Ha, I am trying out a new tactic to get more hits and comments on my blog.  I've been a member here for almost a year I think and of the around twenty (lengthy) posts I've contributed to the cause of revolution.  Regardless of the subject matter (or tags) I have failed to connect with the majority here.  I feel that revolution should only be excerized when there are any number of citizens or states right to use their voice.
I especially feel that it is some sort of responsibility to share these thoughts and topics, for everyone that I shared regards to a growing but preventable doom.  My contribution to those subject matters was common sense, Christianity, and a love for history.
So dam it, I think I ought to be heard!  If having a misleading subject line will bring you to my blogs I wrote for you, then why not.  In fact, aren't your heroes, whether be Obama or McCain, always reflecting those tactics?  At least I give the people a chance to slay me for my mistakes and errors in these posts.

I can't believe how disappointed I was with the American people today.  For the first time in my life I felt more love for Congress than I did for their voters.  I wish the reason why was more obvious than just a few.
Before the House voted against the 700 billion dollar, socialist, special rights for a few citizens or institutions, anti-accountable, little band aid bill, the American people were screaming fire and brimstone for their lawmakers to say nay.
The following is a note that I wrote to Bill O Reily (the GOPs spokesman in the media):

I should have felt an unchecked relief yesterday that for once the great majority of congress did not turn their back on the American people for partisan or party interests and deals.  Rather, our congress on both sides of the isles sided with the opinion of the people.  Neither party can be blamed for the bill's destruction.  Rather I think, even in spite of the total turn around of opinion, that the people truly stepped up and caused their voice to manipulate congress.  We all seem to have a very short memory considering the people decided to approve after it failed to their will. It is hard to imagine that just two days ago we demanded congress vote against it.
The second I heard the results of the congressional vote yet before the first interviews I felt a great spell of hope for our country.  I was feeling hope that had been mostly gone since Ron Paul ducked out of the race.

Congress not only moved with the will of the people, despite the turn around but it did also side with the rights of the people and their states.  Did they recognize that such a bill was unconstitutional for very important reasons?  Instead of passing another sort of legislation that would challenge our rights and our laws, congress did the responsible thing by not trading liberty for a little temporary (financial) security.
Yet, yesterday was mixed with despair over the sanity of the people.  It was announced the bill that the people had been firmly against had just been firmly defeated.  Yet, suddenly the media, Wall Street, and the people had a complete change of heart.
Before yesterday citizens wrote countless blogs, letters to the editors, congressmen, and appeared on talk and radio shoes to express their rage against a "government bail out."  Everyone felt that it was a sell out of our trust to protect financial giants with no accountability and that the banks should find a more responsible solution, just like the rest of us.
One person called it a "golden parachute."
If I am not the most confused person on earth, one day after, I am positive President Bush is the most likely other.  On one hand congress and the people's initial opinion once again shared a mutual distrust towards the president's solutions aka problems.  And that was never more obvious in the past than it was yesterday when in the midst of a financial crises and a administration in panic mode, Congress equally on both sides of the isle, shouted nay in his face.
Yet, on that same day the Dow Jones mysteriously dropped more than 700 points and the voice of the country quickly forgot its previous day's principals.  Suddenly the president that has caused so much economic punishment and casualties in two separate wars these past eight years, might have been right after all.  (We were wrong?) Suddenly a temporary security by giving big banks Federal (our) hundreds of billions of dollars, might of been pretty cool.
It was only right that you had Senator Kerry be a guest on your program last night.  Yesterday truly was a "Was against it before I was for it," moment in our history.
I give my thanks to Congress tonight.  Will they take this as a "can't please our voters no matter what," and become more reckless then in the past?  Shall they remember that despite what the public is saying now, they did exactly what it demanded before hand?  I hope at least, they are convinced they did the right thing.
They did.

Because I am neither Obama or McCain I have decided not to allow my subject line to be misleading after all.

The top five reasons to love Sarah Palin

1.) She would be the most ardent and passionate pro-lifer in an aministration since the Rogue vs. Wade verdict.  Though she is against the death of unborn babies, she is still more hypocrite than Christian.  She supports the death penalty and she supports war which usual involves wide scale death.  Anybody in the world can claim to be a Christian yet until that person attempts to follow the commandments and opposes any violations of it regardless of his causes, that person is not a Christian.  For example, The Bible says THOU SHALT NOT KILL.  There are no foote notes to that included.  You either obey the whole thing or you don't.
But I am not going to vote for Obama.  Because though he does not support causes that cause soldiers to get killed in Iraq he nevertheless favors abortion.
Because both candidates support causes that clash with multiple of my most strongest Christian beliefs, I will vote for neither.

