THE TEA PARTY "REVOLT" AND WHY (TORBENSON) DON'T GET IT

My answer to:

[The Tea Party “revolt” and why I don’t get it,” article by Eric Torbenson (APR 13,2009) at dallasnews.com] ::

This is it- the ultimate example of (from their standpoint) unbiased(?) reporting. IN MY OPINION, A COMPLETELY UNNEWSWORTHY article, empty - shallow – void of any depth or desire of writer to understand. Torbenson seems to have been in a first-stage thinking process when he decided to bang out some sort of attempt to meet his article quota. He claims to be neutral. HA! Well, I don't- I am a freedom loving American with an agenda-- Liberty.

He claims to “not get it” but then goes on to mumble about the Bush budget, the Bush bailout: this looks to be a normal “political writer’s” beginning stages of laying groundwork for a rough outline to BEGIN the research for a real article with substance; it ain’t hard to find the who, what, when and where of the upcoming April 15th event”S.” Typical for a left-biased reporter, Torbenson must add all the Bush poop he can scoop up, as a reminder to the general reader, as to who caused what and when. WE DON’T CARE, Mr. Torbenson, who caused what. We don’t care about the party in charge, whom/whatever that/it may be. We don’t care if it’s female, male, black, white, or a multi-sexed hybrid with pink blotches. What we do care about is results.

Torbenson also keeps his subject narrowed as most other “political writers” are doing, looking at the named Tea Parties through very narrow eyes, determining what is most obvious only to them; that these Parties are directly for the same purpose of the original Boston Tea Party. Truth is, Mr. Torbenson, there were several “Tea Parties” within days and weeks of the famous Boston Tea Party, all of which were held for various reasons (such as women’s rights), but all had one underlining meaning; liberty, Mr. Torbenson, Liberty.

Torbenson suggests, first, that we are living under the Bush budget; is that news to anyone? No. It just satisfies his leftist (reader) desire to kick a man while he’s down. He mentions the 700m bank bailout passed by Bush AND the current Congress, but fails to mention the trillions allocated since. Yes, Mr. Torbenson, we are upset about all of it: the lack of accountability in government, the lack of respect for our Constitution, and the total disregard for our posterity.

Secondly, who holds the meter deciding which economist is respectable? I suggest a small web research term, Mr. Torbenson: “economists against the bailout.” You will find heaps of economic professionals, including some you would otherwise worship who are professors at various universities. Their two-fold consensus, in general, tells me what my grand mother taught me a long time ago, the rule of holes: when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. And on the other hand, they seem to be preaching patience; the kind that tells us to not go grocery shopping when hungry-- something we lost many decades ago. (Oh, and the bartering thing you mention; I suppose such would be pretty scary for those of you who merely push a pen for a living.)

Your third issue just needs a little tiny adjustment. You mention tax money going to foreign entity’s coffers. Isn’t that what Mr. Obama is doing?, paying for abortions (including partial birth) in foreign lands, and actually sending millions overseas for international bailouts. How about China buying our paper debt, then also taking some of our recently printed legal tender? Further, why is it that tax money “keeps us solvent?” – Why is government so closely integrated with the private sector? It shouldn’t be, and this is another reason for this protest, as it all comes to a head, Mr. Torbenson. Liberty. PS- I love paying proper, constitutional taxes, for the GENERAL welfare, as any thinking American does. But it is also our American responsibility to pay the least possible taxes- a concept that sent the pilgrims to America in the first place (unlike Biden’s ancestors). [For your reading enjoyment I suggest Mrs. Robins’ book, “The Governor’s Story,” which will take you on a learning-journey following the “voyage” of Governor Bradford’s manuscript.]

And still on your third point; do you really think 95% of working Americans are not going to pay more taxes? How stupid do you thing we are? – How stupid are you!? Corporate costs will be sent down the chain at the expense of the consumer. Energy costs will soon shoot sky high, Mr. Torbenson (60% of America’s electricity is generated by coal burning, an industry soon to be decimated). Relative to direct taxes, you might be right. But you have to understand most taxes are paid multiple times as they are passed up and down the money chain, making up the majority of what is actually paid – from the consumer’s pocket. And who do you think will get hit the hardest by the Obama plan? The rich will still be rich, paying, in percentage, the smallest amount towards energy, transportation, etc., and the poor could care less- they will see their welfare checks go up and up, while the middle class will get hit the hardest with cost-of-living adjustments sending many of us to the poor house. The overall effect will shrink the middle class, further dividing America into class warfare. The rich will continue to find deferments, the poor will still be buying their I-pods, and blackberries, funded by tax money through local, state, and federal programs, but the middle-folks are going to take it in the shorts, Mr. Torbenson.

