have an invitation. I wonder if I’ll get an invitation? I don’t think I have a thing to wear!

Parties, parties, parties! Here a party, there a party, everywhere a party-party, old McParty had a party, E.I.E.I.O.! So many parties, so many to choose from, so little time. Which party are you attending in November? Will I get an invitation? Do I even want one?

Major Parties

Note: These parties are official and presently active in the United States. They are listed in chronological order of their formation.

Democratic Party 1828

Ideology: Liberalism (American), Third Way Progressivism

Internal factions:

• Progressive Democrats • Libertarian Democrats • Moderate Democrats • Conservative Democrats

In some circles this party is called: The Demoncrat’ or The Jack-ass Party Republican Party 1854 Ideology: Conservatism (American), Classical liberalism, Fiscal conservatism, Social conservatism Factions: • Traditionalist conservatism • Libertarian conservatism • Neoliberalism • Neoconservatism

Note:  Neoconservatism is presented as conservatives, but actually favor big government, interventionalism, and a hostility to religion in politics and government.

In some circles this party is called: The Repiglican’ or The Dumb-ass Party (like as – ‘Dumbo’ the elephant Libertarian Party 1971 Ideology: Libertarianism Classical liberalism Cultural liberalism, Minarchism, Non-interventionism Political position: Fiscal: Right-Wing Social: Left-Wing Constitution Party 1992 Ideology: American nationalism, Christian nationalism, Conservative liberalism, Conservative libertarianism, Economic nationalism, National conservatism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Social conservatism, Protectionism

Note: “paleo” or paleocon (when the context is clear) is a term for conservative political philosophy found primarily in the United States stressing tradition, limited government, civil society, anti-colonialism, anti-corporatism and anti-federalism, along with religious, regional, national and Western identity. Green Party2001 Ideology: Green politics, Grassroots democracy, Social democracy, Populism, Progressivism, Civil libertarianism Political position: Left-wing


Note: This non-party and non-official party is presently active in the United States

A Non-party politician or person is an individual not affiliated with any political party. Many of these have just never been invited to anyone’s party and the rest have chosen not to attend.   🙂

Ideology & Political Position: It is difficult if not impossible to determine their ideology or their political position. This is why they are called: INDEPENDENTS! 

Note: Neither of the two dominant parties can win a national election without the Independent vote!

Other Parties

Note: In chronological order of formation. These parties are official and presently active in the United States, unless otherwise noted below.

Prohibition Party 1869 No logo

Ideology: Temperance

Yes, this party is still active. Either they are not aware that prohibition is over or waiting for the next one. Socialist Labor Party of America (formerly known as: Workingmen’s Party) 1876  

Dissolved September 1, 2008

Ideology: Marxism-DeLeonism

Note: De Leonism, is a form of Marxism developed by Daniel De Leon in the United States.

Political position: Left-wing 

No, this is not the same Arm and Hammer® baking soda. Communist Party of the United States of America 1919

Ideology: Communism, Marxism

Political position: Far-left

Socialist Workers Party (Formerly known as: The Pathfinder tendency) No Logo 1938

Ideology: Communism, Marxism, Trotskyism, Castroism

Note: Castroism (castrismo in Spanish) is a left-wing ideology, lined with and created by Fidel Castro. Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Leon Trotsky. Workers World Party 1959

Ideology: Communism; Marxism-Leninism

Political position:

Fiscal: Socialist economics

Social: Revolutionary socialism  Freedom Socialist Party 1966

Ideology: Socialist feminism, Trotskyism

Note: Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Leon Trotsky.

Political position:

Fiscal: Left-wing

Social: Left-wing Socialist Equality Party 1966

Ideology: Left-wing, Trotskyism, socialism

Note: Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Leon Trotsky.

Political position:

Fiscal: Socialist economics

Social: Anti-war, pro-choice, against identity politics Peace and Freedom Party 1967

Ideology: Socialism, Democratic socialism, Feminism, Environmentalism, Pacifism

Political position:

Fiscal: Left-wing

Social: Left-wing

Hmm, was this started by hippies or flower children? Perhaps they were concerned about ‘Free Love’ being taxed? American Party 1969

Ideology: Paleoconservatism

Note: “paleo” or paleocon (when the context is clear) is a term for conservative political philosophy found primarily in the United States stressing tradition, limited government, civil society, anti-colonialism, anti-corporatism and anti-federalism, along with religious, regional, national and Western identity.