2.) She once discussed Alaskan secession.  Many on the Donkey side of the isle will scream that she is a radical secessionist wac job while the Elephants will try to dismiss or ignore it. I mean, after all, didn't Lincoln having the reigns of the Republican party raise several armies of Northern troops to invade and destroy the South for attempting secession?
Regardless of either parties' views towards the constitutional right of secession, the right still very much exists.  First of all did the states not join the Union with as much freedom to withdraw from it?  Did any of the states or their represintives sign any oaths or contracts that forbade their will to any ends?  And most obviously, does not the X amendment read clearly that the supreme rights be reserved to the people of the states?
So constitutionally and in respect to freedom of the people, what part of Pailin's secession discussions was wrong?  Maybe it is time that we start addressing and demanding certain promised and recorded rights that have long been oppressed.
Civil War hero Admiral Raphael Semmes wrote that the revolution, though illegal under British law was a right reserved to the slaved or oppressed by God.  Yet, secession, though our government all but forbids it, is a right reserved to the people and states of the United States by the Constitution.

3. She supported the "Bridge to Nowhere."  I'm with you Sarah! Bridge to Nowhere my butt.  It would be a bride to Paris, London, or Rome.  True there are many challenges we would face the building project considering it would be thirty miles longer than the longest bridge at the present, it would go across the Baron Strait, and that more than a thousand miles of tundra wasteland exists during the first part of the vacation.
Yet, are we not Americans?  How many times have we scorned at the odds with the Washington Monument, the San Jacinto Monument, or the Golden Arch?  What about the Lake Charles Bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge, or the Golden Gate bridge?
Even though I have never been to college in my brain's mind I can envision perfectly the Bridge.  To protect the trains and other vehicles from some of the most cold and violent weather on earth, the whole expanse of the bridge would be in a tunnel like tube.  Vehicles and trains would pass through it like electricity in a wire.  It could be made large and strong enough to protect passengers from the elements and high enough off the water to protect shipping.  Such feats have been proven before.  Certainly the above ground tunnel idea has worked.  As far as the population problem, temporary stores and gas stations could be erected along the way.  Such ideas had been practiced during the gold rush to California.  The route out west was dotted by small camp towns and trading posts.  The same idea is being used along the ice roads of the north that end up at giant mines.  Rough out posts and fill up stations dot that landscape.
The need for those structures would not last forever, for I am confident this largest example a means to trade and ship overland would produce dozens of towns along the way.  And then to address the costs.  Considering that our country was prepared to spend 700 billion to help ignorant banks and trillions on depths that had aided the actual people very little, I am confident the budget could be there.  In fact, along, over, or under, the above ground bridge tunnel there could be a large or a couple large oil pipelines connecting oil rich northern Russia to the US.
As a traveler I would love to someday drive to Paris. I hate airplanes.  Yet, most importantly, our country used to build and create some pretty amazing things.  As far as those that imagine that the Freedom Tower may at least be an example of that, I don't find anything amazing about building a VIP office building upon a graveyard of pulverized terrorist victims.
Even though that very specific plot of land seems ot be a common target for terrorist attacks, wouldn't it finally be wise to leave that peace of earth alone?  It really doesn't make any more sense than if the US navy put their ships back in packed formations even in spite of the lessons of Peal Harbor attack.  Building an even taller world trade center upon the same site that terrorists on 9/11 used the height of the former Trade Center to deadly effect is as nonsense not to mention very disrespectful towards the victims.  There should be a monument (s) there, the biggest the world has ever seen, yet not stuffed with people.

Sorry for getting off topic.  I do like Sarah Pailin on some issues.  I even think she is pretty foxy!  Yet, this shouldn't be the best there is.  It is sad that since Ron Paul left the race, the only grain of light I see is that I agree with some of the issues of a VP nominee.

In the worlds of poor Charlie Brown, Oh Brother!

I first started blogging here about a year ago after seeing the wonderful editor of this site appear on a Fox News program.  Blogging was a very new thing to me so I wanted to go with the biggest and best.  I loved the concept of blogging.  For the first time since Manifest Destiny's bloody assault upon the west, Americans, regardless of their location can from their PC or black berry or even phone (wow) communicate their thoughts, grievances, beliefs, ideas, hopes, dreams, fears, achievements, questions, and public and political information to masses of people.  I have no doubt the blogging age had a serious influence upon politics and the election.
"I have a voice and I have a lot to say."-MxPx.

My personal visions, feelings, principals, ideas, hopes, dreams, fears, and values are all over the place.  I am smart and I know history, geography, and a lot of other stuff.  But it would be useless for me to blog about math.
About politics,different issues, or candidates, NOTHING nor party is an influence.  The constitution and our rights are the side you'll see me by.  Our country faces countless of issues because we do not trust our own constitution to decide them. Aside from my Ron Paul and Thomas Jefferson and Jefferson Davis principals, I am pro-ALL life (anti-abortion, anti-war, anti-capital punishment).  In other words, I feel that whoever approves of any form of knowingly killing another human, including the unborn, is a hypocrite if he or she is either against other forms or happens to be a Christian (who's Bible is blunt THOU SHALT NOT KILL   p-e-r-i-o-d).
I believe that healthcare should be a right and that we already get taxed enough to budget this (as soon as we challenge the government's spending habits). I believe that Creatism is logical and more scientifically true than evolutionism.  I that Jesus created the only road map to peace.  I believe that most Christian churches are misleading in that very few actually deeply consider or attempt to follow His commands.  I always thought it was weird that for a group of people that appears to love Jesus so much and dance the aisles because of His death and resurrection, those people usually have no clue about half of what Jesus commanded.  Nor do many of them ever attempt to practice those commands at least as much as they seem to pervert it!

