As to your post, you’re right about “Clinton or Obama”. I wish you had mentioned Bush and Reagan, too. By no means is the Democratic Party the only one that regularly violates the rule of law. If “Left” means “miserable economy…miserable standard of education, excruciating regulatory burden, and …excessive taxation” (your words), then “Right” must mean: Fourth Amendment violations, global military conquest, governmental protectionism of mega-business, etc.

The fact of the matter is that both “sides” in this stupid left/right game are part of the Hegelian Dialectic that dupes practically EVERY American into believing that some “healthy” state of debate exists in America, when in fact, it’s mostly a dog and pony show for the benefit of those who want to keep believing in Santa Claus.

It is astounding and very troubling to me—-the numbers who believe that if only their party would sweep the Congress and the White House in 2012, everything would be pretty much OK. It is because we believe such things that the dialectic has so much power over us. And it is because we are so terribly dull that we believe such things.

Jack

Most people don’t understand the issues of our day. I literally know a woman who actually said to me once “Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up.”!

I have another friend, a liberal, who refuses to discuss politics. She wants to think everything is roses, rainbows and unicorns without addressing the realities of actual issues. Most liberals TRUST their overlords to make decisions for them, believing politicians have only good at heart!

Thus our miserable economy, our miserable standard of education, our excruciating regulatory burden and our excessive taxation.

It’s the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” mentality. They get the sound-bites from manipulators like Clinton or Obama and don’t think for themselves.

Combine their votes with everyone who has died in the past 70 years and democrats command enough victories to keep them in power.

What we need is Rule of Law.

What we get is politicians voted in by useful idiots.

Sorry you’re going belly up.

They will have to sacrifice their own “identities” and come together for what is truly a COMMON good, surrendering the opportunity for their own marketing traction. To complicate the matter, surely SOME of the many organizations out there are not what they appear to be, but are tools of some “wizard” behind some curtain somewhere. (It was Vladimir Lenin who suggested that the best way to control the opposition is to LEAD it.)

So I’d never expect complete cooperation. But there’s still a great deal that could be done if even HALF the groups out there could get together on some common ground. (This is what I hoped for ROLR—that the generic idea of government following the law could be widely received and supported by people from all parties/organizations…..but I was wrong.)

As Stephen Covey put it in 7 Habits, “first things first”. There are many groups out there tackling various issues that are VERY important. One tackles getting sworn officers not to disobey the Constitution. Another seeks to ensure fair voting and vote counting. Another seeks to greatly increase the number of elected representatives for each state. And on and on it goes. So assuming that we’re all honest, then we should get together and decide what is the ONE foundational block in the whole building. Then we focus on setting that block straight FIRST.

Could we agree?

I’d sure like to think so. For many of us, it may well mean putting our current efforts into mothballs for a time while we pursue whatever is agreed upon as the fundamental issue.

Thoughts on this?

Jack

For most Americans, the question of the hour is something more like: “What corruption?”

Or perhaps: “Sure, there’s some corruption, but is any of it really that bad yet?”

Still others, however, are under the influence of a sentiment that I ONCE found convincing, but now reject outright. This sentiment is perhaps best summed up in the words often (mis)attributed to British Parliamentarian Edmund Burke:

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

After years of ruminating on this question, I now believe that this sentiment represents an impossibility. That is, I do not believe that “good” men CAN “do nothing”. In other words, it is a corruption itself to do nothing about corruption.

Now, having said that, I believe it is foolishness to fight battles one has no chance of winning….or to fight those battles in a way that is certain to fail. But our biggest problem at present is that we have a whole lot of citizens considering themselves “good” and yet doing nothing about the corruption. Nothing.

The next tier of the populace is simply TALKING about it. Mere complaining with no practical effect.

Meanwhile, for all the nothing and complaining being done, the do-nothings and the talkers are still FUNDING the corruption and voting lawless candidates into office. So not only are they not helping, they are actually contribution to the corruption. (They further contribute to various kinds of commercial/political corruption when they purchase certain products/services from some of the companies who own stock in the US Congress and White House.)

So back to your question: “How do we fight against the corruption?”

My initial idea was that ROLR would simply focus on LAW. Not on policy. Therefore, it would not be at issue whether, say, TARP, was a “good idea” or not, but rather, whether it was legal under the current Constitution or not. This approach is patently apolitical. Naively thinking that perhaps we could get something done by a circumpartisan approach, I set out to promote just such a thing. But it simply isn’t working.

Instead, we must admit one very ugly fact: Not one institution in all of America is deliberately producing individuals who are engaging this problem of corruption. Not one church. Not one university. Not one civic organization or club. Not one public school system. Nor any branch or the government, nor any organization thereunder. No institution makes this its business.

One wonders, therefore, what would happen if even ONE institution would change its mission to address this problem. Whether it comes through an institution or not, however, no solution can succeed that does not authentically persuade one individual after another to adopt an anti-corruption paradigm.

Similarly, public education is also crucial. If I could find the funding for it, I would immediately launch a news service that does nothing but reporting on corruption in government, including, but not limited to, violations of the constitutions and charters that founded our governments. Such a tool as I propose could be invaluable in helping individuals to adopt the aforementioned anti-corruption paradigm.

It is both sad and ironic that it takes money to fight the money-driven corruption out there. If the people were of stouter character, it wouldn’t necessarily take MUCH money. Indeed, a worthy anti-corruption message could spread like wildfire from one concerned individual to the next. But when the populace simply doesn’t care…..

If associations are to be made between opinion leaders with a view toward tackling the corruption, I am convinced that it must be a wholly non-partisan affair. As it is, however, one group wants to push its agenda, and another group wants to push its own. This nonsense would have to stop for an HONEST approach to solving this singular and fundamental issue.

I believe that if 10 or 12 honest and mature people could come together on this issue, some great progress could be made. At the end of the day, however, it will come down to finding people who are willing and able to deliberately influence others to adopt the paradigm…even to the point of becoming influencers themselves. (Passive acknowledgment of a paradigm simply does not make for a movement.)

Such a group of influencers, however, would quickly discover that it needs some substantial marketing money if it wants to compete in the abyss of the “market of ideas”.

We need real champions—champions of the cause, that is, and not of themselves or of their organizations.

Jack

I see mothers harassed by school officials for not drugging their kids with ADHD drug, parents being threatened with removal of their children for child abuse/ neglect for not drugging them. People that fight the system get singled out for attack by the state. People are afraid of losing their kids if they stand up.

Clinton admitted the IRS was used on political opponents. When the state seizes your property and freezes your bank account if they think you may have done something? Innocent until proven guilty my a_ _! People are afraid of state robbery.

In Oregon we uncovered massive vote fraud and corruption. The state ignores the laws and when challenged they change the law, retroactively often. We found where the election office ignored the law requiring them to shred all unused ballots on election night, we showed evidence of the state accessing blank ballots and the “secure” ballots before a recount. They just changed the law so they no longer have to destroy the ballots. The judges in CA got charged with accepting bribes. They jailed the lawyer that filed the charges and changed the law retroactively to allow the judges to accept such payments! People feel powerless the state ignores laws at will.

I think far more people care than will stand up. I think many are brainwashed by the media and are believing the lies. I think many see others singled out by the state for persecution for standing up. How do we fight against the corruption?

They have manage to keep us J. O. B, Just Over Broke.

They: RINO and DINO.