Publius_Fed_2

Publius_Fed_2

70p

252 comments posted · 5 followers · following 2

12 years ago @ Big Government - Sexual Harassment Clai... · 0 replies · +12 points

It is clear that the White House and mainstream media is focused on eliminating Cain. Why? He is a real person with real world problems and real world emotions. Regardless of the exact details, IF THEY ARE TRUE, it sounds like he might have made advances, but advances does not mean that what he is sexually abusing women.

For the most part, the world supports political leaders that are inappropriate with women, not to support or justify deviant behavior, but how will this be viewed by the rest of the world? A man in America cannot express themselves to another woman?

What is Killing America is not only the destruction of the Capitalist System, but the overall expression of our humanness.

How do we know, Mr. Cain, was not having Marriage Problems and was just working through a time that was pretty hard for him? How do we know that maybe he is just very affectionate to others, many cultures view leadership on how affectionate one is with their friends, family and co-workers? Can this affection be very borderline for those whom have been brought up in a sterile environment? Can that affection be borderline too far? Of course if can. But, in of itself, he is accused only of either being TOO affectionate OR too forward on his interest in another woman.

Keep in mind, if this sticks, the being of the human nature of a man in America, becomes impotent.

Are there women that are out there that would attest to how Cain and other men are affectionate to them? Why are they not defending Cain and other "men".

Is there any reason why many men are single into their 40s and beyond? Is there any reason why many women are single into their 40s and 50s?

Could it also be that our culture has also focused on working so hard to make ends meet that most people meet in the work place? Could it be that eliminating the opportunity to "flirt" and be kind in the work place, will further define the "Culture of Impotence".

Take note my friends, even if these allegations are true, the "Statists" are willing to sacrifice the natural culture of human kind, for the advancement of a political cause.

This is actually the story.

Why, because there is no story here... Even if the accusations are true, Mr. Cain may have just been a humanbeing at the time.

If not, where are all the other women that he had "slept with". Or can we believe that he paid off all the woman he slept with.... or does the Politico have the clairvoyance to know all the women that Mr. Cain has meet and potentially slept with and paid them to not speak until one year from now in October. Yes, that is it. They have found all the people that he has been with and will bring them out one year from now.... yeah... Right... NOT POSSIBLE.

The reality is that Mr. Cain is 65, he is a successful and well known. There is going to be some exchanges that may have been misinterpreted OR he might have had some time of "weakness" and explored other relationships.

But if he DID have a deviant issue with women, like so many other political leaders have, would we not have heard something more despicable than this.... What? Just a few possible incorrect words and or possible incorrect touches?

"IF" he was deviant, we would hear more than just these isolated incidents over the past 2 weeks.

This is all cannon fodder!

Publius

12 years ago @ Big Government - Obamanomics: The Marke... · 0 replies · +4 points

One might say, "How can this be? How can we live our lives without the oversight of government? Just think of all that would not work, all of the crime that would be committed? The need for government to save us from all of the problems of the world is no more present than today." In so believing this notion we must note that we do not pursue the negative consequences and risks that come with an environment that is free of oppressive rules and regulations. We embrace those whom succeed and lead the way to success that others can follow.

The natural response is this, "In so doing, you will harm many people. They will have to suffer to achieve the goals you seek with this notion of the purity of fairness." And one would have to agree that this is the case, that some people might suffer due to following those whom are not of the purest of character. But in the end, would this time of uncertainty leading to the individual of character and steadfastness be worth the effort? What do we have now, more shared pain, more stagnation that surrounds us with no end in sight? With the eventual mutual destruction that we face with the notion of the "Enforcement of Fairness”, I think not!

It is better to strive to achieve and know the pains of failure than glide ever so slowly into a numb dull uncomfortable state of depression and lifeless expression. In the end, the pursuit of the "Enforcement of Fairness" leads to the wallowing in vice that the founding fathers warned against; since once you have no competition in the marketplace, once one has taken the reins of "Enforcement" the evils of vice creep inside the human psyche. These things we call vice are those items that lock the natural evidence for the human to justify their actions to push further into their notion that a more powerful government is the only thing that can save mankind.