Yes, I have a lot to say and that's why I am blogging.  It is not only for my own satisfactory but I also think that some of these thoughts, values, and principals may help others.  Most of these feelings, views, ideas, and lessons have been gathered up by a very unique and special life and I believe they are all a part of the same gift of life.  I will attempt to share all I can.

Today I would like to share my understanding and thoughts on the Constitution's and our responsibilities in  maintaining personal and states' rights.
Both the historical references and references of our rights, the states, and the constitution can all be sourced and authenticated as fact.  Every view is related to these facts.

Did not the states create the constitution?  Did they not freely activate it for the purpose of preserving the rights of all the people and states in the Union?  Should the volunteer of its own club not also have the right to leave?
Families work as long as their is peace, understanding, love, faith, and respect are their values.  But still, sometimes a family member can be abusive and evil and corruptive towards another, usually younger, member of the family.  Is it not the responsibility of the community and the people to either intervene and hold the abuser accountable or is the worse case scenario, remove the victim (secede the victim from the family, union until either the home is proved to be beyond a reasonable doubt, respectful of the rights and safety of the victim, or in most cases, never.
The states should have this same right.  The states joined the constitution knowing on one hand that being in a union was better than being on your own, yet on the other, trusting future generations to do what was necessary if ever, the Union "was no longer a safeguard and protection, but a menace to their rights..." (Jefferson Davis)
Republicans like to boast about being the 'accountability' party.  Yet, today's politics and system are so completely opposite of anything resembling accountability.  The fact that our states and the people will not only allow all repeating humiliation and tyranny from the government but we also let it, and its parties, and its lies influence our principals.  That is total submission and pathetic. 
Am I anti-government?  Am I a fanatic? Am I right wing or left wing or conservative or liberal?  Am I a secessionist or a terrorist? (The foundation of the origin and vision of the founders was that no two words were more different from each other than secessionist and terrorist). 
I am not any of those things yet I have a little bit of each inside me (with the exception of terrorism).  However, the most authentic and accurate description of my party and political principals is: FREEDOM. 
Freedom was an American thing.  Somehow, until 1776, no civilization in history had ever experienced quite the same success or magnitude of freedom in the new world.  It was the most perfect marriage of freedom and law that ever existed!  Many of us now either ponder, was our forefather's creation in the latter part of the 1700s perfect enough to provide every solution to every issue including the civil war to today?  Yet, the fact is, the form of government they created was perfect for whatever future generations faced.  The problem is that we are not honoring certain parts of it.  How can a solution work if it is not worked?  Again, the solutions to all our country's issues can be discovered in the same constitution all the veterans of our military and our elected officials swear to uphold! LETS UPHOLD IT!
The other obvious (to me) reason to me that national issues regarding the economy, national security, and personal rights, to name a few of all of them, are always present regardless of what administration is in office is because we ignore and do not consider our national motto, something as truly as important as the constitution.  It reads: IN GOD WE TRUST. 
How fewer problems and crises and issues would we be facing today if the constitution was upheld not only by all the men and women that swore to, but by all the citizens that owe it to their children and ancestors to respect it likewise?  How fewer crises and crimes would happen if even half our citizens honored the sacred motto of a country who's dignity and success rely souly on them?
It is not impossible.

The answers and the messages within our founder's motto and instructions are pretty dang obvious.  They were written for a people to not only understand but also approve.  In 1784, when the average citizen lacked any reading skills because the average village lacked a school, the forefathers had to draft the good news in a language simple enough for the simple man.  If it had been too complicated or vague, the weary and distrustful people would have re-declared their independence, this time from yankee doodle.

In light of this, I can not understand how any of us are having debates about any of the issues when the constitution has the authority to decide it.  The problem is that, for the politicians and law makers, the solutions within the constitution are not the kind of solutions they are looking for (How can I get reelected? How can I get away with this or that?  How can I deceive the public of the real me?  How can I get the most money to get to me?  What's in it for me)?
For the average or unaverage citizen, there are many reasons why the constitution is a forgotten tool box in the shed.  And none of these reasons are beyond our control. (It is too much work, nobody else cares, going against giants, fear, manipulated by the media and government that solutions and hope lay with your vote rather than you. What's in it for me)?  And even though the constitution was created with sensitivity towards a simple nation, most of us can only recite one line from it!  The responsibility of you or your kids becoming educated on the constitution and the responsibility of maintaining it is NOT our schools, NOT our military, NOT our government, and NOT the media.  IT IS OURS.  If we do not gather around our responsibilities, the crap that is building all over, is ours alone.