Political position:

Fiscal: Right-wing

Social: Right-wing

Raza Unida Party 1970 No Logo Partido Nacional de La Raza Unida No Logo (formerly known as: National United Peoples Party or Race Party) An American political party centered on Chicano nationalism. During the 1970s, the Party campaigned for better housing, work, and educational opportunities for Mexican-Americans. The political ideology which gave birth to La Raza Unida Party, and which sustains it, is that of nationalism – in its fullest, most progressive, and democratic form, not in the limited, narrow sense of bourgeois nationalism.  Socialist Party USA 1973

Ideology: Democratic socialism, Socialist feminism National Socialist Movement 1974

Ideology: You figure this one out!

New Union Party  No logo 1974

Traditionally the NUP has been a DeLeonist militant democratic socialist party which “advocates political and social revolution” but denounces violence and is “committed to lawful activities to overthrow the capitalist economic system.” Hmm, maybe they should use another word besides “overthrow”? Socialist Action 1983

Ideology: Communism, Marxism, Trotskyism

Note: Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Leon Trotsky.

Political position: Far-left

United States Pacifist Party No Logo 1983

The United States Pacifist Party is a pacifist party in theUnited Stateswhich supports the anti-war movement. It supports the non-violent resistance of Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Socialist Alternative No Logo 1986

They believe the Republicans and Democrats are both parties of big business. They campaign to build an “independent, alternative party of workers and young people to fight for the interests of the millions, not the millionaires.” Socialist Alternative sees the global capitalist system as the root cause of economic crisis, poverty, discrimination, war, and environmental destruction. They argue that, as capitalism goes deeper into crisis, a new generation of workers and youth must join together to take the top 500 corporations into public ownership under democratic control to end the ruling elites’ global competition for profits and power. The group believes the dictatorships that existed in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were perversions of what socialism is really about. They stand for democratic socialism where ordinary people will have control over their daily lives.  Reform Party of the United States 1995

Ideology: Populism, centrism, conservatism

Political position:

Fiscal: Economic nationalism

Note: Economic nationalism is a term used to describe policies which emphasize domestic control of the economy, labor and capital formation, even if this requires the imposition of tariffs and other restrictions on the movement of labor, goods and capital. It opposes globalization in many cases, or at least it questions the benefits of unrestricted free trade. Economic nationalism may include such doctrines as protectionism and import substitution.

Social: Left-Wing and Centrist factions American Heritage (Formerly known as: Christian Liberty Party) 1996

Ideology: Paleoconservatism, nationalism, dominionism

Political position:

Fiscal: Right-wing

Social: Right-wing (non-interventionist) Labor Party 1996

Ideology: Social democracy; Progressivism

Political position:

Fiscal: Center-left

Social: Center-left Independent American Party 1998

Began as the Utah Independent American Party. The founders claim to have been inspired by a speech given by Ezra Taft Benson, former United States Secretary of Agriculture, entitled “The Proper Role of Government.” The initial party platform was based on Benson’s beliefs. The 15 principles for the proper role of government, taken from his speech, are held as the IAP’s basis for recruiting.  America First Party 2002

Ideology: Paleoconservatism, economic nationalism, non-interventionism

Political position:

Fiscal: Right-wing

Social: Right-wing  United States Marijuana Party 2002

Ideology: Anti-Prohibitionism (cannabis – marijuana, Mary Jane, reefer, weed and etc.)

Citizens Party of the United (formerly known as: New American Independent Party) No Logo 2004

Ideology: Pragmatism, Populism, Centrism, Moderate, Grassroots Democracy Party for Socialism and Liberation 2004

Ideology: Communism, Marxism-Leninism

Political position:

Fiscal: Socialist economics

Social: Revolutionary socialism Unity Party of America 2004

Ideology: Centrism

Political position:

Fiscal: Moderate

Social: Moderate  Boston Tea Party 2006

Ideology: Libertarianism, Non-interventionism

Political position:

Fiscal: Laissez-faire

Social: Libertarian 

Jefferson Republican Party  No logo (other than using an image of Jefferson) 2006

Ideology: No official one, but it is largelyanti-War, and for State’s rights unofficially. Supposedly this is based on: The Republican Party, now referred to by some political scientists as the Democratic-Republican Party to avoid confusion with the modern Republican Party and the modern Democrat party each of which in history, divided from each other. But originally this was an American political party founded in 1791 by then Secretary for the State Department Thomas Jefferson, and Representative for the 5th Congressional District of Virginia, James Madison.

