Wednesday, November 20, 2013

good time to be waking up

Supreme Court backed Government DNA gathering is becoming a Reality in America

John DeMayo
Freedom Outpost
20 November 2013

"To quote from our most conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's dissenting opinion on this historically significant case:

"Make no mistake about it: As an entirely predictable consequence of today's decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason.""

[Read more...]

And I refer you again back to Dave Hodge's post...

if it has Obama's name on it...

Common Core: Obama Education Plan Sparks Nationwide Protest

Audrey Hudson
18 November 2013

"Opponents nationwide declared Monday "National Don't Send Your Child to School Day," and were planning protests in local school districts. A Facebook page boasted that 6,000 followers would attend the protests."

[Read more...]

The Blaze database on Common Core
Changed perspective against Common Core by a principal
A view from a parent on Common Core
"We must obey government officials" is the correct answer on the test

the sort of idea that makes me VERY nervous...

NHTSA May Mandate That New Cars Broadcast Location, Direction and Speed 

Terence P. Jeffrey
19 November 2013

"The downside is that such a transportation system would give the government at least the capability to exert increasing control over when, where, if--or for how much additional taxation--people are allowed to go places in individually owned vehicles. It could also give government the ability to track where people go and when."

[Read more...]

Hat tip: Infowars

Nothing innocent about this one. Does the government need to have this information? I refer you back to the Dave Hodges post regarding how these dots connect...

farewell to Main St.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Economic Enslavement

James Hall
20 November 2013

"When monopolies eliminate competition, the marketplace suffers a crowding out of main street businesses. With the demise of familiar business enterprises, the multinationals expand without hindrance. Entrepreneurial small business is seldom in a position to fill the void left when the muscle of international finance decides to control a business sector. "

[Read more...]

unless you're sleeping

America Has Entered a New Level of Tyranny

Dave Hodges
The Common Sense Show
20 November 2013

"With all the historical precedents, it is amazing that nobody seems to be asking the question, “When does all of this intelligence gathering become actionable”?  In other words, what is the government going to do with all the surveillance data that they have acquired? Is this an exercise in mental masturbation, or is the NSA and ultimately the government going to do something with this vast amount of personal information? Why isn’t anyone asking these questions? Once again, the answer to the first question is that there never has been a police state that did not act upon the information it gathered on the people, and I believe that time is upon America."

[Read more...]

Just the reminder that conspiracy theorists deal with possibility, and dots connected against a future end (that may or may not occur).

If you have not yet gone where Mr. Hodges goes, you might just be sleeping.

If only we still could be sleeping...

oh! oh! oh!

Obama, Declining Media, and the End of “Gimme!” Government

Arthur Christopher Schaper
Canada Free Press
19 November 2013

"It’s official: President Barack Obama is as unpopular as George W. Bush was during his fifth year in office. While polling is a fickle means for assessing the efficacy of the commander-in-chief, the argument that President Obama would get a pass from the passing media is no longer the case."

[Read more...]

that hope of maybe, just maybe, a tomorrow after Obama

The beginning of the end for Barack Obama

Joseph Curl
The Washington Times
17 November 2013

"Twenty hours after Mr. Obama’s depressing presser, 39 Democrats joined Republicans to support the “Keep Your Health Plan Act of 2013.” And just like that, No. 44 became a lame duck, eviscerated and emasculated. The shutdown? Ancient history. The fractured Republican Party? Gone with the wind."

[Read more...]

Hat tip: Red Flag

but rather, a day of slaughter

6 Facts About Hunger That Demonstrate the Shameful Excesses of American Capitalism

Paul Buchheit
Alter Net
23 June 2013

"Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Larry Ellison, two Kochs, and four Waltons made an average of $6 billion each from their stocks and other investments in 2012. A $6 billion per year person makes enough in two seconds (based on a 40-hour work-week) to pay a year's worth of benefits to the average SNAP recipient."

[Read more...]

Looking at Washington DC and Wal-Mart again
Wal-Mart and part-timers turning into temps (Read comments, too)
From Business Insider on Wal-Mart
A Corporate Watchdog's View (2002)

Readers should remember that I do not necessarily agree with the positions taken by all links to which I post. Additionally, deviousness being what it is, the very language changes as we go, and hides many items that are not quite so innocent as they seem. 

The decisive lens, however, through which I view all (and the one that finally proves true, or not-true), is the Logos of God, correctly apprehended, and nurtured so that its seed-gift does not die, but produces a fruit hundredfold times over (Mt. 13:8) the size of the tiny seed that began all, quiet in the very soul and breathing... 

This is an older post, and has languished in permanent draft mode. The subject matter, however, is timeless, and more so in this day wherein corporations (and the wealth of the few) must be questioned, against musings of at what point wealth might be considered excessive, and if so, what remedies might be (or have been) appropriate in safeguarding the many, from the few... 

In an unbridled capitalist society, injury can be presumed. Yet restrictions to free enterprise are likewise not always made of the stuff of a palatable undertaking. An uneasy tension, always, between 'unbridled' and 'necessity's girdle...'

If I may, our time is acutely defined by the dissonance between James 5:3 and redistribution of wealth.

Your gold and silver have corroded, and the very rust of each will serve as proof against you: their testimony against you will eat your flesh as fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. *

I do not support redistribution of wealth, as it is understood by the current administration. I believe in free enterprise as necessity and as it is supported by Scripture. (See here for example. It intrigues to note that the verse does not merely speak to ownership of a home as proof of 'good' within a community and/or nation, but said ownership is framed within safety and/or security.

The mandate that an individual might own his own home and livelihood and 'refreshing' is inlaid into Jewish thought, although I suspect it was not in the same sense as we know such: it seems to exist as a sort of motif or rallying cry, rather, of the best and most proper world and/or life attainment.