Granted, sometimes our responsibility and commitment to our flag and our country may not be simple.  It may not seem right at the time and may even create a few challenges.  One example was the Civil War.  This was the first and perhaps the greatest example in our history where not only did the government crush the constitutional rights of millions of people but a majority of them allowed it.  The Southern states had practiced their constitution rights.  The folks in those states remembered their ancestors' promise.  God had given the colonists the right of revolution for certain rights.  The constitution and the authority of the sovereign states hemselves gave the Southerns the right of secession for any cause. 
However, Lincoln and his administration gave birth to more recent tactics more powerful than honor and responsibility, it seems. Fear.  He ruled much of the north in  by martial law.  In dozens of his speeches, including the Gettysburg Speech, Lincoln constantly hinted that the fate of the nation was being decided when in fact, Southern secession would of had no effect on the exisiting Federal government, its constitution, or remaining states.  He championed the cause of slavery even though he personally wrote racist accounts in letters.  Even though the same cause did not exist one way or another on the other side. 

"The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states."-Charles Dickens, 1862

"We were not rebels; we did not fight to perpetuate human slavery, but for our rights and privileges under a government established over us by our fathers and in defense of our homes." -Richard Henry Lee, Confederate Colonel

Though it was the people of the North's duty to allow the secession of the Southern states just as it had been the duty of those states to secede and make an accountable decision regarding their future.
We will never know what kind of history would have followed if the Northern states had respected the equal rights of their Southern neighbors and allowed them to form a country of their own.  It would not have been the first time a nation was born from secession.  Colonies from England, Mexico and Cuba from Spain, Texas from Mexico.

I pray that someday we will give the states, states of we the people, back the throrn ofthrone that birthed this awesome freedom.

"If the doctrine that secession is treason be true, it matters not how grievously a State might be oppressed, by the Federal Government; she has been deprived of the power of lawful resistance, and must regain her liberty, if at all...........

Was this the sort of experiment in government, that our forefathers supposed they were making?"
-Admiral Raphael Semmes

There is a a giant line called common sense and responsibility that separates:
A. Attacking another country; invading its soil; overthrowing its president & system of government based on NO evidence that the country was any kind of threat to either us or our alleys.
B. Defending your home; your government; your family from an immediate threat from an invading and hostile country.

The true conservative is NOT an imperialist. Perhaps you have not studied the writings and platforms of conservatives throughout our history including those by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Thomas Pane, John C. Calhoun, John Tyler, Jefferson Davis or even those from more recent times, Ronald Reagan, Jessie Ventura, or Ron Paul.

While none of these conservatives would have invaded and overthrown another country based upon false evidence of terrorism, many of them were involved in wars and conflicts that had been unavoidable and for the safety of the safety of their countrymen.  
A few examples include:
The war of 1812. England invaded US soil.
The Mexican American War. Mexican troops crossed the US border along the Rio Grande under the authority of their government.
The War Between the States. United States troops refused to vacate a garrison which was within the territorial waters of the Confederate States of America.
The same month Lincoln issued a call to arms for 75,000 volunteers to cause an armed invasion of the Confederacy, and invasion not unlike the English invasion of the newly independent colonies in 1776.

The true conservative is not against war for the purpose of defense and one executed through the will and approval of the people. Yet, only a liberal (like LBJ) would nod to a war that brings nothing but misery to the US and death to Iraq and continues even without the consent of the American public.

Lincoln did start the Civil War without the consent of the people. In fact, during his administration more than 7,000 thousand citizens including agents of the press were arrested and jailed without trial simply for opposing his invasion of the Southern States.  One of these men was none other than the grandson of Francis Scott Key.
Though it is so that the majority of the Northern States did favor causing bloodshed against their Southern neighbors, I believe that it was because they were more interested in putting their industrial and war profiting interests before admitting the South's legal right to be free.

One thing that I have never been able to understand was how modern day Republicans seem to brag at being the party started by Lincoln even though that party held a far different platform than today's.  While the modern day Republican platform stands for lesser government and less taxes and more faith based community awareness, Lincoln went to war to uphold that central government had absolute authority over the states and the people. Lincoln going further beyond the bounds of the constitution created more sperate forms of taxation during four years than during any other point in history including World War II.  As goes faith, Lincoln was the only American president to of included doubts towards Christianity in his writings.

The South did not break the law of the land but had upheld it. Secession was included into the United States Constitution for two very important reasons. The right of secession was included so that it would be clear to future generations that the states owned the final say and authority over their destiny-that the states and their people could never be harmed by the Federal Government as long as they had a way out if need be. The second reason that the right of secession was included (ironically) was that in the event of a state or states separation, a civil war or revolution would be avoided. For in 1776 the colonies had no legal right to leave England and that was what justified England's decision to fight. By making secession a legal practice within the constitution, separation would be a protected form of action.  
It was the North under Lincoln who did not abide the law of the land. Lincoln and the North took the rights of decision, free will, and self government from not only the states and the people then but the future generations of all Americans.  