Representation, you mention, Mr. Torbenson – You don’t think we have taxation without representation? Do you know a single senator or congressmen who read the omnibus stimulus bill before they voted on it? Even the one who is credited with its creation said under oath he did not read it. Is that representation? Your ignorance, your blindness, and your leftist bias, hangs out all over when you simplify anyone’s objection to paying taxes by suggesting a one-dimensional “on its face” approach to paying necessary taxes.

As you ask, let me help you, Mr. Torbenson. If you will lift your blinders for just a moment, and take a quick look around the internet, you will see what this is all about. At blackrepublican.blogspot you will find lots of info about this peaceful revolt. At taxdayteaparty you will find a really nice summary of what it is about at the very bottom of the home page, right side. And don’t forget about the “Horn Blow for Liberty,” Mr. Torbenson; another part of this peaceful revolt. Further, you can check out the rest of my blog to see what it’s all about- been festering for years, Mr. Torbenson; http://sovereignslave.com/ .

We the people understand that it is the nature of governments to plunder, and we also understand enough is enough. We understand our government –our democratic alter ego—was created under a Constitution, and must be held to those standards. If not so held, we are destined to tyranny. I believe in our republic, Mr. Torbenson, don’t you?

An unbiased historical perspective of the multi-tiered tea party movement way back when will give you a perspective of today’s peaceful revolt.

I pray, God save Liberty in the hearts and souls of Americans.

A vital election is coming up and We the People have an important decision to make. Generally, classic libertarian politics plays a deeply important role in how I vote. But in my eyes politics plays a very distant second in this upcoming election.  We have a mess to clean up, and a People to be accountable to; the Iraqi people. 

A pivotal moment that led me to put my life on hold and join the effort in Iraq had nothing to do with my political desires; it had to do with Right and Wrong. No matter what I thought at the time about the then-stated justifications for war, in 2004 the people of Iraq began showing an overwhelming desire to be Free of Saddam. I watched, as a fat and happy truck driver –feeling safe and content in my part of the world-- while Iraqi’s flocked to the polls by January 2005, and I felt embarrassed as they came out of hiding in droves, braving the war-torn streets of towns and cities in defiance of the rampant violence, to vote in numbers that far exceeded our own in recent elections. 

I watched a news report of that historical vote from the comfort of my living room as a young Iraqi lad carried his grandmother to the polls. When I saw their image on TV I leaned forward in my newly-bought over-stuffed LazyBoy chair to hear the grandmother weakly utter that she was so thrilled to have this opportunity to cast a vote against Saddam Hussein before she died. Through an interpreter she expressed how happy she was to live long enough to see this day! As I leaned back in my chair, a tear ran down my cheek. 

About a month or two later I heard a report about a small (American) Army unit up in northern Iraq that chose to not fulfill their fueling mission stating they took a vote and decided their mission was too dangerous. What?!, I thought -- has party wrangling and leftist ideas become so strong here at home that even our soldiers are feeling the pangs of democratic ignorance, putting their own personal safety above the call of duty?  Weeks later, at 49 years old, I was 30 pounds lighter and in a National Guard uniform.

I put my life on hold, greatly upsetting the harmony of my cozy family life, accepted a sizeable drop in pay, and decided it was time for all able-bodied straight thinking Americans to put up or shut up. Due to my previous Marine Corps experience from the 1980’s, and my years of driving a big rig, the Guard immediately sent me to Instructor school. Afterwards I joined a transportation Unit, endured a few months of training in the New Mexico desert, and deployed to Iraq for a year. After returning stateside I stayed on active duty an additional year to assist in instructing deploying troops. In all, I spent over 2 ½ years on active duty in support of this --as it seems to me-- liberation effort. 

