What Kind of a Captain are You?

I found this video and the article that accompanied it to be a reminder that we rarely recognize the greatness that may be right in front of us.

Just as the Constitution is a plain and precious document that is seldom read by the average American, is the value of John Bell's playing of the violin any different? How often do we really stop and smell the roses, or in this case hear the violin? Too often we find ourselves lost in thought and oblivious to the world in which we are walking. We ignore the needs of a fallen brother or sister and let the Samaritan that follows us take care of the tasks that we, as the hands of Christ could have tended.

In the seminars and workshops I give I often tell people to “100% BE PRESENT” in each moment of their day. When we so live our lives we find the hidden treasures of knowledge and experiences that are to be found on the path less traveled. This life style however takes commitment to a changed view of our role in the world.

If we simply wander as a rudderless ship through life, then we take little responsibility for our actions. If, however, we take the view that we are “The Captain of Our Own Ship,” then we find that each and every decision and action we take has a consequence. We quickly discover that we are wholly responsible for the course we chart.

This changed view of life helps us to find the value in the moment, rather than the moments passing away worthless and wasted. When we are constantly living in the present and aware of our surroundings, we will easily avoid the uncharted rocks and reefs; while still being available to capitalize on and profit from those small windows of opportunity, be they intellectual, financial or spiritual.

Which brings me to one of the final question I ask folks, “What kind of a captain are you”?

"...Prohibiting the Free Exercise thereof..." of the Freedom of Religion

When did the "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" vanish in America? The answer to this isn't quite clear but what is clear is that in Dearborn Michigan there is a tacit support for a city religion.

What religion is that you may wonder and what evidence do I have to make this statement? It is a more radical branch of Islam that seeks to impose the dark aged tenants of Sharia. Sharia is extremely radical and unconstitutional. How is that possible you ask for a religious movement to be unconstitutional you may ask. There are two easy questions we can ask to determine its fitness under the constitution: Does it allow others to have the "establishment of religion"? Does this religion in anyway act or create a prohibition on the "free exercise thereof"? If the religion does then that religion is violating the constitution.

So now we must ask; Does Sharia Law violate this standard? Yes! How? Sharia does not permit an individual to proselytize to Muslims, which is at least a marginal issue of free speech. Sharia does not permit a Muslim to leave the faith, on pain of DEATH. Does that sound like it violates the "Free Exercise" Clause of the First Amendment? It does to me!

This is not only unconstitutional it is unconscionable! As all who know me can attest, I am very much a man after Thomas Jefferson’s point of view, where the "free exercise thereof" of another's religion is concerned.

"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

Yet when it comes to Sharia even I have to draw the line. It not only is picking the publics pocket in this case it literally seeks to enforce its religion at the point of a gun!

This is utterly unconstitutional. There are many on the left who will quote another Jefferson thought,

"There is no freedom of religion without freedom from religion."

Yet these very same people are the ones who are allowing this principled position to be overrun at the point of a gun. If the police are enforcing something IT IS INDEED at the point of a gun.

One more Jefferson quote for you to round out this post.

"Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind."

Have we surrendered our reason if we allow the gun barrel enforcement of Sharia in the United States?

Is it really jobs creation if it cost the market jobs?

Here is a classic old article that handily explains why the "new" jobs creation bill will not create the jobs it is touted to be creating. Yet there are few politicians left or right that have the economic background to be able to understand this policy mistake and fewer still those who do and are willing to stand up and fight this destructive insanity. Here is an excerpt from the still relevant article written in 1987; by Dr. DiLorenzo who is Associate Professor of Economics at George Mason University and an Adjunct Fellow at the Center for the Study of American Business, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri.

The reason why government jobs programs cannot create jobs is straightforward: Even though the programs may “create” jobs for some workers, the resources to pay for the programs must be extracted from the private sector. Taxing the private sector reduces its ability to create jobs, so, at best, government jobs programs can only alter the composition of employment, not the total volume. More government jobs are created, but at the expense of fewer private-sector jobs.

The good Dr DiLorenzo used a fine quote from one of my favorite economic commentator Fredrick Bastiat. He stated of government job creations “is nothing but a ruinous hoax, an impossibility, a contradiction, which makes a great show of the little work that it has stimulated, which is what is seen, and conceals the much larger amount of work that it has precluded, which is what is not seen.”

Life is hard enough when you are in the process of raising kids and living life. The government should NEVER ride in claiming to be making life better while in reality destroying the very fabric of our economy and the job creating engine of the entrepreneurial spirit. Sadly, it is all too often a demand of those most affected by the difficulties of an economic down turn! So the next time you hear one of your Senators or State Legislators or even the President of the United States say that a job creation bill is needed realize that they are seeking to buy you vote and to destroy the very economy they claim to be seeking to bolster!

A Rant that YouTube Wouldn't Allow Me to Post

I just watched a favorite posting on YouTube. What blew me away was the following comment made by a poster to the site. I tried to comment on his insanity but the site didn't let me post. The poster used the id of [jdrobertstri] and here is what he posted.