Secession was included into our constitution because our forefathers knew that no matter how perfect the government they formed was, it was no guarantee that it would always be as it should. They knew that they had no control over how future generations may lead the government.  They had no certainty that the government would always follow the constitution.

When the Southern states agreed that their role in the government was second class and inferior to that of the North, made more obvious by Lincoln's election, they saw no alternative to submission except secession.  
Yet, despite the constitution, Lincoln and his administration led an armed invasion of over one million volunteers to occupy the Southern states...Atlanta, Charleston, Columbia, Richmond, Jackson all burned and destroyed by men from Illinois, Maine, and Minnesota. Men from Mississippi, Texas, and Alabama died by the thousands in POW camps in Chicago, Elmira, and Boston.

The history that has been rewritten was the history of the United States War against the Confederate States.

The true conservative (to the earlier point) is not a party man.  He is one who pledges allegiance not to a king, queen, president, or flag, but to his rights.  Rights not given to him by a government, legislator, or country but by the people.  If Republicans or any other party does not uphold these old (aka conservative) ideas then he is not a conservative.  

Of course there are many other ideas and principals that a conservative considers but these I included are what define him most.  At the time, Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin were liberals.  Yet, their ideas gave birth to today's conservative.

Other than the strange hand in hand time-line of Reality TV's popularity and the loosining of our control and care of our own government is our growing addition to phyc meds and pain killers.  Here in my own city two new pharmacies have been constructed recently, both within one mile of each other. 

Not only are the majority of adults on these medications but they are being handed out just as much to our kids.  Kids today are no more crazy or insane than they have been for thousands of years.  Yet, parents are now treating many of the common and normal characterstics of childhood like diseases of the minds. 
In truth, the parents, just trying to enjoy their own high and dope tranquility, are becoming less patient and accepting of the levels of energy that normal children are supposed to have.  They are becoming as determined to quite their children's existence with perscription drugs as they attempt to achieve the same for themselves.  It makes sense to them that their children should become more quite and dumb.  Cause all these users want now is peace.  Where madness, energy, dancing, and skipping used to represent a healthy and creative child, it is now treated like an exhausting load to deal with.

Within these past nine years I have noticed more and more of my friends and family becoming addicted and dependent upon prescription drugs and in this same time frame, also the time frame of reality tv, mind you, I have noticed the sad, tired, and careless decline in our society and culture.  These and other things, I am confident, are sapping the soul, the energy, the passion, and the life out of a society of a free people.  The reality of our society is becoming as much a farce as Reality TV.
Sorry Brooke, but you and your new room mate are screwing with are a part of a cancer being digested by our country's soul.  Forget American Idol. Lest we loose the American Dream est. 1776.  
How much life, liberty, and pursuits be sacrificed due to our country's dependence on the illusions of television or the foggy realms of prescribed "pain" (passion) killers and "antideppresants" (anti-actions). .

I often complain of the different issues that produce American idiots or cause my countrymen to allow the abuse and injury of their rights.  Many times I wince at our country's almost united stupidity towards its own history or failing to responsibility maintain the rights and traditions needed to guarantee liberty, independence, and security.

This rant is towards America's strange and misguided love affair and understanding of 'reality TV.'  I can't believe that millions of Americans still honestly believe that their votes count on American Idol.  I can't believe that most Americans don't argue on behalf of the likelihood that not only are all the contestants of the talent show pre-chosen based on their characters and their ratings level but that the winners and losers and how they will win and loose are pre-decided by the show's producers.  This truth first came to me when the She bang she bang Chinaman appeared on an aired audition a few years ago.  It seemed hardly conceivable that of the many thousands of Americans who do have a talent for singing, that a guy with so little talent should so happen to appear in front of the three main judges (each judge worth double-digit millions).  His appearance was a curve ball, a ratings work of genius.  Never mind the fact that many of the arguments between the judges appear scripted.

Why would American Idol script these auditions and performances and results so painfully?  It is because the network and the producers have so many millions of dollars invested in it.  How much money it will earn or how popular the show will continue to be hinges completely on the auditions, performances, victories, and defeats featured at the center of the show's theme.  If the public did have as much say in the show's outcome as we are made to believe, then the producers would have no way of providing the best season possible.  The producers, in their pre-decisions know already which contestants would draw the most viewers and which victories or defeats would cause the most drama.  Reserving the season's structure to public votes would cause chances that those who profit the most would rather avoid.

I think that the reason Americans are not raising their eye brows towards these obvious contradictions of what reality TV is simply because...they do not care.  Whether rigged and scripted or not, America still gets its show.  This would explain why wrestling, as obviously fake as it is, continues to grow in popularity.  Watching some wrestling the other day I could not believe in how outrageous it has become while involving detailed quarles between wrestlers and WWE managers, personality feuds and challenges between wrestlers.  Drama, real or not, is awesome.

