Wednesday, June 22, 2011

An Introduction To Water Politics



The following quote is from "Tools To Understand Despotism from Encyclopedia Britannica":

"When decision making is left in a few hands (or compiled into a huge bill so that there is at least one issue you feel so strongly for that you have to vote for it even if other aspects of the bill is bad for the community/country - then you have limited choice {and have been tricked!}) THEN the community is moving towards despotism.

Today, a community can move towards despotism by allowing power to become concentrated in the hands of a few.

The test of despotic power is that it can disregard the Will of The People."




The above video involves people fighting to update regulations to keep thier water clean. The Koch Brothers are involved, about whom alot of controversy already exists.



Notice that Shep points out that if the unions go then the democratic party has no funding enabling the conservative economists to push through thier ideological agenda. {Learn more: Ideological Agenda Proof 1 and Ideological Agenda Proof 2 and Ideological Agenda Proof 3 }
[Note: Economic war on the people of a community counts as treason because it limits freedom and choice as it reduces access to resources to fellow citizens.]

The last point of the 'arguments made about past american presidents', I first mentioned here. (Note how sensible Glenn Beck's argument seems at a first glance - Click Here). My perspective is that there were only 13 colonies at the time, in a wilderness (especially when compared to European cities), they didn't have an economy period (much less a modern economy in a modern world) and they were making amendments to the articles that meant the most to them keeping a continuity with history and the ideals of republicanism and then Democratic. [The Democratic effort is still in the works.] - [Also note that Andrew Jackson also expanded Democratic freedoms in the political arena.]



From Zakaria's site:

In 1787, delegates from twelve of the thirteen states under the Articles of Confederation met to revise a document that was out of sync with the needs of the nation. But instead of revising the Articles, they started anew, drafting the U.S. Constitution.

After a period of debate, revision and ratification, the Articles officially ended and the Constitution came into effect in 1789. The first Congress met. George Washington became president. And 222 years ago, the Constitution became the supreme law of the land.
Has the time come to revisit the document?

America today is quite different from the America of yore. Meanwhile, other nations have updated their constitutions successfully, bringing them more in line with modern democratic representation, for example.

On the other hand, the Constitution enshrined timeless principles of liberty and justice. The document's longevity is itself testament to its lasting value. Would it be a mistake to tinker with such a success script?

What do you think? Should the U.S. Constitution be updated and if so, how? What amendments would you recommend?



Further Research Links:

Water Wars. (College lecture series)

Water Wars.

Water wars in the Middle East.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

The Ideological Debate Between... Jobs vs. Budgeting

The debt ceiling is talked about allot in the media nowadays. An increase in the debt ceiling (which is done by a vote by the representatives of the country's citizens) failed to pass on May 31 for ideological reasons. Some Republicans think that NOW is the time to stop raising the debt ceiling (something done by the GOP leaders several times from 2002 to 2008). Why should we suddenly stop following a previous policy just when we are about to do something different on the economic field? I think its because the GOP leaders have lost faith in the American ability to overcome its challenges (as Republican rule put the country on the brink on economic collapse (remember 2008-09?).

Here is what is going on:

From Fox News:

The congressman said resolving the debt ceiling issue "is crucial for our place in the world economic system," adding that he's open to all ideas to balance the budget. One option the Washington Democrat is proposing is letting the Bush-era tax cuts expire. "The deficit would go down by $533 billion," he said. "So, there are a lot of ways we can get there."

Why is it so difficult to resolve this simple economic issue? The problem is ideology NOT economics...

The old Republicans used to be sensible. Then they got old. Problem is they brought up a bunch of 'old' children as well, stuck in ideology and not aware of the facts the way Republican's used to be. ‎[For example: My grandparents lived through the Great Depression which was so traumatic that they adopted, a 'great depression' perspective. Always worried, accumulating everything they can, wanting things not to change etc. They will often accept ideas from certain authoritive sources just because they have for a long time.]


Extract:

"It used to be that conservatism was a hard-headed set of ideas rooted in reality.
Unlike the abstract theories of Marxism and socialism, it started not from an imagined society, but from the world as it actually exists.

"This is the way things work," conservatives would patiently explain to wooly headed liberal professors. "Whatever you may want it to look like, this is what it really looks like."
But consider the debates over the economy these days. The Republican prescription is cut taxes - slash government spending, then things will always bounce back.