Because of all the negative, political rhetoric coming from our Congress, echoed by our Academia and other loudly-covered leftist talking heads, the everyday people of Iraq laid low until late 2004, fearing the eventual wrath of Saddam’s supporters if and when we gave up and pulled out. But since that time, more and more of the Iraqi people have stepped forward and we owe them the promise of our Word.

I knew back in 2003 our timing for the invasion was all wrong; I remember not being convinced that we had justification for such a task. But the facts now are that we caused an upheaval in the lives or the Iraqi people. We eventually gave them cause for Hope and a semblance of freedom. They came around, putting their lives at stake on the Word of America. The least we can do is, fulfill our promise to them. I live by the words of John Quincy Adams, “Duty is ours; result’s are God’s.” We cannot turn the clock back by ignoring the current reality.

Remember the giant plastic shredder Saddam used to viciously intimidate his detractors. Remember the airbus Saddam’s regime bought to assist in training terrorists. Remember the gassing of Kurdish women and children, lying bloated and purple –and dead-- in the streets of northern Iraq. Remember the mass graves of Saddam’s dissidents, made up of men and women who stood up against Saddam in year’s past, accompanied by their children, in dozer-dug massive graves? There are many humanitarian reasons that justify our invasion not related to oil or other economic/political spins.  I remember, and so do the People of Iraq.

Next up to help in the liberation effort, is you. Some say, 'If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.' I say, if you stand for something and don't know why, you never stood at all. Rise above the political fray and see this effort for what it is through the eyes of millions of Iraqis. They are living in the present while we fight at home over the past. Stand up with purpose and be counted. Vote for the only candidate left who believes we have a moral obligation to the people of Iraq; this is a defining moment in our history, and the liberation effort far outweighs our personal political comfort zone. I hope you are able to look into the future and see how we today will be viewed; defeat by quitting is not an option. Quitting will be the greatest “gift” we could possibly give Al Qaeda, and the radicals coming from Iran and Saudi Arabia, by pulling out before Iraq is independently able to muster its own civil forces. Until that time comes, we have a humanitarian mission to complete, imparting the seeds of Liberty upon the hopeful people of Iraq who put their faith, their very lives, on the line because of us.

I am prepared to squint, hold my nose, and place my vote for Senator John McCain. Lord help us all, as we have a duty to do the Right thing.

Conservative Movement Is No More

After years of research and meditation, "The Conservative Mind," by Russell Kirk, became my political bible; 'Moral Relativism' divides the necessary marriage of accountability from responsibility, and 'Situational Ethics' destroys any chance at Codified control (not to mention its denial to the obvious Human Condition). These findings, and others, helped solidify my field of political possibilities into a more practical model. Further, after much spiritual turmoil, I arrived at –at least- a very firm believe in the spirituality of Man. With this as my base (litmus test) I then came to the conclusion that the most important of the two: body (the physical world), and soul (the spiritual world), that soul is the superior element. With these significant parameters as my foundation, natural progression logically brought me to a conservative political outlook.
I believe absolute equality exists among all people. And, since it exists, I needn’t (re)construct it, but seek it –strive for it-- for myself, with a natural duty to help others do the same. I believe in the wisdom of Judeo/Christian values and I so fully appreciate the Concept of Sovereignty, which one cannot ignore if one believes in the possibility of metaphysical transcendence as well as in inalienable rights. Again, this is conservatism. I also trust most level headed, western-influenced people would believe similarly if they had the desire to gain the necessary knowledge. But, unfortunately, the socio perception of conservatism continues to evolve into a less and less attractive package for the lack of understanding among its followers, as well as among its elected torchbearers.
I served in the Marine Corps under the late great President Reagan, coming of age –-to turn a phrase— politically and morally during that time-frame. But family and socio/politico concerns became a priority and I got out in December 0f 1988. I remained an at-home family man for 17 years. But then, at 50 years of age, I again heard the call of patriotism; joined the Guard to ship out to Iraq with the 756th Transportation Company. You see, I believe in living my belief; that too is conservatism.
With that said, I am growing weary of the Good Fight.
True conservatism has disappeared from our understanding, evidenced by its’ elected torchbearers. I was concerned when Mr. George H. Bush held that label. Then I became alarmed when Mr. George W. Bush became the new leader. And now, with Mr. McCain as the new holder of the torch, I am forced to accept original conservatism no longer meaningfully exists; the Tocqueville warning is now reality. No longer do I hear anyone speaking of our constitutionally guaranteed republican form of government; today its all about spreading (direct) democracy. No one in government, no one in our institutions of higher learning –not even the self-appointed talking heads-- speaks of how we the people are surrounded by a republican bubble, protected from our LIMITED democratic institutions. Mark Levin got close to the issue in, “Men In Black,” in his Epilogue, only to digress to a mere “democratic republic”* in his Afterword. Mr. Novak got real close in, “On Two Wings,” and even Michael Savage ran circles around it in his “The Savage Nation,” but still, no comparative narrations furthering its’ distinctive characteristics.
Freedoms have completely replaced liberties; (distinguishing the two makes an excellent “teaching moment," and discussing freedoms-under-our-democratic-process vs. liberty-under-the-vail-of-our-republic really gets to the meat of the problem). Privileges now overshadow rights (another excellent issue to help distinguish democratic and republican forms of government), but no longer are these issues discussed in the public forum.
Inalienable rights are gone, either by hook or by crook,** as we continue “evolutionizing” positive law by integrating it with contract law precepts. Natural Law is nothing more than museum-esc amusement to academia. Inalienable rights, and the ensuing concept of delegation of authority from a Higher Power (relative sovereignty), IS the basis for our constitutional republic. But it becomes moot and unusable when such idealisms are no longer within the minds and hearts of the People.