Political position: Right United States Pirate Party 2006

Ideology: Intellectual property reform, freedom of information, open government, network neutrality

Are these hackers? Pirates? Arrrrrr!  Independence Party of America 2007

Ideology Non-partisan democracy, populism America‘s Party 2008

Ideology: Conservatism, constitutionalism

Political position:

Fiscal: Right-wing

Social: Right-wing  Modern Whig Party 2008

Ideology: Modern Whig philosophy: Pragmatism, Classical liberalism, States’ rights, Fiscal responsibility, Libertarianism

Political position:

Fiscal: Centrist to Center-right

Social: Centrist to Center-left Whig?

Where’s the wig? Owl? Well, I’m sure they give a hoot.

Objectivist Party No Logo 2008

Ideology: Objectivism (if you object to this party, you have something in common with them)

Political position:

Fiscal: Laissez-faire

Social: Individualism 

American Populist Party No Logo 2009

Ideology: Populism, Constitutional government, States Rights, Natural Rights, Fiscal transparency, Anti-trust, anti-Corporate Personhood, individualized political contributions

Political position:

Fiscal: Center-right

Social: Center-left  American Third Position Party 2010

Ideology: Paleoconservatism, White supremacism, Third Position

Political position:

Fiscal: Third Position

Social: Far-Right

Actually -far, far right and far, far left of normal. They are obviously a racist party of people, but they at least admit it.

Canary Party No Logo 2011

Ideology: Autistic rights

Headquarters: Online

Other Non-official-Non-political-political-Non-partisan-partisan-Non-Party Parties

Coffee Party 

Tea Party 

Anything But Thee Party  (includes all other beverages and positions not otherwise mentioned)

OK, I made this one up, but it would include all the others that are out there.

Note: These non-party-non-partisan and non-official parties are presently active in the United States. To understand “non-party” means that in one way or another they will participate in electing some party even if by not voting for any of the parties that win, and by default this makes them partisan and political. Understanding “non-political” means they are political.

Unknown-Should-Be-Known-Suggested Parties

You Are Too Dumb Party or The Smart People in Charge Party

Official un-official motto: “It is better to be a smart ass than dumb ass.” This unofficial party is an exclusive, members only and by invitation only party. High IQ, the right genealogy and the proper DNA is required to be a member of this party. It is made up of elitists, the so-called intellectual superiors, the smart people in charge, the highly educated and über (super) financed idiots that basically have no common sense.

Whichever The Wind Blows Party

This unofficial party as the name indicates, is made up of people and positions which are determined by whichever direction the wind blows.

The Up Yours Party

This unofficial party (people) usually vote for write-in candidates like: Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Homer Simpson, None of the Above, and etc.

The No Spin Party

This unofficial party are made up of mostly all the media that may not spin the facts, they hyper-twirl. They are usually financed by The Screw You Party (see below) in the form of massive advertising dollars, merchandise, and the unsuspecting public.

The Screw You Party

This unofficial party is made up of mostly people, companies, and organizations etc. that fund elections with taxpayer money, or private money spent to get us to vote a certain way to maintain or increase their profits. Yes, non-profit organizations make a lot of money and also use taxpayer money and they also get it tax-free. The Screw You party will fund any party that can screw you, just as long as it ends up with greater profits in their pockets.

The WTF Party

This unofficial party is made up of mostly people so confused or without a clue that they usually do not vote (see: The Rhett Butler “Frankly My Dear I don’t Give a Damn” Party below), or if they do vote, they will ask others who they should vote for, be paid by others to vote, choose the first name(s) on a ballot or just guess. 

The Rhett Butler “Frankly My Dear I don’t Give a Damn” Party

This unofficial party is made up of mostly people who definitely don’t vote or it would be a cold day in hell before they vote. Their enthusiasm for being so un-enthused will still help to decide the candidates or issues in any election. A no-vote is a vote for someone(s) or something(s). But even so, frankly, they don’t give a damn.

