Local Action

preambleThis New Years holiday has been a quiet one and many ideas are running through my head as to how to deal with the 8000lb gorilla called the Federal Government.  Those on the Left think they are just fine and should do more to help people.  Those on the Right think it’s too big and intruding too far into people’s lives.   With unending scandals ongoing and corruption around every bend in Washington D.C., I concluded, along with many others, that fixing the Federal Government is a lost cause and impossible.  Many should look back and see who was in control when the Patriot Act and the DHS where shoved down the people’s throat.   That, however is not the subject today.  For the purpose of discussion, I’d like to look at why  people need to take action at the local level, what those actions may look like, and how to accomplish the actions.  I will make a case for why, suggest an action to solve a problem and give my ideas on how to present it locally.

First, why should people take action.  I mean peaceful action that can stand up in a court of law.  It is the people’s responsibility to control the Federal Government, not the other way around.  The Constitution defines what the duties of the Fed’s are,  and what the duties of the people are.  This is clearly written in understandable English.  Sadly, politicians and pundit’s have perverted the words to defraud the people into thinking those words mean something else.  In the Constitution, the Federal Government has approximately 18 duties.  None of those 18 duties are more important than to protect the Rights of the people.  They are failing miserably, as is many State and local governments.  For today, let’s focus on addressing the Federal Government’s intention’s and actions that usurp the written authority.

What is not the Government’s responsibility?  That’s easy and seemingly overlooked.  It is written at the beginning of the Constitution, called the Preamble:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, 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.

In case it’s still not clear, it is the peoples responsibility to do the following:   form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.  

Let’s look at each subject that solely belongs to the people:  form a more perfect Union-  being better organized so that all states can benefit equally.  The government’s job is to resolve disagreements between the states.  establish Justice-  courts and peace officers at the local level began this job.  It is the government’s job to protect the rights of the people when it comes to local justice systems, not to provide the form and mode of justice.  Insure Domestic Tranquility-  The people’s responsibility is to resolve issue and disagreements peacefully and fairly.  This may involve the court system.  More on this later if needed.  Provide for the Common Defense-  This is a big one, and will be my subject of action.  But in short, it’s the people’s responsibility to protect themselves, it is NOT the responsibility of the Federal Government.  Promote the General Welfare-  This doesn’t mean having the government steal money from one and give to another, it means to help one another as best one can.  And the final part, it’s the people’s responsibility to secure their liberty.

In looking at this, it would seem fairly easy to attempt to take action locally.  I will be working with the County Commissioners and County Sheriff to attempt to establish new legislation.  I want to begin with the most important objects that keep the Feds from total usurpation of the Constitution, our right to keep and bear arms.  I will begin by investigating the Commissioners and determine a meeting time where the people can attend.  I will ask questions, many of them, and may even begin online via email.  My goal is to write and get passed a County Ordinance that would make illegal and Federal or State govt actions that are outside the boundaries of the US and The State Constitutions.

The County sheriff has jurisdiction over Federal and State authorities when it comes to law enforcement.  This would allow the sheriff the legal ability to arrest any Federal agent that is acting outside of the law.   If the feds decide to make all gun ownership illegal, it would not apply, by our laws, in my county.   But how does this really act against the federal Government’s usurpation of the Constitution?

First, it sends a message that their attempts at tyranny will not be allowed locally.  It could also provide a platform for other counties to take similar action.  As more counties join, States would hopefully follow.  The Federal governments ability to act illegally would be undermined, thus, destroying their illegally gained power.

Will it work as intended?  Don’t know till I try.  Will the Fed’s just use their guns to get their way?  Maybe, and that gunfight will be seen worldwide.  As always, I have more questions than answers.  My ideas aren’t perfect and may not even be doable.  But that’s whats nice about SUFA, we can kick these ideas around, refine them and then move forward with the best path for success.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. I wrote this rather quickly. Tending to a sick dog and we are in the middle of a snow storm. Please accept my apologies for any mistakes I may have made 🙂

    • As is the usual, all subjects are open for debate.

      @Flag, you have had an interesting life.

      • There is a great movie called “We bought a Zoo”

        The fundamental message it has embedded with a pleasant, family movie story is

        You only need to be brave for 20 seconds to say “Yes” to life, then the rest of life merely happens and you work at it.

        And that a truth. No different then anyone, I get scared about losing what I have so to achieve what I want. But I curled up my toes, swallowed hard and got brave for that magic 20 seconds, and stepped forward.

  2. Ugg, hope your pooch comes out OK. My youngest is running a slight fever, upchuck & sinus overload. But mom is providing full time care & he will get the spoil treatment.

    Local action is best, but I think we should still act nationally with our congressmen & senators at the very least. Was there a Civil Rights movement? Did it impact our nation? If yes is the answer to those questions, why not use it as a lesson? Much of the movement started small & locally, spread thru the states and then the nation as a whole.

    What if the same thing happened again demanding the power of our federal, state & local governments be reduced & constrained. We need a Personal Rights Movement! One where your local zoning commission cannot fine/arrest you for a garden or flag. One where government must prove only it can provide a needed service for the common good before it is enacted.

    • The pooch seems to be improving, we shall see. The movement that you suggest can happen, but should start at the lowest level of government. In addition to the proposed legislation above, I like the idea of another piece of legislation that would require any Federal govt employee who wants to conduct government business within the county must first explain the purpose and receive permission from the sheriff’s office/or County Commissioner’s. This new law would be sent to all elected members of Congress and all Federal agencies who may conduct future business. 🙂

      I’m hoping to get lots of feedback on these ideas 🙂

  3. Buck, If your out there today, Happy new year! 🙂

    What’s your professional opinion of my suggestions of local laws?

  4. Just A Citizen says:

    ANITA

    Congrats there SPARTY.

    Good game and as I expected.

    At least some GOOD FEELINGS to start the New Year.

    🙂

    • It was a fun night! Still hard to believe they actually did it! My nephew is really on cloud nine having witnessed the game in person! A certain other SUFAette doesn’t like our Go Green slogan so for her enjoyment I’ll say GOOD JOB SPARTY!

  5. Just A Citizen says:

    Black Flag

    Re: Counties.

    Please read my post again. I said the COLONIES established counties as a subdivision of the COLONY. Jamestown is referenced specifically as the center of Governing the Virginia COLONY, not the State.

    It is true that the first settlements were small communities or “towns”. However, the Grant of territory as “colonies” preceded the “counties” or “Burroughs”. And it came from power, “authority” outside North America.

  6. The other year the NC State transportation department built a divider right down through the center of Havelock NC. Used to be a continuous center turn lane. The town objected strenuously and the State still stuck it to them. 1st a vehicle with a trailor, and there are a lot here with the boating could not turn into a business, much less make a U-turn. To get to the Dunkin Donuts for example you now had to drive at least one mile to get back to the place you were at when you decided a cup of coffee was needed. Not only time, but more gas consumed and pollution created. There was a measurable drop in business of close to 40% on both sides of this divider. Then the State cavalierly (sp) announced they were resurrecting a 1970 highway plan to speed traffic to the port in Morehead City. This would by-pass the city entirely, cutting through Croatan National Forest with at least a 500 ft wide swath. Now destroying beautiful forest and delicate ecosystems. Go figure. The highway to the port was never completed years ago for the simple reason ships sizes outgrew the ports capability. The port could never be built up in anyway, Besides that there was a perfectly good rail system in place. The State then targeted Morehead City to divide the road through town. Citing accidents in the turn lane as unexceptible and the public safety demanded the barrier. The city challenged the traffic incidents and the State refused to provide the records. The city had theirs. I’ve routinely driven the road and have NEVER in 18 years seen an accident in the center turn lane. At intersections YES, someone turning right into a store and getting rear-ended YES by someone not paying attention behind them. The city said for the state to stick it and the plan died. The state under the recovery act always said, but if we don’t use the money we’ll lose it. The State went onto another project and wanted to build a sulfur processing plant at the port. Right smack in the middle of two communities who rely on tourism and fishing. 1st they were keeping it secret, and when leaked to the public, they said we don’t need your approval. This plant was to benefit a private corporation in Aurora NC. That corporation wanted to shorten their supply line obviously to reduce costs. Daily several trains 50 – 100 cars, with molten sulfur pass within 2 blocks from my house to go to the Aurora plant. The state said it was justified because the plant would hire 12 people. At the expense of how many hundreds of temporary and permanent workers in the tourist industry. Needless to say the city had to legally challenge the state for damages that would occur and the state backed down. Company claimed they’d have to move due to the costs, but after two years the trains are still coming through to the plant

    • Dale, I brought this over, can you provide your input as to how it applies to the subject?

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        All about local action can make a difference in the community where it counts most, against the arrogance and of the State and Federal imposition on our community, property and rights. It is painful at times and I’m sure most people want to give up, but I just wanted to illustrate through experience that It can be done.
        I’m sure Havelock in my previous post didn’t really fight the State and Feds to hard. Cherry Point MCAS is always a direct point of contact with the government that can be threatened. The Pentagon already pulled the proposed F-35 squadron out and are placing it at Oceana in Virginia Beach VA. The town is always being threatened with base closure. The last was to shut it down and consolidate at New River near LeJeune in Jacksonville NC. Easier to move the small field at New River to Havelock. No need to expand, plenty of room and facilities.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Follow-up about local government….years ago New Bern, restored their downtown much like Williamsburg, VA. Smaller scale though. Huge tourist draw. The city is a nice town to walk around viewing the historical buildings or paying a small fee to enter the governors palace and museum. The Feds in their policy for fairness, built immediately adjacent to the palace and parking, low income subsidized house for the poor. Needless to say the tourist were and rightfully so afraid of the area especially at night. The housing could have been built anywhere else, there is plenty of space in and around other areas of the town. The last city government passed a resolution and won approval to demolish said housing. Even though the housing will be replaced in a different location, by the city, the city has been tarred with every racist epitaph known. They did win but at a huge cost. Anyone care to walk around Annapolis Maryland at night. I recommend, don’t. Take a car, cab but don’t walk. Federal low income housing right in the middle of a restored historical city costing hundreds of thousands, if not millions for a house for you and I.

  7. Judy Sabatini says:

    To add to the discussion on the previous thread by G & Flag, I have a question for Flag on what he thinks about that 13 year old girl in Oakland Calif, that is legally brain dead, but, is on life support & waiting for the courts to decide if & when she should be taken off and/or put in a hospital for care for the rest of her life, knowing that she will never be the same as she was before that tonsillectomy that caused her to be in the condition she is in now. What would you Flag, or anybody for that matter do?

    If G says he would only be following his dad’s wishes, then who are you to judge him on that? Or anybody for that matter if someone asks to be NOT kept on life support for the rest of their lives. Think back to the Terry Schivo case & what happened with her & how she was when she was on life support.. Would you rather live in a vegetative state on life support, or be allowed to get off life support & die naturally?

    • Judy, I have actually had to make that decision. Several years ago, my wife was diagnosed with ALS (Lou Gerhig’s). They later dialed that diagnosis back a little but the prognosis was still the same. She was declining visibly over an 18 month period. I estimated she was about 6 mos. from hospice. We discussed the situation and actually drew up the appropriate papers so it was clear she did not want to be on life support. The incident was a fall with head trauma (brain bleed) that put her in a coma. The doctors wanted to operate to relieve the pressure but most of her past operations had been disasters. So I opted to wait it out. After a few days, her kidneys failed. They wanted to do dialysis but I again denied the request. Luckily, the kidneys were just taking a 2 day holiday. Then they wanted to surgically implant feeding tubes. Again I declined. But I could not starve her do death so I OKed a nasal feeding tube. After 2 weeks she came out of the coma and 8 weeks later came home a changed person. She did not have ALS but had brain damage from the drugs they had been feeding her for the previous 5 years.

      It is a hard decision to make. It helps when you know the person’s wishes. It would be very difficult if it were one of my children. So I sympathize with the family. One question I would ask is has anyone who has been declared brain dead ever returned to normal? Technology is very good today and should be able to detect even slight brain activity. So if the odds are zero to less than 1 in a million, I would probably pull the plug. Anything else would take some hard thinking.