These things we call vice, grip mankind, and does not let one go such that the notion of purity of character can take a back seat without consequence. The notion of the "Enforcement of Fairness" drives a stake into the heart of those whom would dream of the "Purity of Fairness". Whether the vice is gluttony, anger, hubris, etc., the result is the same, the human psyche can be consumed with the vice to the detriment of their family and friends around them. The vice can be so strong that one can make decisions to enact government policies and controls that support or protect the engaged vice. Or, more importantly, it allows the human psyche to ACT OUT their vice on others within their society or against other societies.

In the end it comes full circle, is the goal of a society to utilize the power of government to enforce fairness? Or is it the responsibility of the people to ensure that government never attempts to utilize itself to enforce fairness, as such the population will enjoy the ever bountiful result of TRUE FAIRNESS and therefore experience the pursuit of happiness unhindered.

So, from this prose to understand the logic of control, we understand that the notion that government can be "Helpful" in the pursuit of happiness is FALSE. In the end, it hinders happiness; no matter how well the intentioned notion is or the volume of papers describe the potion that will finally deliver the goods. It is false because it cannot solve the human sociological requirement to have an environment that purifies the human character to a moral standard that supports the ongoing success of that society.

Where the ingredients to that achievement include:
1) Limited Government, only to what is necessary
2) A belief in God, not a religion but that there is a higher power
3) Functional economics and marketplaces without the oversight of government
4) Individual responsibility to purse a life with a pure character

With these ingredients, the social pressures will allow vice to be purged from the base of society to ensure and guarantee that "Fairness" will reign and peace on earth can be achieved.

This is what the founding fathers attempted to build, and succeeded, this is what we have destroyed and are now paying for our actions.

Do I suggest that we drop all of the "Unnecessary" Programs we have to date? No, since that would do great harm. But what we are saying is that this is where we have come from. There has to be a way back. And if there is not, then the Founding Founders where right in penning that this constitution that they developed was a test that if mankind is able to manage themselves the constitution they put together will last forever. If it does not, then it will indicate that mankind's fate is defined by happenstance and force.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Obamanomics: The Marke... · 1 reply · +3 points

Does the common human mind wish that we could elect or allow another groups of humans to assume this laborious task of ensuring that the world be "fair"? Of course! It is natural to assume, if you’re a fair minded individual, that you have the fortitude to elect an official that will bring fairness to your life and others. It is also fair to say that we can see others that may have more and thus have more freedom in their lives to enjoy the lives they live, and say that this is not fair. As such, we can believe in the notion that it is the RESPONSIBILTY of the government to ensure this fairness, by force, by enforcement.

As such, would it not be true then, if one group has more and then elects those whom might bring that more to us, that one day we may find ourselves on the side of more? Would it not be fair to say that when we are on the side of more, that when our more is taken we might gnash our teeth in rage and disgust and in anger that our more has been taken? Would we not scream "This is not fair, why cannot someone do something?"

So it is true then, in the world of "Enforcement of Fairness" the only group that is dealt the fairness, is the group that is in political power. The group that controls all of the mechanisms of governmental power, except that of the ability to purify the human soul such that the human condition would make the righteous choices that could bring about true "Fairness".

Is this not the arrangement that the founding fathers warned us about? Is this not the notion of government that has plagued mankind throughout the ages? Do I wish that this was not the case? Yes, I do. It is easy to fall into the concept that we can save ourselves by instituting the notion that fairness can be enforced. But in the end it ruins itself. It ends in tragedy.

This is the notion that the founding fathers built, the "Purity of Fairness" through the notion that there is a God, hire power or Mother Nature. Not of Religion in of itself; but the notion that there exists a much more powerful force that we cannot understand and never will be able to understand that it is the ultimate arbitrary of fairness.

And that force provided to us, all of us, not just a select few, the ability to get up in the morning, eat, go out through the day, return home and enjoy our loved ones and go to bed; and while doing all of these activities we use our faculties of reason to make it from one minute to the next; the ability of the mind to perform inductive and deductive reasoning... flawlessly. But the results may vary, and they do; some people's reasoning are more advantageous than others, but in the end of the day, we have our faculties to rely on to make our day a success.