The Nuttin’ Party

This unofficial party is made up of mostly non-people that don’t like nuttin,’ no one, and no-how. They are usually militant. If there is nuttin’ to destroy or they’ve got nuttin’ to shoot, they will usually shoot themselves.

The Out-of-Here Party

This unofficial party is made up of mostly people who prepare and believe, it’s always time to kiss our asses good bye, although they can’t seem to come up with a clear date for the end of the world. Note: Even though the last day of the Mayan calendar is Friday, December 21, 2012, it has been found that artisan that chiseled the calendar into stone, merely ran out of room when he hit 12-21-12. His boss said, “Oh, well, that’ll freak em’ out someday!”

The Festivus Party

This unofficial party is made up of mostly people who feel left out. They have no clear ideology or position, only a motto: “When we figure out Festivus, it will be for the rest of us.”

Whew -Who Knew there were so many parties in the U.S.A.?

So which party are you going to in November? The honest truth is that all of these parties are divisive. They divide us from our money. They divide us from the facts. They divide us from our resources. They divide us from our Lives. They divide us from our Liberty. They divide us from our Pursuit of Happiness. They divide us from each other. But dividing us, unites them. These are all united and all come together, one way or another, under one or the other, of the dominant two-party  political ‘system.’

Aren’t you sick and tired of this? Aren’t you sick and tired of being sick and tired of this? Is there anything you can do about it? Who is’ “you”? Is there anything i’ can do about it? Who is’ “i”? Is there anything you and i’ can do about it? Who is’ “you and i”?  What’s a “we’? Are we an “us”?  And what’s an “us”? Are “we” and “us,” WE the People? If you and I, US, and WE the People, weren’t so divided over which party to attend, WE’d be united.

Invitations to a party generally mean others were not sent an invitation. Sometimes, some people uninvited to one party still find out about the party and try to crash the party. They are usually part of some other party they found un-responsive, un-productive, boring, got kicked out of or were sent to crash another party.

Which party are you attending in November? Maybe if WE were all united, we wouldn’t be so divided? To hell with the parties, let’s have a parade!

Parades are public, open to anyone and for everyone! Start a parade, be in a parade, watch the parade, and enjoy the parade! Read:


October 16, 2011

By Dahni

© 2011

all rights reserved

For well over two years now I have been trying to get a book out. Originally it was titled: PURPLE HAZE “An UN-alien’s Guide to Finding Our Republic. The book was finished with around 481 pages. It was not published. It needed work, a lot of work to be precise.

For one thing the title and subtitle were all wrong. The artwork for the cover was all wrong. What follows is a sample image of the former cover.

 Although Purple Haze is certainly a two word description of what many people think about our country right now, I certainly would not want to stay in a haze or a purple haze. Would you? Do you?

The idea for the title was that if you take the red, white and blue of Our flag or Republic and mix it all together, mess it all up, you end up with purple, or a purple haze. Descriptive yes, but it just does not communicate visually what this book is about.

The same thing would be true about the words “Finding our Republic.” I n order to find something, I suppose we needed to know it was lost. Most of US either don’t know there’s something wrong in Our Republic or WE don’t know what the true cause is. “True Cause,” could there be such a thing? Yes.

So a new title was needed. It needed to be more descriptive and more positive. Sure, describe the symptoms, but where is the cause? Eliminate the cause and the symptoms will disappear!

In the new book, I’ve trimmed by almost a hundred pages of needless repetition. But there is even a whole lot that is new. It is more targeted. The premises and the conclusions are really tight. Perhaps this entire book could be considered as an historical narrative, with analogies, current events, facts, fiction and non-fiction all thrown in together.

Having now completed the writing and my own personal edit, I just finished reading it from start to finish. It reads a lot better. It was written for the reader in mind. Is it interesting? Does it hold the attention. Is there humor? Is it factual and can it be proven? Can people relate to this in their every-day lives? Can I relate to it? Would I have read this book if you wrote it? And the biggest question of all, will its “prescription” (solution) really work? If it is even possible for me to be objective about my own work, my answer to all the questions is YES! You will just have to read it for yourself to see if you agree.

But the new title is:

RESETAn UN-alien’s Guide to Resetting Our Republic

The title itself shows what this book is about. The word “Our” shows who this book is for. It is for you and me. It is for US, WE the People.