The particulars of how each might or might not have acquired a home is not mine to know; however, the use as a motif of perfection mandates that it was not always attained, whether because of national situation or otherwise.

As I mention frequently, American jurisprudence is based on several historical templates, of which Judeo-Christian jurisprudence is one. A sense, then, of a private ownership of the essentials of life as 'one's own,' which is a defining point of capitalism, might be found in the Jewish thought that is the origin of what became Christian thought.)

For a great many years now (as is evidenced by random posts at several blogs), I have questioned a   system that is free to establish a wide disparity between the earnings of a company's leadership and its investors against those upon whose back those earnings are made.

Walk with me, here.

While I would not want to veer over into this without exacting research, there lingers in my mind an item I noted long ago in a Victorian novel, one of the master works of that era, although I forget the title and author.

To whit, what was beginning then as what we know now as the stock market was not the stuff of gentlemen, who regarded it as speculation and a sordid manner of earning wealth. Would that I could call the exact quote to mind!

Whether a particular type of stock trading (rather than the global of stock trading, as I have constrained it within my own mind) was inferred in the novel or not, I cannot say: the London Stock Exchange became "the first regulated London, and the modern Stock Exchange [wa]s born" in 1801.

But stocks (and an inherent, 'unearned' wealth) are not the only driving force in today's wealth. Something vastly constructed—which is to say, mechanically and definitively created—plays herein as well. No laws exist that define how much an employee can or must (or likewise cannot) earn in any particular position, and likewise, no laws exist that define the earnings of those who are at the head of a company.

(Unions are outside the constraints of what I attempt herein, which tends more to a theological and/or philosophical treatise on the whole.)

It seems (and readers are welcome to challenge my observations) that, within an industry in a specific community, guidelines develop that are regarded as a 'normal' range for a particular position. Companies either regard them in choosing how much to pay or they do not; in the main, however, most companies pay within that range for employees in those positions within a particular geographical location.

Which is to say. A receptionist might make as much as, say, thirteen dollars an hour or as little as eight but the position is likely not going to earn twenty-five dollars in that same market, regardless of how much the highest paid employee of that company earns.

That curiousity that remains, however, when the lowest earners within a company do not even make 10% of what the wealthiest earn concerns. A gap that large (and larger), when created within a system that deliberately creates the exact amounts each position within the system earns, must operate outside of a 'free market' defense.

In a true 'market' system, one's earnings are decided on the basis of how much each individual sells.

A certain 'fairness' built in: if another seller sells more, well and good.

A similar fairness cannot be said to exist in man-made economic infrastructures.

In the same sense, while it seems to my disinterested memory that set amounts did once govern sports figures, excess rules there as surely as in stockholder earnings (when compared to workers) and CEOs of high-earning companies.

Excess, however, being the defining point of the day, and in a society that holds pensions and stock market trends (and now, that rush to gold) and wealth to be defining points of success, the verse that charges you have hoarded wealth in the last days (later in the passage cleanly said to be 'a day of slaughter') should compel all to examine the moral impurity to excessive wealth when earned in such a landscape and to such result...

Not that I will hold my breath to wait its happening.

It is in that sense, however, that I proffer the above links. This side of Heaven, we seem to devolve to systems created by and instilled and administrated and endured by man, some (whatever system is used) going to wealth, others to a working poverty, and others to lives of sponging off others without contributing anything but the ready hand of give-me: whether socialism or communism or a redistribution of wealth to unfairly reward those who do not work to earn—or even a 'free enterprise'—it is in the context of the answer to God for that wealth that I proffer any posts herein about wealth.

Because I do not see that Heaven will justify this hoarding and those who, like the Koch Brothers or Bill Gates or the Walton family or many others, who earned their wealth on the backs of workers who do not share in the wealth earned...

Something about that remains problematic. Yet countered always by the reality that, even in the act of Christian giving, a gift ceases to be a gift if it is mandated as 'have to.'

The mandate of moral integrity, however, is indeed a 'have to,' and it is by this that we will all be judged at the last hour.

Because yes, we always had a choice. It is the choosing that will condemn us in the last hour.

Given the excesses of modern corporations, a commentator who might vilify the city council who stood up to Walmart's tawdry bullying and 'lost' the stores Walmart had intended to set into the Washington community needs a refresher course in American economics. No advantage to the poor can be envisioned from corporate excess.

* James may be, I believe, referring in his "eat your flesh as fire" to the same future experience to which St. Paul alludes in 1 Corinthians 3:12-15.

My translation of the verse from James is slightly paraphrased.

[Note. As a footnote, how pensions, and even savings, figure into the whole is something I frequently turn over in my mind. Atlanta is a town of much wealth, and the pursuit of wealth here by everyday Americans...

Against that charge from the fifth chapter of James...

Begs the question of exactly how far we have already strayed from a Christian ethos.

But I mention that only because rumours abound regarding 'haircuts' and sweeping losses of pensions and that rush to gold mentioned above was, in a recent season, creating a rumour mill regarding whether or not real gold backs the certificates purchased.

When the enemy counterattacks what seems 'good,' it becomes a matter for analysis and inquiry—which is to say, to whom does James 5 address its concerns?

That banking community we have already seen operate falsely (2008)?

The mega-million and billionaires?

Mom and Pop on Main Street who have channelled their entire lives into acquiring future fortunes that will hold them in their life after retirement?

It is a difficult thing, however, to examine these things quite so acutely, when it has been the way and expectation of our time for many generations now.

A very real question remains, however, when a family becomes excessively wealthy at the expense of the people who laboured to create their wealth.

It is, however, as noted, a moral question.

And for a final note of a most dangerous absurdity, read hereEd.]