      One thing I am sure of is the hospital and doctors involved in putting her in this state should not be the ones advising the family or declaring her brain dead. They have a financial liability and should be out of the picture now. I would also question the advice of the doctor who advised surgery to correct sleep apnea.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        T-Ray…your last paragraph goes along with my post and the hospital’s responsibily.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      As you are probably at this time grappling with this very issue. What I have read of this case in Oakland, the Mother is wanting to keep her daughter on life-support with a wait and see point of view. Plus after a “simple” operation to have her daughter stripped away from her life would be heart breaking at the least. The hospital want to pull the plug, and wash their hands of it. Is this the same hospital where the operation took place? Is there possible litigation resulting from some negligence on the hospitals actions? Needless to say, the Mother is the next in line and has legal responsibility of decisions for her daughter especially since the daughter is a minor. If I remember the Terry Schivo case, similar to a degree, but her husband, who has the legal responsibility for decisions of his wife in her condition. Her parents were the ones injecting the the courts into and issue where the parents had no real legal standing anymore in that case. My opinion but I believe it will stand legal scrutiny. The court in the Oakland case is right to intercede on behalf of the Mother, and were wrong getting involved in the Shrivo case.

      • Dale, I agree with you on the legal aspects of the two cases. Congress was wrong for getting involved as well. I wonder what the decisions would be under Obamacare. Will the government panels decide to withhold financial compensation if the family decides to continue life? Would this be Palin’s death panel?

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Is that a rhetorical question?

          • Just wondering what the future will bring. Yes rhetorical.

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              I grew up in California. What is the prevailing opinion of the individual mandate there? I assume you are in the bay area? Is there any feeling that anything can be done, or are people adapting a wait and see attitude?

              • I’m in the foothills east of Sacramento. Most of the people I work with think it’s a farce. From the letters in the paper, it’s a mixed bag. The people who have preexisting conditions are happy but most everyone else is not. The majority have business supplied insurance like we do so it is moot so far. My youngest is unemployed so will probably opt out for the time being. Our Congressional Rep. is Tom McClintock who is dead set against it. We have a lot of bay area transplants here in the foothills so he takes grief from them but their numbers are limited albeit vocal.

                Our work insurance comes up for renewal in April so I will know more about the trend then. Rates have been steadily climbing over the last several years which I expect to continue. More troubling to me is the fall off in our business sales. Last year was a very slow year despite all the glowing reports in the MSM. We supply instruments to petroleum and chemical companies worldwide. Business was down all over including our competition. I sure hope this year is better.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          I believe they will withhold financial compensation unless it is in the political self interest of the people and businesses who brought us the ASA against the objections of the continued majority of “We The People”

          • Here’s how I see things at this point with the ACA. Once all the BS is fully running, the so called committees will be making all pertinent decisions about end of life. This also includes seniors and their future health care. No longer will a 70 year old get a hip replacement or a knee replacement. No more eye surgery after a certain age. On and on. Parents will no longer have the choice’s they have today. The brain dead girl would be gone and buried by now under the ACA. Healthcare now is no longer about care, but about the bottom line for insurance companies and their investors.

            I don’t think most of the above will matter, there won’t be enough doctors to do the work anyway. By the time the Democrat idiots in DC figure this all out, it will be far to late for Single Payer to fix it, they will dump it all back in the laps of the people and say “sorry”. The the Repubs in DC will chime up and say hey can fix it. The wheel of suffering continues…..unless we the people can fix it 🙂

    • I have a question for Flag on what he thinks about that 13 year old girl in Oakland Calif, that is legally brain dead, but, is on life support & waiting for the courts to decide if & when she should be taken off and/or put in a hospital for care for the rest of her life, knowing that she will never be the same as she was before that tonsillectomy that caused her to be in the condition she is in now. What would you Flag, or anybody for that matter do?

      First, what I think I would do has absolutely no merit to define what anyone else should do.

      Not my child, nor issue, nor life…. my opinion here has no merit.

      And until, God forbid, such a thing happen to me in my life, I have no opinion one way or another except it is wholly up to the family to decide and -further- it is wholly up to the hospital to decide what care the hospital is willing (or not) to provide to the family.

      There is no right for someone to demand another provide their work and effort.
      There is no right for someone to demand another must die against their wishes or their family’s wishes.

      The hospital does what I thinks it should do -for itself- and must the family. Whatever happens after that … happens.

  8. Judy Sabatini says:

    T-Ray, thank you for sharing your story about your wife, & I know it must have been a hard decision to make whether or not to continue having her live on life support or feeding tubes, not knowing if she would make it or not. You say she came home a changed person, but, was it in a good way or bad way? I also have to agree with G about the insurance & all they care about is their money. I say that, because me & my sister have been going round & round about our mom & where she’s at right now. She’s still in the rehab place for now, but, is suppose to be going into a long term nursing facility right across the way from where’s at now. Her insurance will no longer pay where she’s at, but, will pay 100% for 100 days for her long term care. After she broke her hip, & had a hip replacement, the ball joint, & after about a week, she was moved into the rehab place, she was doing pretty good at first, doing what she was suppose to be doing, but, then pneumonia set in, was taking antibiotics for it, got a little better, but, continued with her therapy, Then got pneumonia again, so she wasn’t do as good. More antibiotics, got a little better, continued with therapy, but, wasn’t doing as good as she was. She has yet another bout of pneumonia & is declining pretty fast, so, now, they’re more or less giving her a somewhat comfort care. Anyway, since her insurance is no longer paying for her to be there, we or her should I say would have had to pay out of pocket, but, the good news there is, the rehab has decided to bite the bullet on it for now. Right now, it’s a day to day thing with her, they’re still going to move her into long term care, but, it’s just a matter of when. She can no longer stand on her own, has to be helped into a wheel chair, into bed, into a shower with a chair in it for her, can’t really do anything for herself, has to have 24/7 medical care at all times now. She is having a hard time swallowing, so it’s difficult for her to eat, because when she does, she aspirates. She made a decision long ago before her Dementia set in, not to be on life support, because she didn’t want to live that way. She will never recover to the way she was or recover at all for that matter the way she is right now. She doesn’t remember who’s who anymore, but, she does know me, but, doesn’t if that makes any sense. She has about a 2 second memory anymore. It’s not an easy thing to watch a parent go through this, watched my dad die of brain cancer, my mother in law of pancreatic cancer, to which they both no longer wanted to take Chemo because of what it did to them, made them sick as hell for 4 days or so. When I see my mom struggling to breathe, even with oxygen, I pray to God he will take her soon so she doesn’t have go through this any longer. She will never, ever be the way she was & to me & my sister, this not living, it’s only existing right now, but, time will tell just how much longer she will have, that’s the one thing we don’t know, only God does. Guess what I’m saying, it’s hard, hard choice to have to make whether or not to take someone off life support, which by the way my mom isn’t on, whether or not they will survive after being removed from it. It appears that my mom’s body is starting to shut down, so if she wants to eat, she can, if she doesn’t, they don’t force her because of what it could do, which could cause a lot of pain in their stomach for what I understand. She has lost a few pounds & she’s a tiny woman, weighing all of maybe 85 pounds, so, yeah, it’s extremely hard to watch somebody go through this. Plus she’s in the final stages of having COPD, which is also a contributing factor with her. That’s another thing she’s battling with. They’re giving Predisone to help her breathe somewhat, but, keep having to up the dosage on her. Right now, we’re praying when the time comes, she goes peacefully in her sleep & won’t suffer anymore. It’s in God’s hands now when he decides to call her home.

    • Judy, it is a struggle. Best of luck to you, your sister and your mom. My wife was clearly dying before hitting her head and requiring 24 hr care. She came home happy, alert, and significantly more mobile. Since then things have declined some.

      Watch out for doctors that over medicate. It seems that drugs are their only solutions to problems. My Mom had cancer and died a year ago last fall. She was in hospice care about 3 weeks. Within one week of being in hospice care she went from being talkative and chipper to zombiesville. When I got back to the Midwest and analyzed what they were doing it was clear that they were giving her way too much morphine. I had to explain to them control theory. Once I explained it, my brother understood and backed me up.

      Keep us posted, and again good luck. You have our prayers and sympathy.

      • Judy Sabatini says:

        Thank you T-Ray I really appreciate your kind words. Sorry to hear your wife has declined some. My mom isn’t being over medicated yet I don’t believe, all they’re giving her as I said above, is Predisone 20 MGS to help her breathe, Spirva, which she can hardly inhale right now, & an aspirin once a day & the antibiotics for her pneumonia. The doctor said with her enlarged heart, not much more they can do for her & it’s really a matter of time, so, basically just doing comfort care for now.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Judy and T-Ray…….It seem that you both are doing the right thing concerning the care of your loved ones. My advise to you both is that if you feel that the care provided by the doctors is not correct, research on your own. Push them to explain, to your satisaction, that the care is sufficient and correct. If not, force corrective action. The doctors may hate you for it because they dislike being challenged. In the end the outcome will be the best for everyone involved. It is a hard time, but you will find inner peace knowing that you have done your absolute best for the ones you love in their greatest trial, whatever the outcome.

          • Judy Sabatini says:

            Thank you Dale for your advice, but, like I said, my mom isn’t being over medicated, just giving her what she needs for now, in fact the doctor himself said he doesn’t want to over medicate her, that too much would do more harm than good. I just got back from seeing her a little while ago, & she was more awake this time, just a little more talkative, but, had somewhat of a hard time speaking she’s so congested. The nurse came in while I was there, gave her Spiriva, which she did have a hard time inhaling, took her at least 4 attempts to get enough, gave her a mashed aspirin mixed in some applesauce, but, took a while for her to be able to swallow, but, finally got it down with a little water, which also took her a while to swallow. I gave her some pudding as well while I was there, & again, took her a while to swallow each little spoonful I gave her, but, the nurse did say she ate a pretty good breakfast which her food is all pureed now because of the trouble with swallowing, she ate a little over 1/2, which consisted of pureed pancakes & scrambled eggs. Some days she does okay & other days, not so good. Guess today was or is a good day so far. She was starting to drift off to sleep, so told her I was going to go, try to be back later, if not, for sure tomorrow. So, that’s the latest with my mom for today, but, things can change at any time.

  9. @Black Flag, Continuing from yesterday. It seemed like the goal posts kept getting moved, even though they weren’t. While your core philosophy seems to be black and white and set in stone, never to change, sometimes just living life to the fullest, being nice to others, not wanting to harm others etc doesn’t seem to qualify as a core principle. I know evil from good. I too often give the benefit of the doubt and see good in people who’s belief’s are evil, buts that’s how I learn things, from mistakes. We as people are all different. No one can be you, except you. One day I’ll figure out what you have done and apply my own feelings in a similar manner. That still don’t mean we will act the same or make the same decisions.

    • No, the goal post has never moved.

      What has moved is what you thought was a “core principle”. What you thought it was, wasn’t, but really was a consequential action based on your -yet to be articulated- core principle.

      Core principle is neither black nor white. As I said, “It just is” – it DEFINES moral black and moral white, but itself is neither.

      And, yes, it does not change. A malleable core principle is worthless. As soon as some pressure is applied to live by it, you throw it away?? That isn’t living by a principle, that is merely evil pragmatism.

      You do not yet know good from evil. You cannot know something you cannot define nor articulate. You are lost in the mush of emotionalism and whatever “feels right” or “wrong” you move – but you don’t know if that is truly a moral good or evil act. Feelings are not REASON.

      Again, no less LOI and Anita, you attribute a life seeking “pleasure” and avoiding “pain” as your root motive. As I have stated and shown by reason, this is EXACTLY HOW YOU EMPOWER EVIL.

      As long as evil delivers to YOU your pleasure or relieves YOU of your pain, you will champion it – because without a principle, you cannot measure the cost of the pain upon the innocent lives of others

      No less then the German people who found their own personal prosperity rise, thus supported evil upon the minorities, did nothing to advert the disaster that would later overwhelm them – no less here.

      Without a principle, how do you know what you must fight for?

    • No where did I demand you must make the same decisions as me.

      That is the root confusion you and LOI (and less though from Anita) make.

      It is a demand from YOU that YOU know WHY you are making “this decision”, not that you are making the one I make or not.

      Look, I have nothing to judge YOU based on MY principle. Nothing in the Universe declares mine superiority-ly righter then yours, and vis versa.

      But I do and can know you to be absolutely wrong

      I can know this when YOU violate YOUR OWN principle – if you contradict YOUR principle by YOUR action, YOU are MORALLY WRONG.

      Remember what I said before, this is absolutely nothing about ME.

      IT is ABSOLUTELY everything ABOUT YOU.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Gman, if I read the article correctly, our leader used executive action, an EO, to do much of what he’s been wanting and only exhorted Congress to do more. Four big violations, of the Constitution as I see it. Article 1 section 1 of the Constitution (what’s new from Obama), Violations of the 2nd amendment and the 4th and 5th also.