The other day, I also watched an episode of Brooke Knows Best.  It is one of many "off shoot" reality shows appearing these days.  (Reality series stemming from a previous one like for example I love NY from Flava of Love).  Just as with countless other reality series, Brooke Knows Best (an offshoot of Hogan Knows Best) is presented as a pure and honest day by day life of Brooke Hogan living in Miami.  Yet, it only took a few minutes for me to realize just how scripted her series is.  The first clue is the one that seems to deface every other reality show.  The characters and even the extras constantly go about as if there are no group of producers or cameras present.  I've seen an actual set of a reality show before and there are many shades of lights, sizes of cameras, and types of people with clip boards and mics.  Have you ever wondered just how these characters seem to wake up in the morning with fabulous hair and soft makeup?
If it were a true reality show, the people along the street or at the beach would gawk or wave to the camera.  It is what people do.  People don't just see a scene of Brooke Knows Best or The Osbornes go by them without doing a double take!

The second and just as obvious clue is how every little situation, argument, or problem seems to happen and work out as if it were...scripted.  Honestly, peoples' lives, even celebrity's lives are not that interesting day to day.  A true reality show would be boring for the most part.

In this episode of Brooke Knows Best she and her female roommate were having issues with their newest roommate.  This guy was such a slob and he looked the part.  He slept nude in the living room and he woke Brooke up in the middle of the night to ask how to turn on the hot tub for him and his date.  Can you imagine that ANYBODY would sleep nude in Brooke's living room with the knowledge that a reality show was being filmed there?  Even if it was a self-promoting stunt on his part, it was not natural, and he was not as clueless as the scene made appear. Alsot, would somebody as famous as Brooke accept a room mate like this or at least kick him out after the first of these signs?  Can you imagine anybody waking up Brooke Hogan in the middle of the night to figure out how to turn on a hot tub, especially while being filmed?  It was clear that this guy was not only paid but also asked for these performances.  The show demanded his role.

I do not lay awake bothered by the fact that America buys into the phony production of reality tv nor do I suffer more than a little that our whole culture is being turned on by a strange version of the blood sports of Roman times when battles and scenes were staged to look real for the public's entertainment.  Instead of blood, these modern-day Roman entertainment thrives off drama, backstabbing, drug and relationship issues, and other forms of the human illness.

Yet, sometimes I am concerned that all this reality entertainment is having more of a bad influence on America other than just a distortion of reality and sliming of values and dignity.  Since reality TV really started becoming popular with Survivor, Americans have become more seduced, entranced, and obsessed with television than ever.  The evidence is clear in the number of camera flashes that surround Paris Hilton or Linzy Lohan.  (Following the dysfunctional lives of celebrities is becoming a reality TV clique in its own right becoming more and more popular).

Is this recent fetish of reality tv culture damaging?  Can it be one of the causes why we the people have allowed so many of our rights to be axed and have allowed so many of our public leaders to continue to be corrupt, abuse their powers, and tax and spent beyond our consent?  I ask this because I have heard more than a few novel Americans chime that our country does not care what state it is in as long as American Idol is still scheduled.  It also seems that before reality television became the phenomenon that it is now, Americans were much more aggressive with making our leaders accountable for corruption or lies.  Before the age of reality TV we forced the resignation of Nixon because of crimes his staff committed.  Before this time we impeached President Clinton for lying about a sexual experience outside his marriage.
Yet, since this reality tv dynasty began, we have allowed our current president to invade Iraq without congressional support or declaration.  We've not impeached him for using false information to invade and conquer a whole other country that caused thousands of deaths of our troops and hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians.  We've not held Bush accountable for carrying on a war beyond the goal he set of capturing Sadam Hussein.  We've stood by while he continued the war years beyond his public declaration that the mission had already been accomplished.  We've not only allowed but we re-elected him.  And now Americans have ushered two men, McCain and Obama onto our ballot, who show virtually no promise of being the people's representative or becoming an ardent defender of the people and the constitution.  And we did not protest enough against the media when it made its own conscience decision to censure and silence a candidate who had the qualities of liberty and justice in his heart, Ron Paul.
Was revolution, revolt, riots, or tea parties sacrificed by the seduction of Reality TV culture?  The timing of it along with the timing that so much started going to hellsbells seems more than a coincidence.

Nay, it is true that this isn't the first period in our history that we have allowed bad things to happen.  Did American citizens not also allow the Lincoln Adminstration's armed invasion of the Southern states for executing their right of secession?  Did we not also allow our government to conduct an armed take over of every native settlement out west?  The thing is, the only reasons why those things happened was because the citizens just wern't succesfull in preventing it.  The difference between now and then was that then, there were plenty of Americans who aggressivly stood by their principals especially when their government contradicted them.  Defeat was not dishonor, for again, Americans always try.  In one example where many Americans campaigned on behalf of their rights and values was the late 60s, the protests against the War in Vietnam.  Sometimes the people was succesful and sometimes not. 
These days even the public protests have lost their bite.