Now, I would like to see lower tax rates in the context of simplification and reform, but what is the actual evidence that massive tax cuts are the single best path to revive the U.S. economy? Taxes as a percentage of GDP are at their lowest levels since 1950. The U.S. is among the lowest taxed of the big industrial economies.

So the case that America is grinding to a halt because of high taxation is not based on facts, either past or present. It is simply a theoretical assertion.

The rich countries after all are in the best shape right now with strong growth and low unemployment are ones like Germany, Denmark and Canada - none characterized by low taxes.
"


More proof that the economic debate in the States is an ideological debate - i.e. watch the following talk between the economists on whether we should have jobs vs. whether we should be budgeting (I know I'm biased, but that sounds like my Grandparents... sensible for an individual in dire economic times but not for an economy/country). With jobs for our youth there will be a boost in demand driven by greater income. Add technological boosts and new/small business boosts and the demand in the country's economy will be even greater - i.e. we can think innovatively and succeed with the resources that we have.

[Edit: June 22 '11 - Podcast link removed and replaced with direct video evidence (below) - even CNN notes that this is an ideological debate]



Notice where it says 'in my judgement' in the following quote - another proof that this is an ideological debate...

"STOCKMAN: Yes. That's the dilemma that we're in. We're in a deflationary cycle. We can't afford to borrow more. We can't afford to create artificial demand and artificial employment. And so, therefore, we're likely to have unemployment in the teens for the balance of the teens, that is, for a decade or more.

That's the mess that we have created after 30 years of, you know, tax giveaways and lack of control on entitlements and running this massive $800 billion war budget that we don't need and can't afford. It sounds like very harsh medicine, but it happens to be reality. We cannot borrow our way out of this one, in my judgment. We're now facing the day of reckoning, literally."


Here is another direct quote (notice that what this Republican economist thinks should be done is an ideological perspective NOT an economic one {i.e. he is using metaphor of personal budgeting for understanding an economy)...

"Two years ago, Greece was borrowing two-year money at 3 percent. This morning, they're borrowing at 30 percent. There reaches a point when the bond market is no longer willing to tolerate the kind of fiscal irresponsibility we have, and I think we're very close to that, and it is very foolish to run a risk of trying to find out how much longer we can go on with this before the reaction sets in.

So, yes, I agree it would be nice if we could afford to spend money to put people to work or put money in people's pockets, although I don't think that's a good public policy. But we can't afford it. Literally, we are broke. Literally, we are at the edge of a financial calamity and we have to get beyond the idea that there is always enough balance sheet left to borrow some more money until we get to economic conditions that are more to our liking. The conditions that we have are the ones that we have to cope with, and that, unfortunately, is the fact of life today."


It is a fact of life for people. Economies function on different principles as my new REAL Economics blog will make clear. this post is just to make it clear that raising the debt ceiling an creating more opportunities and jobs VS. the current GOP leader's 'budgeting' approach to a country's economic system is an ideological one NOT an economic one.

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Tools To Understand Democracy & Despotism from Encyclopedia Britannica


[This is an old documentary by Encyclopedia Britannica that provides a way for a person to measure the levels of democracy and despotism in a society. This documentary is made in 1946 in collaboration with Harold D. Lasswell PhD of Yale University a political scientist. Harold D. Laswell PhD begins with the statement, Avoid the comfortable idea that the mere form of government can of itself safeguard a nation against despotism. He then encourages a person to look beyond fine words and noble phrases and to use a couple of scales as yardsticks to measure the levels of democracy or despotism that may exist in a community.] 
EDIT - 11/18/2012

Democracy & Despotism: 1940s Encyclopedia Britannica Films

by Maria Popova
Vintage lessons in civic harmony, or how small-scale common courtesy paves the way for large-scale peace.
In 1945 and 1946, immediately following the end of World War II, Encyclopedia Britannica’s films division produced two educational short films, one on democracy and one on despotism, exploring how societies and nations rank on the spectrum from democracy to despotism by measuring the degree to which power is concentrated and respect for individuals restricted. More than half a century later, these analyses remain a compelling metric of social harmony and discord, in an era when we’re still struggling to understand the psychology of riots  in a global political climate where the tension between despotism and democracy is in sharper focus than ever. (read more)
 Despotism (1946 Encyclopedia Britannica educational film)






