In Defense of Politicians.

English: The Bill of Rights, the first ten ame...
English: The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution Česky: Originál Listiny práv, prvních deseti dodatků k Ústavě Spojených států amerických Deutsch: Die Bill of Rights genannten ersten zehn Zusatzartikel zur US-amerikanischen Verfassung, die den Bürgern bestimmte Grundrechte garantieren Español: La Carta de Derechos de los Estados Unidos, el término por el que se conocen las diez primeras enmiendas de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos de América (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Another new revelation has appeared on the scene today. The telephone records of millions of formerly unsuspecting people have been seized, and continue to be seized, by the government through the use of a secret court order issued by a secret FISA court, while the company involved was ordered to say nothing of this seizure. This was not publicized until a foreign media source obtained the information and printed it.

This is just one of many abuses by our government. We no longer have any expectation at all to privacy. The State on New York is attempting now to pass a law which will make it a felony to “annoy” a police officer. Senator Lindsey Graham, among others, has questioned whether those of us who are not “real journalists” deserve equal protection under the First Amendment. Public land in Itasca County is subject to being freely traded for the apparent gain of certain county officials. Our DNA is to be unconstitutionally collected for a government database merely because we are accused of a crime, even if the accusation is completely unfounded. Must I go on? I don’t think so.

Meanwhile I am surrounded by a variety of statements from people seeking to defend their favorite politicians. “Bush isn’t in office anymore.” “Obama is trying his best to help us.” “McCain is a war hero.” “Hillary Clinton is just being set up by the establishment.” “Boehner would stop the spending if he could.” And so on, ad infinitum.

Stop it, people! Defending these politicians just because they say what you want to hear, or because of the label they affix to their name, just shows your ignorance in the matter. The President could stop the abuses of our rights in a days time if he wanted to. He does not want to. Congress could do the same. They also do not want to. They can tell you they want to protect your rights all they want, and have done a very good job convincing you, but that does not make it true. They are liars. They tell you what you want to hear, then resume the theft of your rights. They could stop the abuse anytime they desire, but aside from a small number of honorable politicians, they have no desire to work for us as intended. They wish to rule.

Keep standing in defense of your favorite politicians, of your favorite political party, and you are equally guilty of the fate which will befall us as those who are more actively taking part. There is nothing wrong with ignorance, it is just a lack of knowledge, but when this is pointed out it becomes willful ignorance, which is an offense against yourself. It also makes you vulnerable to con artists. Career politicians who will say anything to get elected and maintain their high status.

Let us educate ourselves to what is happening, and why, so we can begin to undo the damage.


Too Afraid to be Free.

"Crime Scene, Do Not Cross" Tape At ...

Events are one by one occurring which are destroying the authority of the Constitution and eroding liberty for us all. For those of us who have been paying attention this is no surprise.

We all know of the popular scandals in the media, but possibly the worst is the newest development. The Supreme court has now decided that it is constitutional for the government to collect our DNA and enter it into a database when we are arrested. Not convicted, but merely arrested. Not found guilty of a crime by a jury of our peers, but merely accused of an alleged crime by a government agent. I am led to restate this as an attitude by all levels and branches of government that we are now officially guilty until proven innocent. I also put forth that the government views us as something akin to property, to be treated and disposed of as they see fit. This is the culmination of the rise of the elitists fueled by our blind desire to believe what they tell us and trust them to solve our problems rather than taking personal responsibility for our own problems and their solutions.

As a reminder, the government is Constitutionally authorized to take a census for one reason only, the determining of congressional districts.

A federal database constructed from our DNA is a de facto census, even though it is not all inclusive. It is a census of a group of people who have gained the attention of the government, in this case by being accused of a crime.

Some say this would be acceptable if the DNA collection did not occur until after conviction, but in reality this is yet another form of census, just of a smaller group. Also, are we not supposed to be considered as absolved from our crime after we have paid the appropriate penalty? Should not then we be exempted from being a part of a permanent federal database after our penalty is paid? Or once guilty, or in the case of the above court decision, accused, are we to be treated as such for the remainder of our lives? Think this through and you must agree with me that this is wrong.

How did we get here? Fear. Nothing but fear. We were afraid of being harmed by another so we asked the government to protect us instead of standing ready to protect ourselves. Now we can be convicted of a crime by protecting ourselves instead of hoping the government decides to protect us. That’s correct, it is based on their decision to protect us, they are not required to do so.

Then we went even further, we still felt unsafe when those who did harm us were released from prison, so we asked the government to track them, as if that would really stop them from committing another crime. It would be laughable if not so tragic. How often does a government restraining order, for example, actually stop a determined criminal? Almost never. It does not serve to protect the victim, only increase the penalty after the fact. It also makes people who intend no harm into criminals by the appearance of guilt, rather than the actual intent of guilt.

More examples of unconstitutional lists on which we can find ourselves are seemingly innocuous and we might think they would cause us no harm or inconvenience, but look to recent events and they begin to look less harmless.

The IRS is accused of using lists of political affiliation to determine tax status. The government is seeking to obtain a list of all firearms for the supposed purpose of protecting us. Our driving records are on various databases for . . . our protection. Our medical records are now going to be entered into a database for . . . again . . . our protection.

The end result? We are rapidly losing all semblance of our liberty, and perhaps even our chance to regain it, because we have been too damned scared and lazy to look after ourselves instead of asking our big brother to save us from our self inflicted inadequacies.