      This week the 2012 FBI data was release about homicides of all type. 2012 had 8855 deaths by a gun of any type. That makes a 5 year average of 9011 per year. Through data from another government source, just under 50% of suicides are by a gun. These numbers are included in the FBI data. Studies of countries with very strict gun control, have no seen and change in suicides, the person just used another tool.

      There is also average of 98,000 persons in the US, death rate at the hands of a doctor, where the death has been determined to be caused by negligence and malpractice.

      • What stuck out to me is Sebulis making a rule change (as she calls it) to the HIPPA Law. Since when did this bitch get the power to change a law? NEVER. She has no authority to do so and she is putting doctors in jeopardy of lawsuits for violating the law.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          I rolled my all thoughts into as viewed through the constitution. I also read through most versions of what today may be called the Hippocratic Oath. Let’s take the newest version called the Declaration of Geneva. “I will respect the secrets that are confided in me, even after the patient has died”. Unfortunately 98% of the medical school graduates in tthis country take some oath, like the Hippocratic Oath only 50% in the UK do so.

  10. Very interesting report just out….

    Emergency room visits increased by 40% since the roll out of Obamacare. ( Seems I remember the argument of universal health care……. that preventative care would eliminate or greatly reduce the number of emergency room visits )…..well…OOPS. It is the opposite.

    Why you ask? Well, it seems that the bulk of the enrolled people and sign ups are going to medicaid……doctors and primary health care doctors are dropping medicaid…..therefore, fewer doctors = greater emergency room visits.

    The shortage of doctors claim has been disputed my MSNBC but what they found was that the specialists and new doctors, once internship is finished, are opting for private practice and concierge services and are not going to take medicare or medicaid…….the hits keep on coming.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Sir…and let us not forget the sections of the ACA that make it mandatory for the people/taxpayer to bail out the insurance companies and cover any losses in their deal with the devil.

    • I’d say those who push Obamacare as a first good step-don’t care about these problems-our being right doesn’t matter to them because they want universal healthcare-they want all heath care personal to become government employees-they don’t see that as a problem-how many new government employees would that add-with salary and retirement benefits. But hey what the hell-who knew money really does, per liberals “grow on trees”

      • I gets clearer each week that Obamacare was intended to fail. I just don’t think the people will react like the Liberal’s think. Most will not ask the govt to fix it, but rather to get their noses out of it. There’s a Cold Civil War underway, let’s hope it don’t go Hot!

        • I’m not sure what the American people will do anymore-have been shocked by their actions in the resent past-but I agree with this author-they pay much more attention when it hurts them personally or their personal circle of family and friends.

          January 4, 2014
          Showing How Government Fails
          By Bruce Walker

          The debacle of ObamaCare may do what conservatives have been trying to do for a long time: show ordinary Americans the depth of government incompetence. Businesses have grasped since FDR the sting of the quip “I’m from the government — I’m here to help you.” The hyper-regulation by the federal government of nearly every aspect of commerce and industry through an ever-growing leviathan of laws, regulations, judicial decisions, and executive actions has stunted and even crippled huge swaths of private enterprise in America. Almost any small business can recount at least one horror story that cost our nation productive activity, reduced meaningful employment, and closed off areas of potential growth in our economy.

          Many Americans, however, have generally been shown only the sunny side of the federal government. Those who do not run or manage businesses, who do not pay federal taxes, and who do not have to deal with the profound inanity of government bureaucrats may live their lives seeing only “goodies” like Social Security, welfare-state entitlements, and countless “feel good” advocacy programs notionally on their behalf.

          The divide between the small business owner crushed by compliance with irrational and often incomprehensible tax codes and the employees of this small business is gaping. The employee may not make enough to have to file a tax return, and if he does, that return may be fairly simple and may produce, because federal withholding masks the true costs of federal taxation, a refund to the filer. The union worker may see federal labor regulations as creating “protections” which apparently costs the worker nothing, because apparently the cost is wholly assumed by the employer.

          There are exceptions, of course, to this general pattern. Those who have served in the military may have sampled the glories of Department of Veteran Affairs, and nearly all Americans will have to deal at some point in their lives with the Social Security Administration. Voters who find these federal agencies maddeningly incompetent, however, can turn to their congressman or senator for help. Each year, most congressmen have several hundred of these cases, in which letters to various federal departments, always copied to the constituent, create vey favorable impressions with the affected voter as well as his friends and family. Constituent service to these frustrated voters incrementally increases the popularity of members of Congress over time, which makes incumbents very hard to beat.

          The misery of constituencies under ObamaCare will be radically different from what most members of Congress have faced before. Instead of a few hundred troubled constituents who have problems with a dozen or so federal offices, senators and congressmen will be swamped all at once with tens of thousands of terrified constituents all dealing with a single federal agency and a single federal law — and no one in Congress will be able to do anything to help most of these people.

          Unlike the goodie programs of the welfare state, millions of Americans will endure in dramatic fashion what their more affluent (i.e., taxpayer) countrymen and the businesses in their state have endured for decades. This seems not to have percolated through that dense fog that is entrenched leftism. Millions of Americans who until now have yawned at the dull destructiveness of federal intrusion into the commercial life of our nation will wake up and find all at once that they are in the same shape as small businessmen, with stark prospects and no hope of relief from even the most helpful congressional staffer.

          It gets worse. The tens of millions dreadfully affected by ObamaCare all have friends and family as well. The secondary political shockwave will be the cumulative effect of voters not badly hurt by ObamaCare — at least yet — who get an earful from all those people they know and trust who are badly hurt. Congressional offices will tell constituents — very reluctantly, but inevitably, even for those Democrats who voted for this legislative nightmare — that the problem is not the sluggishness of federal bureaucracy, but rather the federal statute itself, and that nothing can be done without a repeal of the law.

          Government — especially the federal government — fails wretchedly, but the impact of that failure, until now at least, has been hidden from the vast majority of ordinary Americans. That’s about to change. When it does, there will be nowhere for federal politicians to hide. When it does, we may see a true revolution in the political affairs of our nation. Let us hope that it’s not too late.

          Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/01/showing_how_government_fails.html#ixzz2pS2YrKbX

          Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

  11. @ BF…..I have been following your discussion on core principle with G Man…..I have a question for you as it relates to core principle and health care. The oath of Hippocrates (both versions) seem to lay out a “principle” of what it takes to be a physician. An oath no different than a military oath, or oath of office in whatever profession……etc.

    Now, you have physicians…they borrow money, go to school, learn medicine, and become physicians to garner economic gain. That is the reason they become physicians….however, they are still supposed to subscribe to this Hippocrates oath. Fast forward to Obamacare……you now have physicians that are not going to take medicaid/medicare. You now have a fast growing free market of concierge services which will cater only to cash or specific non obamacare insurance. Is there a violation of a core principle here? Can a medical student go through medical training with his core principle of economic gain and not subscribe to Hippocrates?

    Do you see a moral or ethical violation here?

    • Can a medical student go through medical training with his core principle of economic gain and not subscribe to Hippocrates?
      Do you see a moral or ethical violation here?

      No.

      Adhereing or not to some ancient words of another man thousands of years ago is not a measure of morals or ethics.

      A doctor – a human being – makes his own principle for his life. Whether he abides by or not to someone else’s is irrelevant. He measures himself to his own principle, and the more he acts within his principle, that is what makes him moral.

      If his principle-in-action is expressed by economic gain, yet, he acts in a manner that contradicts this, no matter how much “good” it provides to you as his patient, he is acting in contradiction to his own principle and providing now suffering to his family who is bearing the loss instead of -say- you, his patient, who indeed should be bearing this cost.

  12. Kim Jong-un, ordered the execution of his uncle ( everybody knew that ) and the news report originally reported that he was shot by firing squad…..

    Well, this out……….

    The Straits Times, which covers Asia, published a story Dec. 24 that the execution of Jang Song Thaek, who was the number two man in North Korea, was a horrifying scene. The newspaper based its story on Dec. 12 account published in the Hong Kong based publication, Wen Wei Po., which often serves as a mouthpiece for Beijing officials.
    Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/Report_N.html#PeLMEC0KxioSGgoI.99.

    According to the report, Jang was not killed by firing squad.

    Rather: “he was stripped naked and thrown into a cage, along with his five closest aides. Then 120 hounds, starved for three days, were allowed to prey on them until they were completely eaten up. This is called “quan jue”, or execution by dogs.”
    The process took up to an hour and Jong Un supervised it, according to the account.

    This would probably get my attention……..

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Glad I haven’t eaten breakfast yet. The “cringe” can be felt from head to toe at this moment.

      Now I wonder WHY the Chinese “authorities” would allow the world to know this!

  13. Judy Sabatini says:
  14. http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/va-hospital-bans-singing-religious-christmas-carols/

    “Military service veterans, male and female, represent people of all faiths,” hospital spokesman Brian Rothwell said in a statement. “It is out of respect for every faith that The Veterans Administration gives clear guidance on what ‘spiritual care’ is to be given and who is to give it.”

    ” This is not a religious proselytizing, evangelistic issue”

    Most hospitals have a place for worship and spiritual counselor. They could just as easily have a Christmas party there or a large conference room or something, as it wouldn’t interfere with the other patients. This would allow patients/staff to freely exercise their beliefs as well as respect any patients that did not wish to participate.

    It seems a bit odd they would regulate which songs, although I think I understand what they were trying to do.

    The whole idea of the tradition of religious freedom and separating church and state, was recognition and respect for right to choose what to believe, to practice and express without being forced by a government or someone otherwise being able to interfere/stifle or violate this right.

    If the VA is having an official Christmas party, then they are using tax payer funds for a state facility to promote/represent a religion. If they tell people they cannot celebrate, they are prohibiting the free exercise of religion. If they have a celebration in a way that does not allow another option for those who do not wish to participate, they are essentially allowing a disturbance.

    If I were in the hospital trying to convalesce, I am not sure I would want to tolerate any kind of celebration. If I were a ‘Christian’, I wouldn’t want to be told I could not have visitor in my room to pray and/or exchange gifts, …or ban a Christmas party in the chapel area.

  15. plainlyspoken says:

    Well, still at the hospital. With any luck my wife may get to go home tomorrow. Today she was able to handle solid foods – gluten free only – but still has a lot of abdominal pain when she eats, requiring medication to ease the pain. Her celiac disease is severe and demands a strict adherence to a gluten free diet.

    For those unfamiliar with celiac disease, here’s a quick description from the Mayo Clinic: Celiac disease is an immune reaction to eating gluten, a protein found in wheat, barley and rye.

    If you have celiac disease, eating gluten triggers an immune response in your small intestine. Over time, this reaction produces inflammation that damages the small intestine’s lining and prevents absorption of some nutrients

    Her doc has told her that even the smallest amount of gluten will cause her to become inflamed and damage her stomach/intestines further, increasing her risks of developing a stomach or intestinal cancer. Not something you want to have to contemplate at age 31.

    So, tomorrow we hope to get her out of here and home.

  16. Dale A. Albrecht says:

    Folks…..I’m going to try and distill in three sections, my feeling and opinions about the common threads of the past two weeks of discussion on SUFA.
    1) Core and principle values: This topic got quite hot and inspite of the usual level headedness of the contributers to the site was not articulated well. I will have to side with BF on his attempt for folks to get to their core values, however, no to the methodology and the Socratic Method, which is very deep and requires a great deal of forthough before replying. It got to personal and folks were being pinned down while they were dealing with some very trying experiences. This is to T-Ray, Gman, Judy, and Plainlyspoken.

    I feel the bigger picture is by, referring to threads from earlier discussions, is how our legal system and healthcare systems have gotten to where they are today and affecting each and everyone of us.

    These two disciplines which affect us every day in one way or another have NO core value. This is directly to D13’s and BF’s point. Their core principles change like the the direction of the wind. Take the Hippocratic Oath for example. Other than some minor translation variations it had stayed fairly consistent from its inception until after WWII. Since that time the “Declaration of Geneva” has for the most part superceded the Hippocratic Oath and has been continually updated to reflect changing political views. 98% of all US medical school graduates take some oath in respect to their duty as a physician. In the UK it is < 50%. In France they take no oath, but do sign a document. Even in the current form of the Hippocratic Oath, almost every doctor, if they follow the government laws set forth by the ACA, will basically declare that they have NO Core principles. I look at the medical profession and ask "Why do doctors continually say they "practice" medicine"?