As such, the "purity of fairness" then is a notion that relies on the human individual ability to monitor, maintain and adjust to meet our daily needs, wishes and desires; as such, the need and more so the necessity of government becomes less and less critical to the success or our lives.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Obamanomics: The Marke... · 0 replies · +3 points

Some folks would argue that they also can make the marketplace work by organizing the business sectors and in some cases running some of the businesses. As this is form of government results in fascism. Others would say that this is good, that there is a need for government to run all parts of the marketplace in order to ensure full fairness and eliminate the evils of profit.

In the end, the idea that the government can create an atmosphere of "fairness" is one where we have to fully comprehend the mechanisms that government has to enforce and fulfill this promise. As stated, these mechanisms are limited. More importantly they do not include the responsibility of ensuring the population earns a life guided towards a character that requires respect and admiration. A character of purity in thought and deed such that the human will make choices to care for their family and their fellow humans.

No there is no mechanism that can do this within the realm of government. As such, we must then ask, can government deliver fairness without the mechanisms to enforce and promote a purity of character?

The answer is, of course not!
No matter what rules are put into place or incentives one can surmise. There is no mechanism that government can use to purify the human soul such that the human will act in such a way that they will make decisions based on honesty, trust and fortitude.

But what can? What can assist in doing this cleansing of the soul? There are many books that talk about this action of cleansing of the human soul, and one cannot do it justice in a few short words here. Nor can one attempt to replicate the religious teachings of all religions of peace here in a few short lines. But at the end of the day, the moral pinning of a society has a close tie to the necessity of the understanding that there is a higher guidance, a higher power, some call it God. Others call it Mother Nature and still others call it the eternal force. Regardless, this little understood relationship between the notion that there is a God and the moral responsibilities of all humans requires the process in which one can purify the human soul, without force, is the true essence of "fairness".

As such, this critical distinction, between the "Purity of Fairness" and the "Enforcement of Fairness" lays the ultimate truth; that the moral compass of a nation will determine which avenue in which they choose. The notion that "Enforcement of Fairness" is the righteous path to choose or the "Purity of Fairness" is the atmosphere to choose.

Down one path, there is the use of government and all the tenant tools it can posses, minus the brazen tools for purifying the soul, to achieve this concept of "Fairness". And down the other path is the notion that government's intervention in the lives of humans, prevents the forces of the population from "Purifying" the human souls so that right minded thinking can prevail and "fairness" can emerge.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Obamanomics: The Marke... · 0 replies · +4 points

This my friends, is what we might paint as the utopia that we would like to achieve. And no matter what group we are from, from the mind set of big government or big business or a more libertarian perspective. These goals are shared by all.

Why is that? Mostly to preserve our society and continue our families into the future. As time passes, so will our lives pass, and at the end of the day we must realize that we have some responsibility in shaping the world to come. That the people that we choose whom then help choose the type of government that will enforce laws and rules that will bring peace and tranquility, must be chosen with sense of direction toward these goals.

These goals of a society, ensure fairness and ensure the mechanisms for people, of good character, are fostered that play nicely with each other and create an atmosphere of fairness.

Fairness, what is that word? How can fairness be such an important subject at such a time in which the wealth of the world is so unevenly distributed. Fairness is a term that can be relative, they have more than I, so that is not fair. They took what I have earned, that is not fair. So what is fair? Taking from someone that has worked hard to earn something because they have obtained it and the other person did not? Or is it fair to say that someone has too much of something and has to share it, forcibly, such that others can participate in having that which they do not have?

And yes, it is true; this concept of forcibly sharing what other's have as fairness, when contrasted against the fairness of something that was earned, is no longer a concept of fairness. Would it not be true, at some point a thief, justifying their actions in the moment, may consider taking what someone else has as their own and call it fair? Someone down on their luck, sees a rich man lost in some dark ally and determines that what they have should be shared with him in the moment. Regardless, the act of stealing from the gentleman is no less of a barbarian act as entering an empty home and taking the owner's valuables.

More importantly, what does our goal have to do with the overall concept of fairness? The answer is that we must establish what it is that we want before we can set in motion the mechanism to determine what it is we can put in place so that we can achieve it.

So in the end, we want an atmosphere where there is an element of Fairness such that all can create a life they can enjoy and create a sense of fulfillment. Some people refer to this as the Pursuit of Happiness. Ultimately, the actual pursuit of happiness cannot be experienced by all unless there is an element of fairness.

So, back to our original question, "How does the control of government help formulate this atmosphere of fairness for all?"