Here is a sample of the cover art:

Original Cover Art © 2011 by Dahni

The plan at present is to have this out in digital format around December of this year 2011. The hardback book will possibly be available by January of 2012. One way or another, it will be out before the November elections of 2012. It needs to be. WE need to RESET our Republic! For more information click the button below:

An UN-alien’s Guide to Resetting Our Republic

Truth Trust & Treasure

November 2, 2010

Many purport to speak for the American People of the United States. And these comments can be clearly seen in light of the 2010 mid-term elections. There are advocates for party, positions and platforms. There are negative ads and perceived media bias nearly everywhere, all across the country. The truth is, not everyone can be right and if not right, then they are wrong. Whether by intent or by an incorrect opinion formed by insufficient facts, if something is not the truth, then it is a lie. Pilate once asked Jesus Christ,

“What is Truth.”

John 18:38

The truth is poll after poll indicates that most of us do not believe the politicians or the media. And this brings us to trust. The truth is most of us do not trust politicians or the media. The truth is most of us do not believe what we treasure is being protected or preserved.

“Well, here’s what we’re gonna do. We’re gonna see how well we do in this election and I think a lot of it is gonna depend on whether we still have some support not only from Democrats, but also Republicans, but they’re gonna be paying attention to this election. And if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, we’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us, if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”

President Obama

These comments have been taken to mean that basically anyone not in agreement with the president, his agenda and the Democrat party, are enemies. The president has since tried to explain his comments, but the truth is those were the words he used.

The Tea party has been demonized by many and referred to as twits, being un-patriotic and a host of unsavory titles as well as anyone else that is in opposition to the direction of this country. The president and the Democrat party have been demonized as well. The truth is the Democrat, Republican and other parties are frought with error and have all taken part in the present debacle of this country.

If there is a change in power for the House and Senate from these mid-term elections, there are many speculating as to why and what will occur as to either the results or the consequences of these elections.

John Boehner has a message for President Obama and the Democrats: Don’t expect the Republicans to play nice if, as expected, they take over the House following next Tuesday’s elections.

“This is not a time for compromise, and I can tell you that we will not compromise on our principles.”

Congressman John Boehner – Republican minority speaker of the House

Those comments have been taken to mean that if the Republicans take control of the House, they would have been given a mandate by the people. The truth is it is not about them which matters most to us, WE the People. If elected, their party is just as much responsible for our present crisis as any other party. The truth is, if elected, they are on probation with the American people.

Sarah Palin has indicated that if the American people were to even vote in candidates that are on the extreme right, this would result in balancing out the extremes of both extreme left and extreme right. The truth is this may work with the pendulum of a clock, but not with politics.

Are the mid-term elections about changing the balance of power? Are they about changing party? The truth is, even if the House and the Senate changes to having a majority led by the Republican party, it is doubtful if not impossible, for them to have a ‘super’ majority. This super majority must occur for them to make any changes whatsoever, without the help of others. So then are these mid-term elections about compromise, about getting along and working together for the good of the country? The truth is that if the American people vote in some and vote out others, what is clearly on our minds is that what has been happening these past several years, is not working or working fast enough. So what is it that we want, if we vote today and these votes change the political landscape? The truth is most of us are not voting for anyone or against anyone, but as for as it were, a restraining order. Changing the political landscape in this way in essence is saying, stop!

The truth is there are more registered Democrats then there are Republicans. The truth is neither party can win any election without the Independent voters. The truth is that any changes resulting from these mid-term elections will be made by Democrats, Republicans and Independents. The truth is, this is who WE the people are!

But what is the truth? What is trust? What is treasure?

These three are fundamentally tied and inextricably bound to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The truth is that WE the people are endowed by certain –

“unalienable rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

Excerpt from the Declaration of Independence 1776

The truth is that WE the people put our truth, trust and treasure in preserving, protecting and restoring life.

The truth is that WE the people put our trust in preserving, protecting and restoring our liberty.

The truth is that WE the people treasure the pursuit of happiness.

The truth is that these mid-term elections mean (if there are changes made in government), WE the people want to cease what is believed to be a loss of truth – of life, of trust – our liberty, and of our treasure – the pursuit of happiness. The truth is, this is or these are the only reasons; the only purposes for which WE the people should vote for today!

E plurbis unum

(out of many one)

see also:


Vote Now animated gif © 2010 by Dahni & I-Magine all rights reserved

1 of WE,