    The second is the legal profession. The basis and foundation of our law of our country is the "Constitution". The legal profession continually states that they are "interpreting" the law. To me there is no interpretation of the Constitution, it is clear in its intent. It has a change mechanism. Though it requires a very large majority of the people to agree to define more rights, it with patience can be modified to reflect more modern thinking or the peoples desires, good bad or otherwise. The fact that our government is ignoring through legal interpretation, and superceding one right by claiming primacy of another. One can not overwrite the other. Everyday, the administration is violating the Constitution with creating and modifying existing law at a whim and by-passing Congress. When 5 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices say that they will consult foreign and international law before rendering an opinion an opinion on our Constitutional law. Something is terrible amiss here. Again to reiterate, NO core principles.

    Thirdly…..and this is a question to the floor….Why did the vast majority of the State capitals get placed in what are considered locations that make no sense today in regards to the major urban and metropolitan cities even in times past?
    Reading todays analysis the claim is they were central to the median population of the State, more defensible and other assundary reasons. Not one covers what I learned in the 60's when taking Constitutional Law classes and the formation of this country. The Capitals were placed away from the cities like NYC, Boston, Philly, Charleston etc. and placed in Albany, Springfield, Harrisburg and Columbia because of the deep seated distrust of the cities and their way. Gman brought up the huge demographic shift away from the countryside to the urban areas exacerbating the problem even more. In an urban environment the people are really dependent upon others to survive and those outside are capabable of independence and individual sustainability. Earlier I asked T-Ray about what California thinks about the ACA. I grew up in California, and remember many of the prevailing politics and ideals. He lives in the foothills on east side of the San Jouquin Valley. Lot of space, independent minded people, I'll take care of my own. Directly opposite mindset of the major urban area of SF. When I lived in Maine, the strength was, hey whatever, I can survive, I don't need help, life sucks sometimes but I'll make due. 18 years later, as more and more folks from Boston and NY etc moved there initially as vacationers that independent ideal disappeared. The same happened in VT. Completely turned on their heads the political structure of the States. One needs to look no further than some of the original State motto's and visualize that State today. Vermont, "Freedom and Unity", New Hampshire, "Live Free or Die", Maine, "I Lead", Mass, "By the sword we seek peace, but peace only under Liberty" turned on their heads and opposite mindset to their original foundations………North Carolina, "To be, rather than seem to be" Texas, "Friendship" really have not changed in their outlook from the beginning……..California, "Eureka" New York, "Ever Upward" what can we say, all about hitting it big and commercial interest even to this day.

    • RE: Core Principal’s : During my debate with Black Flag, amid the distractions of a sick dog and all, I found myself more confused by the discussion than achieving anything. That’s a bummer. But, maybe because I don’t want to know what my CP really is, or maybe I live it and fail to understand it enough to put it in words. I think Flag believes that without knowledge of your CP, you cannot act properly, for lack of a better term. I feel that we as people, act out our CP each day we live, without regard to the words that explain our CP.

      Here’s what I do know, and have for most of my life. I can and will kill another human under certain terms of self defense or the defense of my family. I hope that experience never happens, but in this world, it’s seems more likely each day. I can’t stand dishonest people (politicians and LIARS). I believe in honesty. I don’t steal, and don’t like thieves (Politicians, Liberals, and all other thieves). If my home is ever invaded, I consider that life threatening. Thief or murderer matters not.

      I believe in self sufficiency and thrive to continue to improve my skills. Most things that people need to have/do to stay alive, I can do/build etc. I will always help people within my means and ability. I will not be forced to do so. In the toughest possible times, I believe I can feed a lot of people who are not/can’t get properly prepared. I think of the family up the road a bit with 6 kids, plus any family/friends who know to come here under certain conditions.

      Based on all that, what is my Core Principal?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Gman

        I think BF’s purpose in trying to get people to recognize they haven’t REASONED out their principles is not because you “cannot act properly” but that without clear understanding we “act in contradiction”.

        Remember his old comment that “Contradictions” in principles are the root of evil?

        I stayed out of this discussion this time around in order to prevent further confusion or to interject complexity before it was needed.

        Now, however, is the right time to do so.

        Here is the key part not addressed in BF’s argument of using REASON to discover core principles. REASON involves thinking in ways consistent with REALITY. This is what separates IDEAS from WHIMSICAL UTOPIAS.

        But this conformance with reality creates hard choices that go beyond the “Core Principles” once you have described them.

        Let’s summarize the conundrum this way. If you believe that Theft is evil and unacceptable then how do you behave in a world filled with thieves? How do you provide for you and family when Thieves dominate the economic and political world?

        I submit that this is the dilemma most here face. It is not so much a lack of clear principles, it is not being able to reconcile the real world and how we conduct ourselves in it, with those principles.

        This is the “necessary pain” that BF is referencing. To live in strict adherence to “principles” which conflict with the reality around us can be very painful.

        • I can see your point I think, while I despise politicians, I can’t just go kill them because it’s against my core principle. Yes, that hurts a lot because they just keep stealing and I can’t stop them.

      • I think Flag believes that without knowledge of your CP, you cannot act properly, for lack of a better term

        No.

        You do not know if you are acting properly since you lack the immutable measuring stick by which YOU can judge YOUR own such an action.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Dale

      You should have been around for the first few times we explored the philosophical questions here. This round was tame by comparison. I think most people here are used to the sharp edge on the Pirate’s sword.

      I do agree, that it is hard to do the hard thinking and post responses in a timely manner. Much thought is required when considering the various propositions and/or arguments.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        Dale, JAC is right on the money. BF’s sharpness was tame by comparison to other times many of us have been at the pointed end of his comments. It’s all good and for the majority we understand it isn’t personal insults he’s handing out, but poking us to dig within and work on our understandings of ourselves.

        Gman – Thank you, my wife would love nothing better than to be at home tucked into her own bed on this snowy Colorado day (predicted for a measly 3-5 inches up at my place).

        As to BF’s comments – I believe I see the path he was trying to get you to look/walk down. For instance, if I am right, I would say one of my core principles in that everyone living being has the right to life, even the unborn, yet I struggle with the contradictions that I would take life or support the taking of life under some circumstances (and if this isn’t a CP I am sure BF will correct me). I say this is a CP just because it is, I cannot find any reasoning beyond that (again BF – point out my error if I am wrong).

        Anyway, my thinking so far (which I’ve been doing a lot of sitting around this hospital room) prompted by BF’s exchange with you. I am sure there is a lot more I need to do too.

        @VH – I do believe the ACA is a large step towards universal health care that the “do-good” liberals hope for in this country. Yet, as to what the majority of the public will do is simple – NOTHING. They will sit back and let the elected “representatives” do as they please and eventually enact a universal health care plan on this country. People just don’t care unless or until it adversely effects them directly and painfully. So it will happen, when is the only question. Once the pressure gets heavy enough of the opposing politicians they will cave quickly.

        Ah well, just my 2 cents, which with $2.00 will get you a cup of coffee at Denny’s.

        • I am thinking as well, now waiting for light to start to shine, once that happens, bingo 🙂

          • plainlyspoken says:

            G – I think it is more of you exploring the dark and finding the switch to turn on the light.

        • For instance, if I am right, I would say one of my core principles in that everyone living being has the right to life, even the unborn, yet I struggle with the contradictions that I would take life or support the taking of life under some circumstances (and if this isn’t a CP I am sure BF will correct me). I say this is a CP just because it is, I cannot find any reasoning beyond that (again BF – point out my error if I am wrong).

          Yep, you’re right – it isn’t.

          As soon as you find yourself apply an exception, it can’t be a CP.

          That exception is another expression or consequence of your -yet to be articulated- CP

          It’s like this.
          You see an occurrence “A” and apply a judgement. You see a similar occurrence “A-2”, but your judgment is different,

          What did you use to measure these occurrences that created two, different, judgments? You used some sort of “measuring stick” that told you “these are not the same”, thus “my judgement is not the same, either”.

          What was that measure?

    • 1) Core and principle values: This topic got quite hot and inspite of the usual level headedness of the contributers to the site was not articulated well. I will have to side with BF on his attempt for folks to get to their core values, however, no to the methodology and the Socratic Method, which is very deep and requires a great deal of forthough before replying.

      Exactly right.
      To achieve “Know thy self” is very hard difficult work – and absolutely necessary for anyone who wishes to achieve some part of a moral and ethical life.

      And as you describe, few want to do that work – even here from what is usually a very smart group of people.

      If people here stumble and avoid, how about the masses who have even less contemplations???

      That is part of my bigger point about the dialogue here, and the growth of evil all around.

      Without understanding your fundamental principles, any declared “solutions” to the problems are vastly more likely to make it worse, not better.

      • Understood. But the fact that you are square with your core principles doesn’t change the fact that most of humankind is not square with theirs. So I’m thinking that kind of boxes me in to a See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil scenario because i am forced to live in an evil world.and there’s no way you can change that. So it still doesnt make any difference to me that I’m still a bubblehead. Whatdya have to say about that Pirate?

        • But you CAN make a difference, or do you believe Jesus made no difference (one man) or Gandhi (one man) or .. or … or…

          In fact, it always has been ONE with immutable PRINCIPLES that is the ONLY source of change.

          Indeed, what you are saying is that you are afraid (which is ok, by the way).
          It takes incredible willpower, strength, etc. to absorb the cost and pain of resisting evil. It is far, far, far easier to go with the flow.

          But what is forgotten is that one day, there is a reckoning of that evil, and it will be absolutely terrible. It will hurt everyone, badly.

          So it comes to this idea:
          “If not now, when? If not you, who?”

          If you do not resist now, you merely pass worse to your children and so on, until one day, your children’s children will be utterly and completely wiped out. And that legacy will be “Why didn’t you, Anita, do something when you could have?”

          Saying “but I didn’t know what to do?” will not be at all a satisfactory answer.

  17. I think it’s safe to say that all of us respect the sanctity of life. But more important is our individual right to life and when that right is in jeopardy, lethal force can be used to defend that right.

    I think it’s safe to say that we all have a right to liberty and that right is also defendable with lethal force if need be.

    I think I have the right to my property and you have the right to your property. No one has the right to take that property without permission or by mutual agreement. Property is also defendable through the use of lethal force.

    I have the right to defend the lives of people who’s right’s are being threatened, when invited to do so.

    My rights are equal to yours, until you choose to violate my rights, at which time you subjugate yourself to my defense, which may be lethal.

    Don’t tread on me and will act in kind. Quite simple 🙂

    • This is my definition of “live and let live” 😉

    • Again, Gman, answer the question I asked about boat/kid/saving myself – your “right to live” has holes in it…

      • I have thought about it, and, because it’s hypothetical and has no timeline, it’s has no correct answer. What I think today may have been much different 20 years ago and may change 20 years from now. Life and circumstances change, as a person, I change my thinking and goals as well. This is where I think philosophy fails when it comes to where you want me to go. I’ve explained who and what I am. That’s not going to change this month. So whatever fancy words apply to what I have written, that’s what it is. 😎

        • First, it is not hypothetical.
          Such circumstances actually have happened.

          Regardless, it is an example which punches a hole in your “principle” as big as the moon.

          Core principles do not change over time – if they do, then you’ve really not had principles (not debating children’s minds here, but your adult one)

          You will not answer it – probably because it contradicts something you do not wish to confront – which is exactly why such work is necessary.

  18. Just A Citizen says:

    Perhaps it is time for a little REVIEW:

    https://standupforamerica.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/building-a-foundation-for-resurrecting-america-part-i/

    Note that folks have been claiming, not claiming, defending, etc, various “principles” which would fall within the realm of “Ethics”. Yet “ethics” rests upon two other foundational stones.

    Remember the first question you should ask yourself after claiming “ANY” principle or premise is “HOW DO I KNOW THAT”?

    • Going over that article reminded me that I skipped SUFA during that time because the topic didn’t interest me..still doesn’t 😉 But it is nice going over it (that article) just to see and read the old faces of SUFA. USW!!, Ray, Esom, Spitfire, etc. All good people.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Anita

        I am surprised you claim NO interest in the subject.

        Given that you ask many questions and voice your anger or dissatisfaction with our Govt. based on failings that all fall within this subject matter.

        I posted it to help folks remember the framework for addressing BF’s questions and points in the current discussion.

  19. Democrat ideology costing jobs in Colorado. Why can’t those losing jobs sue the DNC and the politicians for various number of issues, including lose of income?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/4/colo-democrats-blamed-80m-hit-economy-pushing-out-/

    In my opinion every politician that votes for a law that costs jobs should be held financially accountable. I’m not talking about taxpayer dollars either, but personal wealth. Bet the crap would stop real quick, like the ACA would have bankrupted Democrats already.