Yes, i believe in all those values. I got sick over the eight Bush years of the tyranny of Wall St., the expansion of federal government, the contempt for the middle class, the stupid military decisions wasting lives and treasure. That's why I voted for Obama.
I think George Washington would agree. And Thomas Jefferson would be no friend of Dick Cheney, believe you me.

Here is my reponse to Robert.

Wake up! You speak of the "the expansion of federal government". What do you think the Stimulus Bill, ObamaCare, Auto Industry takeover, and now the Wall Street takeover. I suppose I probably shouldn't bring up the fact that the deficit under Obama has MORE THAN TRIPLED!!!

Next you mention "the contempt for the middle class". Here is a quote for you that demonstrates "CONTEMPT AND DISDAN"; This statement was made at a fundraiser for RICH CALIFORNIANS about the Pennsylvanian middle class.

"...they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Following that you speak of "stupid military decisions wasting lives and treasure." Let us consider the stupidity of how Obama handles the military as we watch all the dear sacrifice in Iraq and Afganistan get flushed away by a man who arrogantly dressed down the advice of his serving Generals. This is the man who has brought TERRORISTS to our heartland to be tried with all the rights and privileges of our citizens!

And then you have the audacity to say, "That's why I voted for Obama." Dude! Wake up and open your eyes! You are dreaming and it appears you think it is a good dream. Sadly, it is a NIGHTMARE for the rest of us liberty loving patriots!

And if that wasn't enough you go on to say, that "I think George Washington would agree." ARE YOU KIDDING?!?!?! Obama is a similar type of tyrant that George Washington was fighting against. King George was TAXING and curtailing the liberties of the colonies, that is the reason for the original Boston Tea Party. Open a real history book for once in your life and READ!

You compound you ignorance by stating "Thomas Jefferson would be no friend of Dick Cheney, believe you me." Let us consider Thomas Jefferson. He once stated,

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Here are a few quotes of Cheney's to compare:

"Direct threats require decisive action. "

"There comes a time when deceit and defiance must be seen for what they are. At that point, a gathering danger must be directly confronted. At that point, we must show that beyond our resolutions is actual resolve."

"We must be prepared to face our responsibilities and be willing to use force if necessary."

If you aren't convinced try these quote from dear old Tom!

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

In the end it is clear to any student of history and especially that period of time in which our Great Nation was concieved of and brought forth, that there is a strong likelihood that Dick and Tom would have been friends than the other way around. You are yet again wrong in your assertions. So forgive me if I soundly state that I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU!

As a parting shot I simply state that you are not paying attention to the policies of Barrack "Insane" Obama.

Net Neutrality is "Abridging the Freedom of Speech"

I strongly believe Net Neutrality is an attempt at "abridging the freedom of speech" which our Congress has been specifically instructed by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution that "Congress shall make no laws concerning" the exercise of religion "or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The internet, has facilitated the creation of sites like facebook that allow citizens of the US (and world) to do just that very thing. Now there are politicians in Congress who want to "Change" that antiquated 1st Amendment Right!

I AM OPPOSED TO THIS BILL!

Join me in letting our CONGRESS know that we OPPOSE NET NEUTRALITY!

Intrigues, Villainy an Facistic Avarice

Unless I am missing the mark by a mile, the seizure of 401(k)'s would trigger a firestorm worse than Health Insurance Reform created. Theft is theft and that is all that this move will be seen as in the eyes of those American who are law abiding and gun owning. If the terrorist loving Eric Holder and his good buddy Congressman Andre Carson fears the Tea Partier now, they will have given them even more reasons to react if they follow this plan through to its conclusion!

I am certain the ire of the tax payer at that moment will be more than any administration or elected official can stand. Especially if it is attempted under this President, who even his wife calls "a Kenyan". The Perfect Storm of intrigues and villainy is what this fascistic and avaricious plan appears to be building towards. Again, I could be wrong, but I am afraid for where this will lead and what it will mean for our children.

An Excellent Discourse on Life, Liberty and Property

This video presentation is the best explanation of what our founding fathers meant by their insertion of "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," into the Declaration of Independence.

Furthermore, it was plainly understood by those who ratified the Constitution that "happiness" was the pursuit of "property". If you disagree with t...his assertion try this historical resolution that was adopted in the Article I of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which was adopted UNANIMOUSLY by the Virginia Convention of Delegates on June 12, 1776. and written by George Mason, is:

"That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain
inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot,
by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life
and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing
and obtaining happiness and safety."

Clearly the men who wrote the Constitution understood the importance of property. Sadly the theift of property is the name of the "Socialize Everything" Crowd at the head of the Government.

I had several responses that I believe added to the facebook thread and its value:

Brandon Koller: That sentence would denote not that happiness = property, but
that each person should have the means to gain adequate property to support
one's happiness.

John Royce: I believe it more accurately put that one is free to purse to the
extent they are able the means to gain adequate property to support one's
happiness.

Paul Cargile: Furthermore, owning property insures freedom.

At the end of this is the concept that property is somehow critical to freedom. This is a simple assertion that holds great power if you care to do a bit of digging into the connections between Life, Liberty (Freedom) and Property.