A Republic, If You Can Keep It - The American Form of Government



The essence of freedom is the proper limitation of Government

"There is a reason we refer to "the rule of law and not of men" when discussing the American political system. It is because a republican form of government seeks to restrain the unbridled and quixotic passions of pure democracy, rather than yield to them. It also rejects the desire of the majority in favor of individual rights. Democracy seeks to assert the right of the group, but so does a mob with a hangman's noose. There's also a reason why lady justice is blindfolded: She is not to see the individuals, interest groups, race, or any characteristic at all of those that plead before her--her proper concern is not directed towards them; her care is to decide the law. It's also why the question of justice as presented before judges is not one of mercy (that belongs in the will of the people as expressed through their representatives in law), but one of exacting only what the law requires be exacted. The rule of law is all about the removal of arbitrary will from its application. A judge who seeks to apply his own notions of justice and mercy (as opposed to those notions being defined by the people through law) is a judge who seeks to impose arbitrary will in opposition to the rule of law. And it is arbitrary will that is the very definition of tyranny.


Notes:

You can measure any community on this simple scale;


Be careful NOT to assume that the 'mere form of a government can guard you against despotism'.

Germany was a Republic and yet a despotic ruler was able to take root (i.e. Hitler).

A competent observer looks beyond fine words and noble phrases. [even Hitler used fine words and noble phrases - You look instead at history, actions, behaviour  results of policies (and who was the controller behind the scene NOT just the face of an action)... Then follow the dots into the present using a holistic perspective]

Two yardsticks have been proven to help any community to discover how close it is to despotism;

The Respect Scale



As a community moves towards despotism, respect is restricted to fewer people (such as restricting respect to ONLY members of a small group or one political party).

A community is becoming despotic is respect is withheld from a large group of people on account

of thier political attitudes. (such as persecution because someone is wealthy, of a different race or religion etc.).

The ability of every citizen to better themselves (and educate themselves) is another important measurement of determining the level of respect in society.

The opportunity to develop useful skills is important but not enough as the opportunity to put such skills to use (make a living) is another important measurement on the respect scale.


The Power Scale



This scale is useful to determine the citizens share in making decisions for thier community.

When decision making is left in a few hands (or compiled into a huge bill so that there is at least one issue you feel so strongly for that you have to vote for it even if other aspects of the bill is bad for the community/country - then you have limited choice {and have been tricked!}) THEN the community is moving towards despotism.

Today, a community can move towards despotism by allowing power to become concentrated in the hands of a few.

The test of despotic power is that it can disregard the Will of The People.

Despotism can be official AND unofficial.


The spread of respect and power in a community can be measured using the following 2 scales;

Economic Distribution


If a communities economic distribution becomes slanted then it is moving towards despotism.

If middle income groups grow smaller, then despotism has a better chance to gain a foothold.

One sign of a move towards a despotic society is the concentration of land in the hands of a few people.



When farmers lose thier farms they lose thier independence.

In communities that depend on almost on a single industry (such as a factory or mine) will have find that maintaining economic balance is a challenging problem

Tax Burden


Another sign of a poorly balanced economy is a taxation system that presses heaviest on those least able to pay.


Larger amount of a poorer person's income is spent on food, so sales taxes press heaviest on the poor and middle class.

The Information Scale



A community rests low on the information scale when the press/media is controlled by a few people and when citizens HAVE TO accept what they are told.

If students are not taught critical thinking skills (with a well rounded education so they have basic knowledge of history, politics, sophism, economics etc.) THEN despotism has a good chance of establishing itself.

By keeping students unable to think critically, you get adults who can't think critically (or have any ability to evaluate facts from lies). These adults will accept whatever thier chosen authority source tells them.

*********

This article combines my first and second articles on this topic, into it's (I hope) complete form:

The Republican Party name was christened in an editorial written by New York newspaper magnate Horace Greeley. Greeley printed in June 1854: "We should not care much whether those thus united (against slavery) were designated 'Whig,' 'Free Democrat' or something else; though we think some simple name like 'Republican' would more fitly designate those who had united to restore the Union to its true mission of champion and promulgator of Liberty rather than propagandist of slavery."