    • plainlyspoken says:

      G – it isn’t a big deal to most Coloradans since they got what they really wanted, recreational pot smoking rights. Fools.

  20. @ Bottom Line,

    BL says:

    January 3, 2014 at 7:46 pm

    “LOI,

    I was just poking at Flag, ..demonstrating how pop stars preach the message of understanding, accepting and loving thyself.”

    It’s all good dude..Gotta respect Flag, like Jesus & Gandhi he keeps insisting his is the only correct viewpoint. My vision is different. I can see & understand the need to understand why & where you morals come from, but don’t think everyone has to sit on top of a mountain for ten years or however long it takes to be able to write it down, word for word. I think that gets to a level of confusion that distracts from the thought.

    For Dale A.A., who is new, and Flagster to review. Why I go by Life of Illusion….

    Sometimes I can’t help the feeling that I’m

    Living a life of illusion

    And oh, why can’t we let it be

    And see thru the hole in this wall of confusion

    I just can’t help the feeling I’m

    Living a life of illusion

    Pow, right between the eyes

    Oh, how nature loves her little surprises

    Wow, it all seems so logical now

    It’s just one of her better disguises

    And it comes with no warning

    Nature loves her little surprises

    Continual crisis

    Hey, don’t you know it’s a waste of your day

    Caught up in endless solutions

    That have no meaning, just another hunch

    Based upon jumping conclusions

    Caught up in endless solutions

    Backed up against a wall of confusion

    Living a life of illusion

    @ BL, can”t beat Whitney on vocals, period. Lyrics don’t make the grade. How “bout,
    like an eco down a canyon
    never coming back as clear
    lately I just judge the distance
    not the words I hear
    (Anita knows)(wink)

    • Seger! I really like the lyrics for Life of Illusion..pretty much how I see things.

      We bubbleheads at SUFA are not the problem. I have doubt that we could all live in harmony if it came down to it. I keep wondering if JAC and BF expect that everyone all have the same core principles to be able to live in harmony. I don’t think that is even possible.

      • Big whoops…I have NO doubt……

        • “I have no doubt that we could all live in harmony if it came down to it.”

          (mostly agree, but look at the differences between us righties and Buck, Matt, etc.. they seem to want government solutions to damned near every problem. And the more it doesn’t work, the more they want to tax & expand gov. to fix the problem. )

          ” I keep wondering if JAC and BF expect that everyone all have the same core principles to be able to live in harmony. I don’t think that is even possible.”

          (JAC has now answered this, but no. Everyone is a little different. I am pro-death penalty. Flag is against. I am pro-states rights. I would prefer the USA at the state level decide this issue. Could/would Flag live with that compromise? I’m thinking not. He was -40 below last week. He must be in Russia….He is really Edward Snowden on the lam!!!)

      • You bubble heads ARE THE PROBLEM!

        Look, one can forgive the ignorant – you cannot do what you cannot know, and have no means to understand.

        But generally people here are smarter then a telephone pole. So, yes, IT IS YOUR FAULT. You have the mental tools and strength, but YOU DO NOT DO IT.

        And then you peek up and see evil grow, and do not know why.

      • Same core? Absolutely not!

        That’s another problem, you read my posts then pretend something else.

        Nowhere have I said you must have the same principles.
        Always I have said everyone’s core principle is different – different in expression and action.

        Yet, you go around making up lies to suit yourself as a reason YOU do not want to do the work.

        • I was going to let this go for fear of being accused of avoiding the main idea, but I’m going after it anyway…

          I threw a ‘wonder’ out there. I’m not pretending or lying. You want us to think. We think..wonder..and get slammed. You could have been much more cordial by only posting the first and forth sentence. Instead you over thought it and attacked. I know you meant no harm to me personally ( better not have!), and I take no offense. BUT YOU’RE NOT GETTING AWAY WITH IT. 🙂

    • Gotta respect Flag, like Jesus & Gandhi he keeps insisting his is the only correct viewpoint.

      *sigh*
      LOI, you don’t even have a coherent POV to make any judgement about mine or anyone else.

      You are the pompous little ass.
      Empty-headed, but pretending your empty head is some sort of virtue.

      No. Virtue is gained by resistance to evil, not empowering it.

      And, anyone one who sees philosophical truth in pop stars – well, that’s like taking your interpersonal relationship ideas from watching WWF.

    • LOI,

      ” It’s all good dude..Gotta respect Flag, like Jesus & Gandhi he keeps insisting his is the only correct viewpoint. My vision is different. I can see & understand the need to understand why & where you morals come from, but don’t think everyone has to sit on top of a mountain for ten years or however long it takes to be able to write it down, word for word. I think that gets to a level of confusion that distracts from the thought. ”

      I like Gandhi. (just sayin’)

      When I read the bible, I try to step back and see the overall message, the lessons from the parables and history and everything within, instead of trying to figure out who is ‘right’ or put it into denominational/categorical context. And it is a message that I agree with. It isn’t about adherence to a particular religion, but rather a greater understanding and state of being. If for nothing else, it is practical.

      Is it the only way? I dunno. But it seems like a pretty good way. I also see the same lessons and reasoning in other holy books/teachings, …so it stands to reason that since there is common ground, there is equal legitimacy to them, …even at a nominal standard.

      What I like to do is step back even further and try to discern the universal truth within all of them. …kinda like pieces of the same big puzzle. It requires looking all throughout history to see how they evolved. I think that’s when the deeper message begins to become more clear. At least for me anyway.

      There is a lot that can be learned in doing so.

      I don’t consider myself ‘Christian’ in spite of whatever I gain from reading the bible, because I fail to understand the reasoning behind fundamentalist Christian theology’s interpretation of “Son of God, Born of a Virgin, and Died for our sins”…among other things.

      It sounds more figurative to me. The most reasonable explanations I have heard defining ‘Son of God’, are something more in line with Paganism and mystic messianic/Judaic or eastern oriented religions(Taoism)… which doesn’t necessarily negate Jesus. The concept of ‘Christ’ is something that sounds more spiritual in nature, …as in an inner Christ spirit that allows you to become in tune with ‘god’. This ‘requires’ you go through a tribulation, a trial by fire where your inner Christ spirit battles with your ego(false prophet) and your Antichrist spirit trying to prevent you from attaining spiritual growth and enlightenment. You either become one with the Christ or the Antichrist spirit.

      It is difficult accepting the idea of an actual messiah person.

      This is where I split with Christian fundamentalist theology. Bring up something in conversation like astrology/solstice festivals, Mabon harvest festivities, the moon, or chakras or something. The common response is to denounce or reject it as evil or occult. But if many would care to look into the deeper roots of Christianity, you can see the influence of these practices and teachings.

      “Jesus is the only way”?
      The typical reasoning is that Jesus = only way = Christianity, thus anything not Christian is wrong way. I don’t think that’s exactly what it meant.

      What I get from that is that there was a teacher who was trying to convey a message to not listen to all those others feeding you nonsense. …as if to say, I will show you the righteous path, and that is to follow the Christ spirit.

      But who am I to say? I am only a student of all of this.

      In terms of finding your principles, I think Flag makes some excellent points about looking deeper into things for the root/base/premise of your philosophy. I have often made similar such points as it allows you to be more thorough and consistent in your thinking.

      You may have to do some mental gear grinding, but ultimately, I don’t think it has to be all that complex. I think it is simply a matter of defining your core values and sticking with them.

      What I think Flag was trying to convey is to look deeper into WHY in order to have a solid understanding of just what exactly it is that you stand for.

      • BL,

        Great post! It shows you have given serious thought to who you are & why you believe as you do. I think that puts you way above the masses, not just bound by rote learning. But do you have to articulate what your core values are to have them? If you can’t or don’t, does that mean you are value-less? Just faking it? I say not. Your values are expressed more by how you act than any words you ever utter.

        • But do you have to articulate what your core values are to have them? If you can’t or don’t, does that mean you are value-less? Just faking it? I say not. Your values are expressed more by how you act than any words you ever utter.

          You have them – you use them loosely to help you make decisions.

          But at this level, they only help you where the decisions are clear-cut, like helping someone in a car accident – you know this is the right thing to do.

          But where you will fail is where the circumstance is more complex and not so clear-cut. Here, you will be very confused and very likely to make serious moral errors.

  21. HMM, Things are getting touchy lately. May I remind everyone that name calling accomplishes nothing except destroying a conversation. Try to be nice. I understand passion about some subjects to some people. I also understand that too much of a good thing can reverse the good and make it a bad. 😉

  22. Black Flag is having problems posting, not sure why. In the mean time, I’m going to pass along his posts via email/copy/paste.

    Anita
    You want us to think. We think..wonder..and get slammed.

    Look, thinking is more than merely fantasizing or pretending.

    The thinking, in this context, as JAC so brilliantly provided so long ago means “rationalization with reason”.

    Cordial is not my style. I have found it very necessary to stab and kick for only in irritation, annoyance, a bit of pain does anyone “move!”

    You’re not going to advance in your thinking by someone petting you with a soft hand – indeed, such a thing actually ends up confirming your position

    • Test – back again… humfrp…
      I’m sure to the annoyance of many 😉

    • Whaaaat? The correct answer was “Sorry, Anita but….”

      I’m not annoyed. Too sore and tired of shoveling to even think anymore. I’m just going to bubblehead around today. 😉

  23. Down here Flagster. 🙂

    I will be the first to admit that my years here at SUFA has certainly changed a lot of my thinking, especially about government. I’m still evolving, mentally, so to speak. Gaining knowledge does that. I often hear how the Bible is just non-fiction and it’s teachings are useless. People are allowed their opinion. Then I hear how we need government to protect us and our way of life. People are allowed their opinion. Then I hear that if I can’t accept homosexuals then I’m a homophobe racist. People are allowed their opinion. Then I hear that if I don’t agree with Obama and all his Wordly views, I’m a racist pig. People are allowed to have their opinion.

    Now, I hear that I should find my core principal (s) or……. or what? And who came up with this philosophy stuff? People. Who wrote the Bible? People. Who said all the rest of what I wrote? People. Everybody follows what they believe, you follow men who are philosophers. Others follow men who are called politicians, and preachers, and self proclaimed Angel’s sent from heaven. Regardless, it all comes from people. Scientist’s have said the world is struggling from man made global warming. The scientist’s have been proven wrong.

    Even you have said that we shouldn’t be ruled by 9 people in black robes, or anybody else for that matter. So why do you feel you need to be ruled by what some philosopher wrote down on paper with a feather? And why should I be concerned with what that man/men have written, they are nothing but men, no different than those who wrote the Bible, and no different than those who wrote the lyrics to the song “Life of Illusion”, they are mere men.

    What say you Oh wise one?

    • I often hear how the Bible is just non-fiction

      I think you mean “People think it is fiction”.
      It is.

      and it’s teachings are useless.

      No, its teaching can be very useful – IF and ONLY IF you apply your principles to it.

      Look, Lord of the Rings teaches many useful things about the corruption of power – that no man other than the man who does not seek power can morally use it.

      But LotR is hardly “non-fiction”.

      People are allowed their opinion.
      Opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one.

      But what can you defend??

      Now, I hear that I should find my core principal (s) or……. or what? And who came up with this philosophy stuff? People.

      No, just not “people”.

      People who THINK.
      And there are very few who undertake such a thing.

      So why do you feel you need to be ruled by what some philosopher wrote down on paper with a feather?
      I am not “ruled” by anyone.

      I am not so ruled because I have sought and found my core principle.

      If those that align with it, I work with.
      Those who do not align with it, but do not confound them, I tolerate.
      Those that work against them, I resist.

      And why should I be concerned with what that man/men have written, they are nothing but men, no different than those who wrote the Bible, and no different than those who wrote the lyrics to the song “Life of Illusion”, they are mere men.

      What say you Oh wise one?

      Exactly.
      Why are you so concerned about what others wrote?

      Make YOUR OWN. That’s the whole purpose of getting to the root of your principles – you OWN YOUR OWN MIND.

      Only then are you truly free.

      But how can you own what you do not know?

      • People who THINK.
        And there are very few who undertake such a thing.

        Bye’s who’s decision? Yours? You are nothing but a man, just like them. Hitler thought, Mao thought, Lenin thought. So what, people who you follow are your God’s, for lack of a better term. You worship their words, don’t demand others do or you are know better than those who demand you follow their religion.

        Philosophy, when used for good, is then good. Philosophy used for evil, is then evil. Religion can be used the same way.