Another fact that causes me to wonder about Reality TV's role in the direction of our country was in an earlier part of this discussion.  For hundreds of years, Rome was a republic and its course was decided by its tradition of democracy and elections.  However, about the same time that the Roman empire's territory was at its greatest expanse, during the period when Rome was the greatest world power, just as America is today, it also started to decline.  Now the arrogance of being so powerful and victorious played only a part of its demise.  What really vaporized the empire from the earth forever was when its citizens forfeited their responsibilities and power to a few just as we have forfeited many of our rights and responsibilities to our government.  Those few that included Nero and other corrupt and faulty emperors could not help but allow the empire to fail.  That is what happens when something is trusted to such incompetence.  Why did the Roman citizens allow all their rights to bleed away and for the security and future of their empire to be given to so few, so unqualified?  Around the same period when Rome changed from a republic to an empire and then to nothing, Roman citizens were engrossed and blinded by gratifications and excess.  The most notorious of these distractions were the public and private orgies and the great gladiator shows performed for VIPs and the simple people alike.  The people became so involved in their own self interests and what made them feel good that they lost all control over their empire.  This may have been the plan all along for those then who sought such power.
I wonder today, if the same isn't happening in our society.  The average American appears to care more about the next episode of John and Kate plus Eight than they do about the disturbing direction our country is going in at the hands of incompetent leaders.  In fact not even global warming is taken as seriously as the most high and mighty liberals think it should.  All in all, most Americans do not go any further than blogging about an issue rather than working to fix it.  I stand accused.

Several weeks ago I watched an episode of the TV series, Thirty Days.  I am not sure what network it was on but it really doesn't matter.  I wanted to make some comments on it then but had long since been busy with other things.  But I never forgot.
This particular episode included an anti-gun advocate that was invited to spend thirty days with meat and potatoes gun-loving Americans.  The young woman reportedly knew some victims of violence.

One of the first things I noticed was when she rebuked a family's desire to defend themselves with guns by saying that the family was too paranoid.  Yet, throughout the first part of the show, the young woman appeared very fearful and expressed anxiety (and paranoia) about being under a roof with gun owners.  It is a very wry double standard when you start think about it. 
Why couldn't this young woman see that maybe the family experienced a similar paranoia as her that was caused by living in a world where criminals own guns regardless of the laws?  Maybe that is why this family chose to get guns? 
The young woman was paranoid about being in a house with guns.  Maybe this family was paranoid about being in a world with guns.  Why couldn't the young woman not understand why this family chose to address this fear by owning guns instead of trusting unarmed school staffs, workplaces, and other unarmed places in public to protect them?  Why would it be so hard to understand why it seems more logical to trust guns in your own home to protect you rather than emergency systems that may or may not arrive on time?
In a world where the fear of violence is real, the family featured in this show addressed that fear using their brains.  For there is no better way to address the fear of becoming a victim than by gaining the most logical means to protect yourself from becoming one.

I just can't believe that young woman or any other person in this country can actually believe anti-gun laws in this country actually protect anybody.  The fact is criminals will have guns always.  Gun laws would only limit the number of law abiding gun owners.  Was making street drugs and prostitution or domestic violence illegal as successful as we would like? No!  Making things unlawful has never completely curved the actions of a society.  Yet, unlike many things that are now illegal, the right to bear arms is not only the best and most logical means of protecting ones self and family but it is also one of the most specific rights guaranteed by the constitution.  By limiting our right to bear arms, our government is not only decreasing our chances to live through an act of violence but it is also stripping us of one of our country's proudest virtues and sacred of rights!

Near the end of the episode, the young woman took the family's son, Zack on a field trip to visit a major college nearby.  Her goal was to attempt to alter his affection towards guns and gear him toward more acceptable interests.  If I was Zack or his family, I would have personally been offended at her disrespect towards Zac's choice to honor a sacred family tradition and right as a citizen.  By attempting to distract Zack's love for rifles and taking him to view a college, the young woman was basically urging him to become interesting in something else.  She was attempting to distract him from an interest that made him safe and close to his family as if that interest were towards drugs or porn. 
Lastly, when the two were visiting the college campus I couldn't help but thinking of Virginia Tech.  How many dozens of lives could have been saved if any of the students or professors caught in the cross fire of that terrible tragedy actually had guns on their person?  That the young woman visiting this college campus looked so safe and comfortable spoke legions of her ignorance.  It was evident during those scenes that she had no clue just how vulnerable and unprotected she and Zack were visiting that campus where no armed good guys were around.  While visiting that college, how could she be so confident and sure that they would not witness random acts of violence that are becoming more common at universities today?