In 1854 there was a serious problem with a few individuals controlling the labor supply with no benefits. This created a good economic situation for the wealthy but a life of no self-dignity for their workers (the title for this type of worker of that time is 'slave'). But the republicans came in. Destroyed the slavers and help increase the standard of living for the oppressed so that everyone's environment would improve. With freedom of speech and freedom of choice for everyone - and better economic opportunities - the difference in distribution of wealth (i.e. between those who had money and those who didn't) began to improve. For a while. This means that more people have more wealth. This creates more equality, both in society and in perception of other human beings.

The Republicans were facing a country that was economically broken and socially fractured. To help repair the country and establish conditions for equality, freedom and thus democracy to flourish, the Republicans created an economically and socially sound platform to help protect the freedoms to citizens guaranteed under the constitution. 

Today, we face similar economic conditions and the neo-con Republican platform is the opposite of what the founding fathers of the Republican party sought and won. Creating the America we know and love today. Unfortunately the wealthy people, who were seeking only their own benefit and not the benefits of their fellow citizens - who were defeated by the Republican Party founders - seem to have come back from the inside of my forefathers party and have subverted true Republican ideals to serve their own purposes.

The word society is normal for everyone. We all live in a 'society'. And we all want to help other members of our society and help improve our society. We encourage our kids to help others and to be be more social and better members of society. Yet, doing that (called being a 'socialist' i.e. finding ways to improve society) has been given a bad name and anyone who opposes these speakers are immediately demonized. If you don't help other members of society - first of all, there's a danger of increased heartlessness as we become more willing to watch the poor and homeless struggle to eat - society will get worse. 

*********
The truth on the modern form of "socialism" is outlined here.

********

The following quotes in italics are an extract from Republican Platform of 1856 (The original and True Republican Party Platform):

Resolved, That the highwayman's plea, that might makes right," embodied in the Ostend Circular, was in every respect unworthy of American diplomacy, and would bring shame and dishonor upon any Government or people that gave it their sanction.


Note: The might is right plea is the same one embedded in Laissez-Faire Capitalism.

Resolved, That a railroad to the Pacific Ocean by the most central and practicable route is imperatively demanded by the interests of the whole country, and that the Federal Government ought to render immediate and efficient aid in its construction, and as an auxiliary thereto, to the immediate construction of an emigrant road on the line of the railroad.

Resolved, That appropriations by Congress for the improvement of rivers and harbors, of a national character, required for the accommodation and security of our existing commerce, are authorized by the Constitution, and justified by the obligation of the Government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.


The above two points are about infrastructure development projects. Without good roads you can't have reliable transportation for goods or even mobility between the states. In other words, good economic development projects not only provide temporary jobs and local economic boosts but provide an opportunity for business to grow and economic development to occur - All factors remaining constant that is or as it's called in economics 'ceteris paribas'.

If you are aware of Republican politics of our times then you know that the above platform of 1856 is an obvious contradiction to today's modern "Republican" platform. I call this new Republican party fake because it is controlled by a very small group of people with a great number of resources exactly like Oligarchs.

Compare Reagan...


Greatest president Ronald Reagan defends himself in court, saying he would give the money back.

To Mitt Romney...


Mitt Romney Took Bailouts & Made Money From Abortions!



Mitt Romney Has Federal Government & Federal Reserve Connections (Obviously)



And you can see what's gone wrong with the "Republicans" or more aptly called the "GOP" as nothing about thier party constitutes Democracy or Republicanism ... but its does constitute Despotism... and lying is an art that tyrants and thier followers always take to new extremes in every age.


The following interview helps provide some perspective of the modern "Republican" party:


Daily Show: MSNBC's Michael Steele discusses the GOP's movement toward institutionalization and wants establishment Republicans to stop trying to widen the presidential field.




Note in particular: About elections, 'establishment republicans', change in republican party from the 1850s (from individuals to institutions). When you focus is an institution, which is obviously controlled by a small group of people then ONLY a small group of people can benefit. Also note that Michael Steele is a completely new person with release from GOP chairperson obligations.

The GOP can't properly be called "Republican" anymore...

1. Why Ron Paul's Plan of Cutting 5 Departments/Cabinet-Posts Is Reasonable.

2. Overview of "Socialism" by The Colbert Report (backed by news sources)

3. Overview of the GOP (Colbert Report backed by News Sources)

4. Did you know that Fox News *Literally* has the right to lie in its "news"?

5. The US Is A "Mixed Economy" Because It Has 3 Branches of Government

6. [Bot Bites] Do You Support The Newt-Cain-Limbaugh Slut Train?