As such, the challenge then becomes this, "What act by the government can best assist in fairness?" The reality is that government can only control a limited number of things:
1) Regulate what we do
2) Protect us from harm/criminals
3) Tax what we create
4) Supply assistance to identified groups (Social Security, etc.)

12 years ago @ Big Government - Obamanomics: The Marke... · 0 replies · +7 points

The basic question that faces mankind is this, "Is there a model of government control for a population that ensures liberty and freedom over time?"

Or to make it brief, "Can groups of people be controlled to do what is best for each other?"

Another approach is this, "Can we trust those in Government to always make the right choices so that all peoples can live a full and happy life?"

In the end these are questions for our time, for our generation. These are the matters that will consume this country, the United States of America. The overall thoughtfulness that many people possess is the notion that government, in whatever form, can compensate for the flaws of the market place and the flaws of the human character; either by regulating the marketplace into a conformity that is defined by the benevolent government servants or taking the market over and attempting to supply necessary goods and services under the umbrella of a government entity.

In the end, the words that we speak and write on this topic can fill volumes of books, audio clips and video clips. At the end of the day they are just words. We can fill pages and pages of pamphlets full of nonsense as to necessity of the human soul to have a more powerful source help us manage the daily risks of our lives. At the end of the day, we still rise, eat, go into the world, use our skills to do what we do and then come home, eat and visit with family and friends; at the end of the day we go to bed.

Our lives are filled with the hope that we grow up happy, with a consistent family unit that cares for us as children, that we find a spouse or significant other, that supports us in our dreams and hopes. We hope to find that we can love another and have that person find the stability and consistency to love us in return. We hope to have a family or be part of one to watch the children or someone's children grow up and experience the world for the first time.

These things and much more we hope for ourselves and we hope for others. Additionally, one will need to admit, there is no one individual, that has a solid sense of reason on their side and does not have the intension to harm another, that these ideas are indeed steadfastly fact.

Is there someone out there that does not want these things for themselves? I am sure there are. But we would have to say that these people that want to be alone and do not want others to grow as humans and as families would be part of the abnormal sect of society that we should work to reach out to assist. Not to impose on, but to help them experience the joy and love that personal growth and family expression brings.

Additionally, what can a family bring but hope and love which can bring one to a greater growth as a human on this planet, and has the brazing effect that can mold a pristine character. An individual that can be trusted and is trusting, a person that is open and honest with their promises, that is consistent in their labors that speaks the truth and walks a line that allows that person to reap the rewards of their efforts. And in doing so, has the courage and fortitude to share what they earn with others. Whether it be friends or family or an act of kindness to a stranger, what we might call, charity.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Spokesman: Gov. Rick P... · 0 replies · 0 points

Perry should be a good add to make it competitive.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Tuesday Open Thread: W... · 0 replies · +10 points

Keep in mind, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results every time is considered to be the definition of "Insanity".

Publius

12 years ago @ Big Government - Reason.tv: Why I Was A... · 2 replies · +30 points

This is a VERY important Video. It is happening all over the US. I am currently also in a battle for a city's freedoms and livelihood. This is critical to understand...

12 years ago @ Big Government - Self-Policing Bureaucr... · 0 replies · +4 points

The concept of Public servants is no longer applicable.

Once a country turns to Socialism, the political class rules. The Marketplace caters to the political class and anyone in their way is crushed. The need for them to serve the constitutional intent does not exist. In short, they are in survival mode due to the over spending and the over commitments that the governments have made to their own employees and the groups that are supporting those employees.

We really have left the concept of a self governing society at the door, with the intent that the market place be responsible for punishing those that do not play fair. We now expect the government to punish the people and reduce risks in our lives such that we do not have any accidents or troubles.

Can anyone say STRIKES, UNREST and CONFUSION?

Oh, wait, this is all the cause of the constitution.... maybe if it really gets bad we should call to have a NEW Constitution that will FIX EVERYTHING... isn't that right you little socialist nut cases?

I love you guys, so fuzzy, lovable and full of real meaning and kindness... yes, the way is to have a new constitution that gives people REAL rights... like food, shelter, health care, Flat Screen TVs, Jordan Shoes, Diamond Necklaces, etc. etc. etc.

Publius