"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it…While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -Learned Hand, jurist

Without the people having at least a hint of what real Liberty means; without the people (and our courts) understanding that responsibility and accountability are inseparable twins; with the concept of republicanism moot, and the importance of rights trumping privileges, all gone from the public-at-large sector, conservatism is left with no backbone. The nerves have all dried up and the brain has no way of telling the arms and feet how to move or where to go.
Our apparent willingness to compromise on who gets our vote is also a clear symptom that society is similarly infected. If we are willing to make a voting decision by first determining who is the most evil (off path), then thus, voting for the other remaining candidate, we are then guilty of moral relativism and no longer governed by conservative precepts. Political affiliation within the democratic process becomes all-consuming and we brush off any idealisms of seeking the individual. Is a little evil better than more evil? I believe right is right and wrong is wrong. Yes, there are degrees of right and wrong, but there is always an exacting fulcrum if we would only look. Worker’s unions, insurance protections, disclaimers, customized drugs, voting to affect our paycheck, trading safety for liberty, and 26 ways to file for various degrees of bankruptcy: all symptoms and enablers of passing responsibility along to the goblins They are sharp nails in the coffin awaiting conservatism.
I am reminded of the words of John Adams when he was approached one Easter morning by a “political writer.” The writer asked then-Congressman Adams why he toiled so over fighting slavery when that one issue threatened to destroy his final attempt at public service. Mr. Adams answered in part, “Duty is ours, results are God’s.” We have a duty to vote our conscience, not to compromise it.
Notes:
* My use of the phrase, "by hook or by crook" signifies two of the ways free people are pulled out of our republican sphere and into the public (democratic) sphere, thereby accountable under our institutional system: hook is by contract, and crook insinuates an action causing injury.
** Phrases such as democratic republic, constitutional democracy, and others, are serious pitfalls showing a laziness with our use of English. As such phrases continue in use, the masses slowly absorb the individual words concurrent with their singular, generic definitions. Over time the generic collective understanding of the phrase is then reflected back into what we were originally trying to identify. Thus, rather then the original entity being used as the identifier, the identifier becomes the phrase, modified to fit the name. This is the same process that causes languages to change over time (inverse modification), and it is one of the many causes of our drifting political idealisms. THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOLS OF THE SECULARISTS! Correctly named, our intended system of government is a "constitutional republic." We are not a democracy (though one could say we are democratic in governmental construction). Our republic (public-at-large) has no government and transcends our constitutionally limited democratic process. It is only the man-made (public) sector of constitutionally subordinate institutions that are governed. (There are exceptions; it is contractual law precepts within civil and criminal law that allows for them to be binding. My use, above, of the phrase "by hook or by crook" describes such examples).