7. [Bot Bites] Newt Gingrich's Hypocrisy On Individual Mandates

8. [Bot Bites] Newt Gingrich Has No Ethics

9. [Feature Length] Voter Fraud In The GOP Because Of Our New "Winner Take All" Politics

10.[Bot Bites] The GOP Are Messing With The Economy Just To Get Obama!

11.The Case for Indicting the Murdochs for Treason (*as per The US Constitution)

12. The War Between Right and Left... and Why They Can't Listen To Each Other...

13. [Bot Bites] Why Is The GOP/Fox News Copying The Conspiracy Nut, Rush Limbaugh

14. [Bot Bites] Rick Perry Wages War On Women and Lies About Using Stimulus Money!

15. [Bot Bites] Henry Kissinger Is A War Criminal

16. [Bot Bites] "The Dumbing Down of America" Example 2 - Sarah Palin

17. [Bot Bites] Herman Cain's Fear Mongering Reaches New Levels

18. Newt Gingrich Is A Compulsive Liar, A Slut And A NeoCon [Feature Length In Bot Bites]

19. [Bot Bites] The GOP Listens To A Shock Jock


21. [Bot Bites] Elections Fraud in the GOP

22. The GOP's "War On Native Americans" (an extension of their "war on women")

23. [Bot Bites] Newt Gingrich Is A Proven Racist

24. What Is Class Warfare? (Or The GOP's "War On US Citizens" Part 1)

25. [Bot Bites] Why Is Newt Scared?... And Why is He Trying To Scare Others?

26. Glenn Beck Is An Idiot And A Kind Of Christian Terrorist!

27. Gingrich Takes Ages To Come Up With Ideas And They Are Awful!

28. Pat Robertson Is Beginning To See The Light! Hallelujah!

29. About Guns And Gun Laws In The US

30. Newt Gingrich Is Such A Big Loser... He Bought Twitter Followers!

31. Newt Gingrich Is So Dumb... He'll Say Anything To Get Elected!

32. Newt The Lizard... *Literally* Has Nothing Going For Him Except Attacking Obama!

33. Newt Gingrich's Is As Loyal To His Principles As He Is To His Wives

34. If Newt Can't Respect his Donors Money, How Can He Genuinely Respect A Country's Finances?

35. Newt And Palin Have Been Doing This Elections Dance For A While!

36. Newt Gingrich's Rhetoric Makes People Fear Black People More (Applies To His Allies As Well)

37. Paul Ryan Is A Liar And A Hypocrite

38. The Koch Brothers Are Into Segregation Because Of Thier Facist Roots

39. Newt Uses Words As A Substitute For Reality... And Always Blames The Black Man!

40. Christine O'Donnell Dabbles In Witchcraft and Mitt Romney!

41. Mitt Romney Is Lying About His Job Creation Record!

42. Newt Uses Words As A Substitute For Reality... And Always Blames The Black Man!

43, Christine O'Donnell Dabbles In Witchcraft and Mitt Romney!

44. Mitt Romney Is Lying About His Job Creation Record!

45. [Bot Bites] "The Dumbing Down of America" Example 3 - Michelle Bachman

46. Herman Cain And Newt Are Like Brothers From Another Mother!

47. The GOP and Fox News Team Up To Bring You Thier "War On Christmas"

48. Newt and Mitt Are Allied With The Koch Brothers On Building Racist Feelings In The Tea Party!

49. The "War Party Traitors" VS The "Ron Paul Republicans"

50. The Daily Show and The Colbert Report Use Humor To Tell Truths

51. [Bot Bites] Jon Stewart Of The Daily Show Interviews Ron Paul

52. [Bot Bites] Jay Leno Interviews Ron Paul

53. Ron Paul - Tonight Show w/ Jay Leno 03/20/12

54. Barack Obama VS Dick Cheney's Corporations (Includes Mitt Romney)


Saturday, June 11, 2011

A video and 3 links on Henry Kissinger

Henry Kissinger's book Diplomacy is a important for understanding modern politicks.

This video gives a great overview of the type of 'real politicks' has been going on for the last few decades.