        But how can you own what you do not know? Because I can’t live to the standards of philosophers? Men with words who “think” by your terms. What if I don’t like what they “THINK”? Hitler was a genius, but also a mad man who also is accused of “thinking”. Philosophers are not Kings or God’s, they are just men who think, by that term, we are all philosophers, because our minds work and think through problems everyday. To claim otherwise….is insane.

        • Bye’s who’s decision? Yours?

          No, by the comments they make.

          Look, if you cannot defend what you say with reason then what you say is thoughtless.

          It isn’t a “decision”.
          It is READING AND THINKING.

          If you post nonsense, do you think its a “decision” to say “Hey, bud, that’s nonsense and stupidity”???

          Hitler thought, Mao thought, Lenin thought.

          Yeah, and they played on the weak thinkers and ethically twisted.

          How will you know??

          Philosophy, when used for good, is then good. Philosophy used for evil, is then evil. Religion can be used the same way.

          BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW???

          You don’t know what is “good”
          You don’t know what is “evil”

          These are thoughtless words you type – you haven’t a clue to what they mean, yet, you think you can make bold statements of what is “right” and what is “wrong”? Based on what?

          You are holding up something you simply cannot identify.

          • Bye’s who’s decision? Yours?

            No, by the comments they make.

            Yes, Yours. You have chosen what to believe and not believe, have you not?

            • Chosen….what to believe

              It is not just “choice” – it is how one makes a choice

              It isn’t a roll of the dice.
              It is using reason as your guide, applied to root principles.

              Again, how do YOU know what is right or wrong? Flipping a deck of cards?

          • Flag, I hope you can see that I’m being a devil’s advocate here. I’m sure that your philosophy is quite an eye opener when finally achieved. But it also takes a clear mind, which, right now, isn’t possible at home. There are times when your sword is quite sharp, when you should present a softer and less demanding argument. Here’s an example of what I mean:

            If you don’t follow Islam, you are an infidel and must die!
            If you don’t follow the teachings of the Bible, you are a sinner and will rot in hell.
            If you don’t learn your core principal, you are nothing but a bubblehead and part of the problem.

            They all seem similar. They all, when put side by side, show extremism. Just Sayin 😉

            • If you don’t learn your core principal, you are nothing but a bubblehead and part of the problem.

              They all seem similar

              Absolutely not.

              The demand of principles is a demand of thoughtful introspection and self-knowledge not an adherence to dogma.

  24. Just A Citizen says:

    Kathy

    Paging Kathy

    Shredded CHEESE HEAD anyone?

  25. Just A Citizen says:

    Re: Core principles.

    Reading many of the comments again it seems to me most folks still don’t understand the POINT of BF’s sharp criticism. It always ends with people “assuming” he is trying to get you to accept “his” or a “particular” philosophy. That would only be true if the reliance on “reason” is a philosophy unto itself.

    Most of us, however, view “reason” as PART of a philosophy, not the end.

    So to BF’s point. It is not THE Core Principle which he is attacking, but the notion that the principle articulated is in fact a “Core” principle.

    As he said, if your “core” actually relies on other concepts, precepts, etc. then it is NOT a Core but a secondary principle. The CORE cannot be reduced further. This simply means it stands alone and is not dependent upon other concepts or principles.

    One way to recognize that it can be reduced, or is not a “Core” is if you find gross exceptions to your rule. For example:

    “Thou shalt not kill” is supposedly a CORE Principle. Yet we all know, recognize and ACCEPT that killing in self defense does not violate this rule. So either our acceptance of killing in self defense is screwed up, or the “not kill” principle is in fact flawed. In other words, it is NOT a CORE principle.

    Most of the “PRINCIPLES” people articulate here are upper level principles or values. Many are in conflict. So the purpose of the introspection is to determine if they conflict due to bad “core” principles or due to faulty “application” or “practice”.

    Is killing in self defense a “rationalization” of immoral behavior, or is it truly justified in a “moral” sense? If your answer after hard thinking and REASONING is that it is justified, then you need to find a NEW “Core” principle to support it.

    Now let me tackle the “live and let live” principle.

    If this means you live your life and let others live their lives as they see fit then you must explore the logical or potential real outcomes.

    One of these is that the “other” person may decide that robbing or killing YOU is HOW THEY WANT TO LIVE THEIR LIFE. So then what do you do? Obviously you don’t just let them “live their life” as they “see fit”.

    Therefore, “live and let live” is not a valid CORE principle. OR, you are rationalizing the IMMORAL behavior of defending yourself against being robbed or killed.

    I will also add that “live and let live” is closer to an upper level “ethic” than a “CORE” ethic or moral standard.

    I hope this helps some with their exploration.

    • I had a nice reply going to you and your partner in crime going yesterday but I couldn’t come to a conclusion so I erased it. You wanted to know why I’m not interested in this topic. I remember a few discussions around here would veer off into philosophy. Do you remember me getting impatient with yous? I’d say “hurry up you guys, I’m way past you, I’m already at camp while you guys are stuck in the mud.” Bear with me for as second as I DONT butter you up. I respect you two guys more than you’ll ever know. You have wisdom beyond anything I feel I would need in my own personal life. You’ve spent hours developing your thoughts. More power to you! Now BF has stated that he would tolerate us bubbleheads. Guess what? That’s good enough for me. I trust your (his and your) intellect and judgement on these matters. I’m a doer, not a thinker. Half the time..on just regular everyday discussions, I don’t jump in because my only reply would be I agree or I disagree. Don’t ask me why..I DON”T KNOW WHY..and I DON”T CARE WHY. I just know that it is what it is. So your reply is going to be..Yabut Anita don’t you know why you chastise your child for bad grades? Yes I do know that answer. At the same time he doesn’t know why he’s in trouble. But he TRUSTS me that i do know the answer and he follows my (threat) advice. Same thing here brothers. I TRUST that you have it all figured out.SWEET..I don’t have to worry because I trust you. If that makes me a bubblehead then so be it. But I’ll sure have your dinner ready at camp so you don’t have that worry. Some people are doers, some are thinkers. As long as you’ll tolerate me, I’m happy. In the meantime…philosophy bores me. Sorry. 😉

      • People that sit around and think at my camp go hungry. 🙂

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Anita

        So why do you think “we” have it figured out and why do you “trust” us, while NOT trusting others with differing views?

        Why do you reject the “Progressive” ideology but embrace the more “conservative”?

        If you say it just “feels right” then simply ask yourself why it feels right.

        You are obviously a deeper “thinker” than you are making out with this response. 😉

        OH………….Thinking and Doing are NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

        • I knew that last sentence was coming.

          As far as progressive vs conservative goes..my thinking only goes as far as ‘I’ll do it myself’ that way I only have myself to blame. At the same time I don’t want to be thrown in a camp where I’m the only doer..so I align myself with people who think the same as me. I couldn’t care less weather they can list their core philosophy or not. Actions speak louder than words. I can’t give you any more than that. As I said, as long as you can tolerate me, I’m happy. Making you happy is all I’m looking for. You want to be happy and have it all thought out why you’re happy. I don’t care about why..just BE.

          • plainlyspoken says:

            Anita,

            Let me just say you are one of the nicest bubble heads I know and I’d hang out around camp with you any day. 🙂

            • Why thank you Plainly, that makes my day! If I could get JAC an BF to ARTICULATE those words, we could move on to real stuff 🙂 OMG I’m in a heap of trouble now. 🙂

              (I’d hang with you to brother 😉 )

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Anita

                I have done so before, and still plan to come sit on your porch some day….soon.

                I don’t need to have my reasons for being happy spelled out, I discovered that until I spelled them out I wasn’t as happy as I could be. In fact, I was UNHAPPY because I couldn’t articulate my case AGAINST the Corrupt Ideology of the day.

                You do not have to spend the same effort or time “thinking” or “researching” as I have done or as others have done. We all don’t have to reinvent the wheel.

                But we should ALL spend enough time thinking about this subject to understand WHY we like the wheel and WHY we use the wheel. And of course if there is a better alternative than the wheel! 😉

                P.S. I do NOT think you are a true bobblehead. Your prior discussions and inquiries are not consistent with this characterization. So I am thinking that right now you are too tired, disgusted, distracted, or whatever, to spend the time and effort to articulate some of your prior discoveries.

                Nothing wrong with that. The mood to wax philosophical or simply tackle describing our core principles is not constant or ever present. Good philosophy is like good love itself. You need to be in the right mood. 🙂

            • (Pssst Plainly – you really don’t know her that well……..be careful what you say)

              Oh hi Anita!

              • You shuddup. Where’s your two cents on this subject..G, LOI, and I have taken enough heat for you now time to Kathyup! 🙂

              • plainlyspoken says:

                lolol….it’s okay Kathy. Don’t forget I am originally a country boy from SE Wisconsin farm country. I know about these folks from Michigan. 😉

              • What’s that saying? Can’t take the heat, stay outta the kitchen? Yeah, that’s me – hiding in my family room and away from the kitchen with this whole topic. This philosophy stuff caught me the first go-round a few years back. Thought I’d made it through 3 pregnancies without an epistemology and then JAC informed me I’d had one all along!!! WTH?

                (OK – I caught on after a second glance at the word)

                You’re doing fine!

              • I didn’t look it up. I’m still going with the delivery room thing. JAC’s gross!

        • JAC (and BF), To many of us, this philosophy stuff is boring, plain and simple. Like Anita, I don’t need to know why I do things the way I do them or think the way I think, it just IS. I’m happy that some people find it within themselves to understand why, and don’t hold any ill feelings toward them. I’d much rather spend time trying to solve problems with what knowledge I have than to spend lot’s of time trying to figure something out that is not going to change my thinking anyway. I’m stubborn, I have learned to live with that.

          I brought up some things I’m thinking about to fix problems locally. I’ve gotten the feeling that the subject is too deep and complicated, or people are too afraid of the government to address the issue. (I can’t blame anyone on the latter). This really isn’t the first time with the subject either. I’m sure their are much better ideas than my own that can be discussed.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            If you don’t care about the philosophy stuff then why do you care or even think Govt is too big?

            I know you have partially withdrawn but not that this is PARTIAL.

            You are still subject to this Govt power which you obviously dislike and disagree with but then you say your bored with philosophical discussions.

            They are ALL CONNECTED.

    • What JAC said!

      Exactly.
      In Gman’s case, there seems to be this need to turn it around to be a dialogue about me.

      It isn’t.
      I am only asking questions about Gman’s principles.
      I am not defining them.
      I am probing them, peeling the onion so to speak to find the core.

      Any time you find an exception to your “principle”, it isn’t a principle but a consequence or an expression of a deeper principle at work.

      Not only is it utterly unnecessary for Gman and I have the same core principle, it is quite unlikely. He is not me. I am not him.

  26. A robber attacked Washington D.C. tow truck driver, striking him in the head with a gun, but the driver successfully fought back — and now faces a murder charge.

    The driver, 35-year-old Corey Stoddard, was approached by 22-year-old Kevin Lewis Crouch in a tow lot in northeast D.C. earlier this week. Crouch asked Stoddard about a green car. Stoddard replied that there was no green car in the lot, prompting Crouch to draw a gun and threaten him.

    Stoddard attempted to run away, but tripped and fell. Crouch repeatedly struck him in the head with the gun, according to The Washington Post.

    Finally, Stoddard flung his wallet toward a fence, and Crouch ran after it. While Crouch was distracted, Stoddard climbed into his tow truck and ran over his assailant. Crouch died from his injuries a few hours later.

    Stoddard readily admitted these details to police.

    He has now been charged with second-degree murder. Police rejected arguments that Stoddard was merely attempting to flee in his tow truck, or acting in self-defense.

    Stoddard is free for now, but must wear an ankle monitor.

    Crouch has a criminal record: He was convicted of carjacking in 2009, when he was 17, and served four years in a youth facility. As part of his plea deal, several assault and gun charges were dropped.

    Since Crouch was the instigator — and attacked Stoddard with a gun — many say the homicide charge is inappropriate.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/02/man-attacked-by-robber-fights-back-is-charged-with-murder/#ixzz2pdTj8HaH

    This is a great one to consider when talking about core principles. Is the tow driver guilty or innocent? Should he be punished?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Physical violence and injury begets physical violence and injury.

      INNOCENT.

      The Govt Authorities should be Tarred and Feathered for even pursuing this charge.

    • Under the law (D.C.) he is guilty, that he could have fled. Even there, he should not be punished(maybe probation to show he is not violent unless attacked). He was attacked & faced a threat to his life. After escaping he made a choice under extreme circumstances to flee or fight. Had he fled, would he have been shot in the back? Would this man have been free & killed his next victim? After being beat in the head repeatedly, how well do any of us think?