Because we can not ban every single bad guy and loose screw from owning a fire arm and because we cannot have a portable policeman living with every person 24/7, Americans need to take the safety of themselves and their families more seriously. Everyone needs to reconsider the gross irresponsibility towards our safety we are allowing when anti-gun laws are passed. 

Until every American appeals and demands its full and unrestricted rights to own firearms, I do not see us taking the safety of our families that seriously.
What a sick distortion; since 9/11 we have allowed our government to snap due process for arrests and charges in two, dismantle our privacies, and bury our freedoms in the name of the Patriot Act, Shock and Awe, and Operation Iraqi Freedom to name a few from a few dozen.  That any of these measures have made us any safer or have produced anything other than attacks upon on our rights is a farce to the honest person. 
And now, as our government produces more anti-gun laws, we are becoming much less safe and secure from an enemy much more common than terrorism, domestic violence, school shootings, kidnappings, and home invasions. And again, as with post 9/11 national security measures, anti-gun laws are further breaking new world liberty to pieces.

Our liberties and rights protected by the law are being killed.  And why not?  We the people and our states were charged with the responsibility of protecting the laws that protect our rights.  For several decades, average Americans have avoided the responsibility of maintaining our rights and protecting them from injury by anyone including the government.  The problem is not about what is happening but about what we are letting happen.

Before I come upon the point I originally logged on to share, I would first like to share my thoughts regarding the pro-McCain and anti-Obama propaganda being advertised here.  If Townhall is attempting to produce a conservative vibe here by showing this support for McCain and opposition towards Obama, I must say that you've lost me terribly.
The conservative message, as I understand it is a principal dictated by old values that not only made our country a success story once upon a time but was also the same spirit that helped found this nation of sovereign states.  The true conservative's role is to not become blindly loyal to a man just because he belongs to a certain party.  Rather the conservative role is to preserve the most precious and endangered right that the Federal government should have no control or influence over the sovereignty of the states and the people of those states.
Being a conservative is about not stumping or standing for rights protected by the constitution such as the right to bear arms, privacy, and countless other freedoms but actually living them.
Enough of McCain's history in the senate and plans if elected to the white house stray as far from conservative roots as Obama!  In fact, picking a woman for his choice of VP says clear enough that he is attempting to rally Hillary's camp to his side.  A conservative candidate should be concentrated on rallying conservatives to his side by declaring conservative ideas.  Again, instead, he is more concerned with attracting Hillary's liberal numbers only because they are large numbers.  He is more concerned about gaining the coolest job in the world than performing the responsibilities of a Republican platform.  His decision to prolong the Iraq war for another hundred years if need be is so distant from the values of conservatives.  True conservatives believe that the true wars are being waged at home and that the money they are being taxed by the billions should be spent for the home of the taxed rather than overseas.  The true conservative's values and ideas are dictated by those that developed our country from the secession from England.
A. Lincoln was the first Republican president.  During that period in history, the Republican party stood for big government, central powers, high tariffs, and limited rights.  It does seem that the party is coming that way again or at least merging with the Democrats.  Lincoln insisted a war upon the Southern Confederacy without the consent or approval of the states in the Union that did not secede.  When even the first draft in history, the first income tax, sales tax, and property tax failed to produce for Lincoln the necessary number of combat soldiers and materials, his government then started recruiting Irish and German immigrants by the hundreds of thousands to fight for the South.
Lincoln motivated thousands of new immigrants to our country to use them towards his goal of empire and to conquer the Southern States.
McCain in turn wanted to offer amnesty and other pro-illegal immigration laws for immigrants from Mexico so that big business he is invested in would be able to have local, unregulated, and cheap labor and manufactures.
The spirit of true conservatives today, war should not be declared without the consent of the people and their congress or the consent of the states.  Our country should not be involved in oversees affairs no matter what the reasons.  Lastly, all taxing and spending including that for national defense should be limited to the consent and governing of those who are taxed.
A conservative does not want a president who wants to continue a war without the approval or consent of the people.

Ron Paul was a true conservative candidate.  Yet because most Republicans as well as Democrats choose to protect private and personal interests rather than principals, McCain is the safest choice.  The conservative American who shows the heart of 1776 America, 1836 Texas and 1861 Dixie, the conservative American that sees no hope in a presidential candidate but rather the people and their constitution is perhaps the most surprised minority in our country.  His message and his ideas are censured from all parts of our great society.  For if the voice of the conservative was declared loud enough and brought into being, politicians would be held accountable for acting beyond the authority of the people and constitution, corrupt ties between Washington and international business would be exposed and demolished, and the media and government giants of our country would have less power and force than the people.
In short, anyone that profits from the demolition of our rights does surely shiver when in the presence of an American Conservative.

Townhall, are you Republican or are you a Conservative?  Are you for war or are you for the people's fight?
Lastly, how can you knock the Democrats for their pro abortion stands when the deaths of hundreds of thousands of middle east citizens and American soldiers is heroic?