Link 1

A prominent member of Switzerland’s largest political party has called upon federal authorities to arrest Henry Kissinger as a war criminal if he attends the 2011 Bilderberg conference of global power brokers which is set to begin on Thursday at the Hotel Suvretta House in St. Moritz.


Link 2

WALLACE: Good evening, I’m Mike Wallace. Tonight we’ll tackle the immediate issue that will decide the fate of our freedom, certainly, and possibly even of our survival. We’ll discuss the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union, and the chances of war. Our guest, Professor Henry Kissinger, Associate Director of the Center for International Affairs at Harvard University, and the man whose recent proposals substantially influenced President Eisenhower’s plan for military reorganization.

Dr. Kissinger, last year your attack on our foreign and military policies was apparently found so disturbing that the New York Times carried this front-page story: they said, "For the first time since President Eisenhower took office, officials at the highest government levels are displaying interest in the theory of the ‘little’, or ‘limited’, war. The theory of massive retaliation is being re-examined." That was a year ago. What has come of the re-examination?

KISSINGER: I think the theory has been re-examined; the practice has not been.

WALLACE: The theory has been found wanting, then?

KISSINGER: The theory has been found wanting, but I don’t think we have made the effort, or spent the money, or made the sacrifices necessary for… to get a capability for limited war.

WALLACE: Well now, in order to better understand your proposal for limited war, perhaps it would be well for you to define what you understand to be our current United States’ military policy. What is our military policy?

KISSINGER: Well, our current military policy is based on the doctrine of massive retaliation: that we threaten an all-out attack on the Soviet Union in case the Soviet Union engages in aggression anywhere. This means that, against almost any form of attack, we base our policy on the threat that will involve the destruction of all mankind; and this is too risky, and I think too expensive.



Link 3

Despite the fact that the United States is embroiled in three major conflicts and can barely service its own gigantic debt, with Standard and Poor this week indicating the US will soon lose its triple-A credit rating, top globalist and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger recently told fellow elitists at three different globalist confabs that the US needs to launch a ground invasion of Libya and keep the war running for at least another year.

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Introduction to true Republicanism



Extracts 1


The Republican Party name was christened in an editorial written by New York newspaper magnate Horace Greeley. Greeley printed in June 1854: "We should not care much whether those thus united (against slavery) were designated 'Whig,' 'Free Democrat' or something else; though we think some simple name like 'Republican' would more fitly designate those who had united to restore the Union to its true mission of champion and promulgator of Liberty rather than propagandist of slavery."


In 1854 there was a serious problem with a few individuals controlling the labor supply with no benefits. This created a good economic situation for the wealthy but a life of no self-dignity for their workers (the title for this type of worker of that time is 'slave'). But the republicans came in. Destroyed the slavers and help increase the standard of living for the oppressed so that everyones environment would improve. With freedom of speech and freedom of choice for everyone - and better economic opportunities - the difference in distribution of wealth (i.e. between those who had money and those who didn't) began to improve. For a while. This means that more people have more wealth. This creates more equality, both in society and in perception of other human beings.


The Republicans were facing a country that was economically broken and socially fractured. To help repair the country and establish conditions for equality, freedom and thus democracy to flourish, the Republicans created an economically and socially sound platform to help protect the freedoms to citizens guaranteed under the constitution. 


Today, we face similar economic conditions and the Republican platform is the opposite of what the founding fathers of the Republican party sought and won. Creating the America we know and love today. Unfortunately the wealthy people, who were seeking only their own benefit and not the benefits of their fellow citizens - who were defeated by the Republican Party founders - seem to have come back from the inside of my forefathers party and have subverted true Republican ideals to serve their own purposes.


The word society is normal for everyone. We all live in a 'society'. And we all want to help other members of our society and help improve our society. We encourage our kids to help others and to be be more social and better members of society. Yet, doing that (called being a 'socialist' i.e. finding ways to improve society) has been given a bad name and anyone who opposes these speakers are immediately demonized. If you don't help other members of society - first of all, there's a danger of increased heartlessness as we become more willing to watch the poor and homeless struggle to eat - society will get worse. 


The difference between the wealthy, who can afford to do something other than struggle to survive, and the destitute is growing. The middle-class is shrinking (all through Republican policies that are not based on my forefathers party - as I have shown in other articles in other blogs). The current platform (see previous post) does exactly the opposite of what would be needed to ensure our freedoms and continued democracy. 