      But he should be completely innocent.If a police officer had done the same thing, would he be charged? No! A police officer would be found to be doing their duty removing a threat from the streets. Our laws are supposed to treat all of us equally. If it’s legal for a police officer to kill someone after being attacked, it is legal for anyone. Police have no more rights than any other citizen.

      • You just hit on a very big problem in this country (in many places), cops getting away with mostly anything. They, of all people, should have a higher standard held to them in doing their job.

        As far as the thief who got squashed by a tow truck, should have been working a McDonald’s and trying to lead an honest life. When one steal’s , attack’s and threatens, he should be killed, because it’s only a matter of time before he kills someone he assails. More street justice and less prisons would go a long way to solving our crime problems. Let the people arm up and protect their neighborhoods. Crime would become rare, real fast.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          It seems all there has to be is a report of shots fired or they feel treatened and police respond with deadly force. Aren’t they the ones who are supposed to be trained and protected enough to assess the real danger and act accordingly. Several incidents in NC since September.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        According to the report posted about Mr Stoddard, he DID try and flee. He was run down and beaten by his assailant. How many times was he suppose to test the theory of “Flight makes Right”. Couch was still armed and most likely really pissed off that he was distracted by the thrown wallet. My conjecture is that he would have made a point of coming back and just popping Stoddard at some other time.

        • plainlyspoken says:

          Doesn’t matter what Couch might do or have done. Hell, I could make it my conjecture that all Couch wanted was the wallet and was going to flee with it once he picked it up – presenting absolutely no further danger to Stoddard. By the article we can reasonably assume (in it’s incompleteness) that there was not imminent danger to Stoddard once Couch went after the wallet. Stoddard was able to get into his vehicle and run over Couch. Until we know ALL the facts surrounding that we can’t truly judge whether it was right for Stoddard to run Couch over.

          If someone walks up to you and slaps you in the face and turns and walks away while you stand there stunned in shock does it mean you should go beat the hell out of the person because they MIGHT come back and do it again?

          • Dale A. Albrecht says:

            We can conjecture about this all night long concerning the DC event. By the way Stoddard was black. Couch had to be one stupid person to tangle with Stoddard. That dude was huge.

            What I know would have happened with your supposition of how I would have handled myself if a person walked up to me and tried to slap/hit me. I very seriously doubt if they would have succeeded. The next to last time someone tried to slap me I just grabbed their hand and the event was over. The last time someone tried to hit me, while on shore patrol in the Navy, the two assailants woke up in the hospital. They were charged with attempted murder. They were in the process of beating a police officer, almost to death, in San Diego whom they had caught by surprise. Thing was they were being discharged with DD’s that morning. They each spent about 2 decades in military prison. So much for a short-timers last night out.

            • plainlyspoken says:

              I understand you not tolerating it – and I should have been clear that the “you” was not you specifically, but you in a general sense. And the point is once the “slapper” walks away should “you” attack them and knock hell out of em just because they might do it again?

              Yes, we can conjecture all night – so lets leave conjecture out of it and work only on the information contained in the news article (as poor as it is).

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      In one of my earlier posts a few weeks ago, I passed on a story that happened to me in Amsterdam. Crowded train station, broad daylight, in the queue just having bought my ticket. Stoner from North Africa, stuck a gun in my face, and tried stealing my bag containing business items. Granted instantly, I did recognize the gun as a toy, due to familiarity with weapons he did continue the assult. I successfully defended myself and he ran away. Cameras everywhere, people everywhere all standing around with their thumbs up their asses and a dumbfounded shocked look on their faces. It was not the event, but the fact I defended myself. Nobody came to my assistance, nobody asked if I was OK, no police officer ever came and made any inquiries. The only response was from the bar tender below my apartment, was be thankful I did not injure him. I would have been the one charged with a crime not the perpetrator because he was an unfortunate soul. The next week I defended an elderly lady from being mugged in broad daylight by the botanical garden in Amsterdam. She was running for her life from a person of african decent and just before he caught her I intervened. Wound up escorting her home to insure her safety. With my radars fully on alert by this time I did avoid 2 more incidents, all being instigated by blacks from north africa. This was all in the span of 4 weeks and I am not a small guy and do not walk about with a passive pick on me look.

  27. Just A Citizen says:

    Now I would like to address the BF comment that “WHICH” principles don’t matter. That he has no desire to impose or convince you that any “particular” Core principle is correct for everyone.

    This point has been made here before and if you recall BF and I DISAGREE on this concept.

    Anita is correct in saying that I wish we ALL held the SAME CORE PRINCIPLES. That is because I believe that rational thinking will reveal that there is a limited set of CORE principles which are acceptable to Long Term Human “THRIVING”.

    We can “SURVIVE” with many “Cores” including some that are rotten. But we as INDIVIDUALS and thus WE as a specie will not achieve our potential unless we find a “common core” that is consistent with the rules of the Universe.

    In short, I am on the side of Rand on this one. That is that PROPER principles of Moral and Ethical nature CAN BE identified via Objective analysis and evaluation.

    But here is the caveat. I constantly re-test my principles and values. I consider the chance that I am “wrong” on a particular point almost every day. So if a good argument comes along that is rational I could end up “changing” a principle, or other standard, or my reaction to certain events.

    So while I wish to persuade others to share my “core” principles, it is more important that they share my willingness to “think” hard about their principles and how they fit into the big picture. Because if I am right, we will all reach pretty much the same conclusion anyway.

    Remember, the most important thing is to:

    Keep and ACTIVE MIND…………. 🙂

    • Can’t I just use your principles?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Anita

        Yes, you can.

        But you should be able to defend them against attack by others.

        And you should be able to defend them to yourself.

        Otherwise you become just another sheep, which I know you ARE NOT.

        • I got nothin’. I do acknowlege your many compliments on my not being a bubblehead. I disagree, but don’t ask me why 🙂 It ain’t so bad being a bubblehead.

          • And, that, most pleasant Anita, is precisely why evil grows

            As long as your life “ain’t so bad”, you continue using your gentle energy making evil stronger….

            …until one day, your life or your kid’s lives are utterly terrible and devasted.

            But then, too late.

            • You’re not so cantankerous today..not sure how to handle that! You went down that road the other day about my letting evil grow. I’m still not seeing how I’m the problem. Well maybe because I am friends with some takers. Should I unfriend them because they willingly play the system? They don’t jive with my feelings but that doesn’t mean I can’t tolerate them. I can and have tried to explain why their thinking is wrong (dangit yes I see the problem there), but that ends up in hurt feelings, that was not my intention. You’ve stated that you will tolerate me..the horror!..you’ve gone against your principle, whatsupwiththat?

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              Evil and tyranny will grow if allowed to go unchecked. Bullies and thugs count on the vast majority of the people to be cowed and intimidated by their threats. Or people just saying,they really can not be that evil. Most people can not fathom evil because they can not comprehend it having not been confronted directly by it. Most of the time it is just theoretical. By no means am I advocating confrontation unless fully prepared to resist, don’t bluff. Most bullies will back down when confronted and the outcome is not guaranteed in their favor. Hitler is an excellent example to this point. He could have been stopped very early in his expansion of the Third Reich. Here was a person who wrote down and spoke about exactly what he had in mind for the world. Generally, with rare exception, people blew him off as a crank until to late, with comments like, “a person can not really mean that”. How many millions died ultimately by the time the world woke up and Germany and their allies were defeated.

  28. plainlyspoken says:

    Ugh, it’s Monday………danged Packers…….not what do I do?

    First, an update (as I forgot to earlier). Finally got my wife home Saturday night. She got discharged about 7 pm and after a short stop at the grocery store, plus a longer than usual (time-wise) drive up the mountain through the snow storm we were having (which is probably now pestering Anita in Michigan), we got home and got her comfortable for a few days bed rest (per doc’s orders).

    Next, to the story of the tow truck driver. Understand I am working off the news story only, not the – I’m sure – full statement given to police (which could alter my thoughts quite a bit if I knew the answers to a couple of questions). Well, he didn’t initiate the violence and (so it seems) had an opportunity to escape harm after tossing his wallet away. Instead of running the guy over he could have fled in his truck, but chose instead to make his attacker into a speed bump. Based on the LIMITED information of the news story, the driver is in the wrong since he went from victim to attacker once the imminent danger passed. Is the murder charge appropriate? I don’t know – maybe a negligent homicide or manslaughter charge would have been the proper choice.

    Now, before I get excoriated for my thoughts on this incident, what is missing from this story is a key point or two. 1. Was Crouch between the driver and the only route to safety? 2. What action(s) did Crouch take (if any) when he saw the driver trying to flee (like turning to use his firearm to stop the driver’s escape – again posing an imminent threat to the driver’s life? These two questions will likely not be answered until trial in the criminal injustice (yes I wrote it that way intentionally) system. Likely the defense attorney will try for jury nullification at the least.

    Are there mitigating circumstances? I believe so since we have no idea how much damage he took to the head from being repeatedly struck by the assailant rattling his thinking. Fear is also a huge fog to get through when you are afraid for your life.

    @LOI – your comment on whether a cop would be charged – no, probably not. It doesn’t mean a cop SHOULDN’T be charged under the same circumstances though. The difference is a cop would not have fled as it is their duty to stop the offender, even at the potential loss of their life in doing so. Plus a cop is armed and likely would not have climbed into a vehicle, instead pulling his/her own firearm and confronting the attacker. However, even a cop is not to take a life when there is no imminent danger to their life or the life of another. To do so opens them up (and should) to the possibility of being charged with a criminal act.

    Well, there’s my opening volley on the subject.

    plainlyspoken

    • Judy Sabatini says:

      Glad to hear your wife is back home Plainly, & hope she will make a complete recovery soon. Make sure she gets all the rest she needs in order for her to do so. You take care as well.

    • Glad the home life is getting back to normal. That helpless feeling while a loved one suffers is one of the hardest things to endure.

      “The difference is a cop would not have fled as it is their duty to stop the offender, even at the potential loss of their life in doing so.”

      Yes but, his life was already threatened. He didn’t choose to be attacked. He could choose to run or to use a weapon to fight back. It was & should be his choice as to what was the best way for him to safely resolve the situation. Police are given a lot of latitude when confronted with violence, which I mostly agree with. But they are not supposed to be “special” citizens. We are supposed to be equal.

      “The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

      • plainlyspoken says:

        @Judy – you bet she’s going to. That and ANY gluten in her diet will be eliminated. To have watched her suffer through the five days in the hospital was excruciating for me and she doesn’t wish any repeat of it herself.

        @LOI – I submit (again based on the story) that there was no longer any imminent danger (or threat) to the driver’s life, ergo deadly force would not be appropriate at all – for him OR for any cop. That narrows the choices legally and morally available to him or a cop.

        I agree that cops should not be “special” citizens and also agree with the belief that cops must be held to a higher standard. It is unfortunate that many law enforcement agencies have devolved into little more than de facto paramilitary forces in the aftermath of 9/11, The “terrorist” threats to the nation used by the government to scare the nation into accepting the loss of their liberties codified in the Constitution have allowed police agencies to become more like jackbooted SS troops than this nation has ever witnessed in it’s history (in my humble opinion). The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has regressed and will not progress further under the cloud of fear the government continually stirs up in the mind of the public.

        @Dale – Makes no difference if they where white/black, blue/green, pink/purple to e. That is not – and should not be – a standard that the situation is judged by (though I know many times it is).

        • P.S.

          “there was no longer any imminent danger (or threat) to the driver’s life, ergo deadly force would not be appropriate at all – for him OR for any cop.”

          He has committed felony assault & battery. He is still armed with the firearm he threatened and battered your victim/cop with. (if a cop was caught off guard & attacked in the same manner) Still armed, still a threat. Totally justifiable for the use of lethal force.

          Agree black/white does not matter except looking at crime patterns and how they can be addressed. Is this another case of youth/gang/urban violence? Where did he get the gun since D.C. makes it nearly impossible to obtain one legally. Supposedly the “knock-out” game is nearly 100% black on white violence. Sorry, but since the media screens news to avoid offending criminals at expense of the truth, I’m prone to ask the same question…….

          • plainlyspoken says:

            LOI

            “He has committed felony assault & battery. He is still armed with the firearm he threatened and battered your victim/cop with. (if a cop was caught off guard & attacked in the same manner) Still armed, still a threat. Totally justifiable for the use of lethal force.”