The following video shows how democracy really works. Not as some catchy political word that is repeated over and over again till people simply are too tired to question it. Subverting the truth and even the investigation of truth with highly emotionally charged propaganda. That's treason. 


Saturday, June 4, 2011

Republican Platform - Past and Future

Republican party origins: 

Trying times spawn new forces. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 divided the country at the36° 30' parallel between the pro-slavery, agrarian South and anti-slavery, industrial North, creating an uneasy peace which lasted for three decades. This peace was shattered in 1854 by the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Settlers would decide if their state would be free or slave. Northern leaders such as Horace Greeley, Salmon Chase and Charles Sumner could not sit back and watch the flood of pro-slavery settlers cross the parallel. A new party was needed.


Read more republican history


Republican Platform of 1856

This Convention of Delegates, assembled in pursuance of a call addressed to the people of the United States, without regard to past political differences or divisions, who are opposed to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise; to the policy of the present Administration; to the extension Slavery into Free Territory; in favor of the admission of Kansas as a Free State; of restoring the action of the Federal Government to the principles of Washington and Jefferson; and for the purpose of presenting candidates for the offices of President and Vice-President, do


Resolved: That the maintenance of the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence, and embodied in the Federal Constitution are essential to the preservation of our Republican institutions, and that the Federal Constitution, the rights of the States, and the union of the States, must and shall be preserved.


Resolved: That, with our Republican fathers, we hold it to be a self-evident truth, that all men are endowed with the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that the primary object and ulterior design of our Federal Government were to secure these rights to all persons under its exclusive jurisdiction; that, as our Republican fathers, when they had abolished Slavery in all our National Territory, ordained that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, it becomes our duty to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it for the purpose of establishing Slavery in the Territories of the United States by positive legislation, prohibiting its existence or extension therein. That we deny the authority of Congress, of a Territorial Legislation, of any individual, or association of individuals, to give legal existence to Slavery in any Territory of the United States, while the present Constitution shall be maintained.


Resolved: That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign powers over the Territories of the United States for their government; and that in the exercise of this power, it is both the right and the imperative duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism — Polygamy, and Slavery.


Resolved: That while the Constitution of the United States was ordained and established by the people, 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," and contain ample provision for the protection of the life, liberty, and property of every citizen, the dearest Constitutional rights of the people of Kansas have been fraudulently and violently taken from them.


Their Territory has been invaded by an armed force;


Spurious and pretended legislative, judicial, and executive officers have been set over them, by whose usurped authority, sustained by the military power of the government, tyrannical and unconstitutional laws have been enacted and enforced;


The right of the people to keep and bear aims has been infringed.


Test oaths of an extraordinary and entangling nature have been imposed as a condition of exercising the right of suffrage and holding office.


The right of an accused person to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury has been denied;


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, has been violated;


They have been deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law;


That the freedom of speech and of the press has been abridged;


The right to choose their representatives has been made of no effect;


Murders, robberies, and arsons have been instigated and encouraged, and the offenders have been allowed to go unpunished;


That all these things have been done with the knowledge, sanction, and procurement of the present National Administration; and that for this high crime against the Constitution, the Union, and humanity, we arraign that Administration, the President, his advisers, agents, supporters, apologists, and accessories, either before or after the fact, before the country and before the world; and that it is our fixed purpose to bring the actual perpetrators of these atrocious outrages and their accomplices to a sure and condign punishment thereafter.


Resolved, That Kansas should be immediately admitted as a state of this Union, with her present Free Constitution, as at once the most effectual way of securing to her citizens the enjoyment of the rights and privileges to which they are entitled, and of ending the civil strife now raging in her territory.


Resolved, That the highwayman's plea, that might makes right," embodied in the Ostend Circular, was in every respect unworthy of American diplomacy, and would bring shame and dishonor upon any Government or people that gave it their sanction.


Resolved, That a railroad to the Pacific Ocean by the most central and practicable route is imperatively demanded by the interests of the whole country, and that the Federal Government ought to render immediate and efficient aid in its construction, and as an auxiliary thereto, to the immediate construction of an emigrant road on the line of the railroad.


Resolved, That appropriations by Congress for the improvement of rivers and harbors, of a national character, required for the accommodation and security of our existing commerce, are authorized by the Constitution, and justified by the obligation of the Government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.


Resolved, That we invite the affiliation and cooperation of the men of all parties, however differing from us in other respects, in support of the principles herein declared; and believing that the spirit of our institutions as well as the Constitution of our country, guarantees liberty of conscience and equality of rights among citizens, we oppose all legislation impairing their security.


==============================================================================

Proposed 2011-2012 Platform

2011-2012 NEW HAMPSHIRE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM SUMMARY

New Hampshire Republicans are united by our belief in God, individual liberty, personal responsibility and limited government, and our confidence in the families, communities and citizens of New Hampshire.
We will work to apply the principles embodied in this Platform and the National Republican Party Platform by:
  • Protecting the fundamental rights of the people and enhancing their freedom
  • Enhancing the New Hampshire Advantage and preserving New Hampshire's unique quality of life
  • Bringing free market solutions to bear on problems, especially in education and health care
  • Creating a government that is effective, ethical, responsive, transparent and fully accountable to citizens without interfering in their personal, daily lives
  • Opposing new broad based taxes, fees and regulations that reduce incentives for business and job creation
  • Ensuring integrity in our voting and voter registration processes
THE FIRST IN THE NATION PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY must be defended and preserved.
GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE: Our state government exists to preserve and protect the inalienable rights of its citizens. The actions of government must always be constrained by the people's rights and by the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions. We believe in the citizens' right to know what their government is doing. We support local control, and oppose unfunded mandates and federal programs that violate the U.S. Constitution's Tenth Amendment.
ENTERPRISE, JOBS AND THE ECONOMY: A strong economy secures the opportunities and livelihoods of our citizens. We will work to make New Hampshire the best place in the nation to live, visit and do business by maintaining a supportive business climate. We favor the creation of private sector jobs, preventing over-regulation of business and keeping state government lean to minimize its burden on taxpayers and businesses.
TAXES AND SPENDING: Low taxes result from low spending.  Higher taxes contribute to the growth of government and provide disincentives for economic growth. Local control of spending and taxes to support local services is preferable to state control.
THE FAMILY: Families and marriage between a man and a woman are fundamental to the preservation of society. The unborn child has a fundamental right to life which must not be infringed. Government must not inhibit or supplant parents in the care of their children. We oppose casino and expanded video-lottery gambling.
LAW AND ORDER: Safety and security is essential to society. Law-abiding citizens have the right to own firearms to defend themselves, their families and their property. We support the swift and sure punishment of criminals consistent with due process of law. We oppose the acceptance of illegal immigration or amnesty for persons who have come here illegally.
THE LEGAL SYSTEM AND THE JUDICIARY: The New Hampshire legal system should uphold the safety, values and freedoms of law-abiding citizens. Judges should recognize their proper and limited role in our constitutional system. Frivolous lawsuits burden our legal system and are a drain on New Hampshire economy.
EDUCATION: New Hampshire children should receive an education based on excellence. Parents must be entrusted to control the education of their children and choose schools that best suit their needs. Local control of education policy and funding creates the best-managed school systems.  We believe in school choice and the use of market forces to provide and improve education.
THE ENVIRONMENT: New Hampshire’s beauty and desirability as a place in which to live and work depends upon a healthy environment. Our parks, lands, waterways, wildlife, ground water, air quality and other natural resources are valuable assets. We will work to conserve open space, scenic vistas, historic and cultural landscapes and sites. We believe markets and private enterprise can provide the best solutions to energy needs.
HEALTH CARE: The health of all citizens is an important factor in the well being and success encompassed in the New Hampshire Advantage. We favor increased use of market forces to provide and improve health care, reduce costs and draw insurance companies back to New Hampshire. We oppose centralized or nationalized health care.

United Nations Bill of Rights

PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1.

  • All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2. 

  • Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.

  • Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.

  • No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.

  • No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.

  • Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.

  • All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.

  • Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.

  • No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.

  • Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.

  • (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
  • (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12.

  • No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
  • (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
  • (2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
  • (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16.

  • (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
  • (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
  • (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
  • (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18.

  • Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

  • Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
  • (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
  • (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
  • (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22.

  • Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
  • (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
  • (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
  • (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.

  • Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
  • (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
  • (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
  • (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.

  • (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
  • (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.

  • Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.

  • (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
  • (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
  • (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.

  • Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.