            Nope, it is not as there must be imminent danger (that gun being pointed at you per se). Regardless of whether or not there was a felony assault/battery committed and the suspect is still armed is only a part of the equation that must be considered. Being an ex-cop I can not recall how many hundreds of times it was drilled into us that we had no right just to cap someone because they had committed a crime and were possibly still armed. If there was no immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm – then no capping allowed. Having in my career held a man at gunpoint while he visibly held a handgun not pointed at me (down at his side) I HAD to give him the opportunity to surrender without shooting him unless or until that handgun came upwards in my direction. In my case, luckily, the guy chose to drop the firearm and be taken into custody.

            Now, in this day and age it doesn’t seem to matter. The standards of behavior for the police have become so loose and oriented to the deadly aggression they can take that likely they would cap the guy and call it a good shoot.

            What had occurred by Couch is not justification alone to shooting him/running him over – based on what we know from the news article. Show me clearly that Couch became an imminent threat again towards Stoddard and then I can say Stoddard was justified is running the idiot over. Until then I can only conclude – again, based on the article – that Stoddard was not justified.

            • Yes but, lets venture down the what if rabbit hole.. What if a guy swipes a cop’s gun, it can happen. He then does exactly as reported here, looking more like he wants cash that a deliberate attack on a L.E.O., cop throws his wallet & jumps into a car, what does he do? Do you let a violent criminal escape and risk he won’t harm anybody else before he’s caught? (don’t forget, you have had your bell rung & are not at your best either)
              would’ve
              should’ve
              could’ve
              damned if ya do, damned if ya don’t…. At the end of it, he attacked you. He is more responsible for his own fate.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Every day violent criminals evade the cops after being contacted. It isn’t reason enough to shoot them down just because of what they might do. Just doesn’t wash. If we wander around that rabbit hole then why not just arrest and confine someone as a potential violent criminal so they can’t hurt anyone? After all, what’s a little preventative incarceration for the safety of the public?

                (No G – the country isn’t there yet, give em some more time to get their program rammed down the throats of the sheeple as a needed tactic to insure national security) 😉

          • plainlyspoken says:

            Oh, and your questions are good ones.

            • Tnks… I’ve been to D.C. before.. funny thing, when I saw the Washington Monument 10 blocks up, I realized I was lost & did an illegal U-turn. I was delivering a vehicle to a county with their name all over it, so very official looking. Drove it to eat & picked a HUGE mall with two eat/drink establishments. Returned to vehicle & found it surrounded with police/fire looking for the county drivers…. Explained to the cop who was happy for me to get the ‘ell out of there. Next day the lieutenant I was dealing with was getting REAMED by the captain, who had been on the phone with the chief. Poor LT was a nice guy, explained things to me & I agreed to their demands with a smile. He said I would not believe how political things were there & I agreed with him and laughed. Was sorry he took all that flak, but I had done nothing wrong & was in no trouble at all. Bet I had phones ringing all across that county….

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          You’re right, it should make no difference, however it does in this country with “Special” groups and prosecution when it is politically motivated through intimidations of violence. Maybe from a devils advocate viewpoint, the DC police didn’t want a repeat of the Zimmerman soap opera to happen in a much more volatle city such as DC.

        • Judy Sabatini says:

          Glad to hear she’s going to & I can imagine how hard it was to watch her like that as well. I’m sure you both will be extra careful now while grocery shopping & looking at the ingredients to make sure it’s gluten free. So happy for you both, that she’s home now.

          • plainlyspoken says:

            I have discussed it with her and this household ill be going completely gluten free to minimize the chances of her getting products containing wheat, barley or rye. There are more and more products out all the time that are gluten free and for the things we need that aren’t we will be closely checking those labels for sure. 🙂

    • Great news on the Missus! 🙂

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Was Crouch black and Stoddard white?

  29. side bar..had to share..wish I could post a pic

    My daughter is an accountant at U of M. It’s unheard of for them to cancel work, but it happened and she’s off today. It’s very cold here but she wanted her daughter to be able to play in the snow. SHE FILLED THE TUB WITH SNOW, got my granddaughter (21 months) all bundled up and she’s playing in the snow tub now! That baby is loving it! What a great idea!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Sounds to me like you Wisconsinites drink Girly Beer.

      Way to much water in the stuff and not enough alcohol.

      You need to rediscover you roots and spread the Viking Ale around.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        Girly beer? Only if they choose to drink that Colorado elk pee called Coors! This Wisconsinite prefers good, dark German beers (and the Viking Ale will work acceptably too)!

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Please do not insult a Colorado Elk by comparing their piss to Coors. To this day, I still can not stand to drink Coors beer and that has been 43 years since last having one. Maybe for the sake of argument legalizing pot in Colorado may be justified by improving the health of their citizens.

          • plainlyspoken says:

            True, I shouldn’t. If the elk in my neighborhood hear me say that they’ll not take kindly to it at all. 🙂 My last Coors that I can recall was around 1979ish. Can’t stand that water – though it did make me a few bucks having it smuggled into where I lived then and selling it to the locals (who seemed to demand it just because it was illegal east of the Mississippi River back then). My horrible crime days of a bit of bootlegging I guess. lol.

            Ah yes, medical/recreational pot here in Colorado – what fun that will be for the State. Hope they keep the taxation high on it. Another good reason to stay hidden up here on my mountain west of the Springs!

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              I understand there is a conundrum, with the police having no means, like alcohol, to test if you are driving while stoned or a legal impairment limit set.
              Spent some good days trout fishing up in the Cripple Creek area.
              Joined up with the climbing teams, in their search for survivors, of the Wichita State Football team plane crash in Loveland Pass area in Oct 1970.

              Point on taxes and what the government consider illegal activity. As long as the government gets their cut they have NO problem with drugs or anything. Numbers rackets illegal but lotteries OK. Same thing. States are desperate for money and any source of revenue. More and more states will follow suit and even worse drugs will be legalized as long as the state imports and distributes and taxes. Taking their cut all along the way. Then they can have more excuses for doing good and aiding those that are completely messed up from the ultimate abuses and addictions with drugs like crack and heroin. FDR’s father in law made two fortunes in the opium trade in China. England and France and also we were involved in the Opium Wars in China. Believe it or not it was all about balance of trade and a drain on hard currency of the western nations while trading with China. End result was the government forced the sale of opium on China and initiated 100 years of gunboat diplomacy in China. Only ended with WWII.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                Not quite true, there is testing available should an individual fail field sobriety tests (FSTs). While there is no field breath meter to blow into as with alcohol, the individual failing will be required – under the implied consent law – to submit to a blood test. Of course they can refuse, just as they can if suspected of drunk driving, but then they suffer the standard consequences of that refusal. My brother-in-law is a state trooper and we have discussed the detection of marijuana use by a driver.

                Those FSTs will be sufficient to give probable cause for the blood test to detect drug use just as they are for alcohol use.

                When I hear the pot smokers say they won’t be caught because there is no “breathalyzer” to detect pot use I just laugh.

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                just was referencing a news article from Colorado. Still haven’t learned about the accuracy of media reports. I’m trying though, but I do catch most inaccuracies…..when it comes to drugs and that includes pharmacuticals, I take a really hard line against them. I’ve seen to many people affected in a really bad way, including death over the years. A lot more than alcohol in my experience.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                I’m with you, I have seen more than my share of the detriments of alcohol and/or drug abuse as well. Yet, if people want to be stupid, who am I to stop them as long as they hurt no one but themselves? Fools will be fools regardless of what reason and evidence to the contrary tells them.

                Accurate media reports are like accurate weather reports normally – unreliable. 🙂

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                Just read an interesting quote. “A man who reads nothing, is better off than a man who reads nothing but newspapers” T Jefferson

  30. Just A Citizen says:

    Here is a perfect example of what happens when we don’t clearly identify Core Principles and then try to apply all types of rationalizations to justify our hurt feelings or address disappointment.

    Note how the very terms “rights” and “freedom” become twisted and meaningless. And this “FREEDOM” is thought to be a CORE Natural Right.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech

  31. Temperature has dropped 12 degrees in 2 hours, now 6 degrees with wind gusts around 43. Going to be a chilly night.

  32. Here is a case of such confusion as detailed by Karl Hess

    “Libertarianism is rejected by the modern left–which preaches individualism but practices collectivism. Capitalism is rejected by the modern right–which preaches enterprise but practices protectionism. The libertarian faith in the mind of man is rejected by religionists who have faith only in the sins of man…The libertarian insistence that each man is a sovereign land of liberty, with his primary allegiance to himself, is rejected by patriots who sing of freedom but also shout of banners and boundaries.” — Karl Hess, “The Death of Politics,”

  33. Let’s summarize the conundrum this way. If you believe that Theft is evil and unacceptable then how do you behave in a world filled with thieves? How do you provide for you and family when Thieves dominate the economic and political world?

    I submit that this is the dilemma most here face. It is not so much a lack of clear principles, it is not being able to reconcile the real world and how we conduct ourselves in it, with those principles.

    This is the “necessary pain” that BF is referencing. To live in strict adherence to “principles” which conflict with the reality around us can be very painful.
    ———————–

    Ahaaa! Here is where I’m going to (try to) trap you guys.

    You have to live in the same painful world as me. You can make a list..I can’t.

    What difference, at this point, does it make

    weather I have a list or not? Your list does nothing to change reality. Even Jesus and Ghandi had a list..and how far did that get us?

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1531520/posts

      not that these quotes relate….just thought them interesting. and we today in our arrogance say the people in the past are not relevent because today is so different. Human nature is evolutionary and takes much more time to really change than we think. Tools of communications etc are different yes, people NO.

      Cold enough for you up Michigan way? Here in coastal NC, its dropped 40 degrees this afternoon.

      • Yes sir. -14 and -40 wc. A 15 degree drop since 2 pm The kids are doing science experiments while still on break. The old throw hot water out the window and watch it freeze instantly trick. High school students, and they’re still amazed..me too

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Have to relate a somewhat humorous story one of my Grandmothers would tell. It was about how gullible she was and how inciteful her older sister was. One cold morning off of lake Erie, with cold like you are now experiencing, their Father said, now girls, its really cold out there today. Don’t touch any metal with your bare hands they’ll freeze to the metal instantly. So off they go out to play. Well anyway, my great aunt Mable says to Edna, my future Grandmother, well Father didn’t say anything about sticking your tongue to metal, why don’t you see what that does Edna. Go ahead and stick your tongue to the wagon wheel. Needless to say Edna lost the entire top layer of her tongue and never could taste again. But to add insult to injury, it was on the metal wheel of the manure spreader.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Anita

      It makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE.

      The Difference between understanding the problems as well as their possible solutions.

      The difference between knowing there even is a problem.

      The difference between knowing that a certain action or actions will only result in more of the same because they are based on the same corrupt principles.

      The difference between supporting Good instead of Evil.

      The “LIST” is the difference in being able to make sound arguments and save the remaining RATIONAL thinkers. Those who will lead the rest who wait to be told what to do or what to accept as their own.

      When it comes to your action, or mine, the LIST is the guide to keeping your sanity. In my example you have several choices that could be consistent with a single Core principle.

      These include withdrawing and waiting for Shit to happen, or acting in a few different ways.

      But if you act and you have no idea what are solid and defensible Principles that support your goals, you will almost certainly add to the problem. Unless of course you get lucky.

      Not sure where you get this “LIST” thing from anyway. The challenge was to use reason to determine if what you think are core principles are truly CORE or some higher order value that is being supported by something you don’t recognize. Something that will constantly work against you.

      Such as in the “libertarian” conundrum that BF has provided above.

      • I dunno JAC. It still just doesn’t (make a difference) click for me. I can answer one thing for sure, the rest I’m just blowing bubbles I guess. The LIST morphed out of BFs insistence that we ARTICULATE our core. I’m going to stop just short of saying you’re probably right. You seem to roll an awful lot into one ball. For instance: The difference between supporting Good instead of Evil. We’ve hashed that one out..who are you to judge what is good or evil. Matt has a whole different idea of what is good or evil than you. He would say you support evil. You would say he supports evil. Nobody knows for sure..it’s all part of what makes the world go ’round. There is the high and the low road. You will come across bumps on your road, I’ll come across bumps on my road. But we’d all still get there.

        So here I am again not able to come to a conclusion.But IT DOESN’T MAKE A DIFFERENCE anyway because we’re not going to see this the same way. I’ll say it again, as long as you’ll tolerate me, that’s good enough for me. 😉

        • Anita,

          Before you debate whether JAC is capable of knowing good or evil, you need to know what those things are first

          Otherwise, you’re like a child debating with an adult about thunder – with you claiming its Harry Potter’s magic.

%d bloggers like this: