We must cease this senseless war on marijuana and this unconscionable undermining of marriage law. The opposition (primarily) comes from the religious sector who attempts to make the morality argument. In both cases the proposal set forth is that both activities are moral evils and as such any measure to prevent (including willful law breaking not civil disobedience) them is considered heroic. The fault lies in that the arguments are based on appeals to emotion and authority, not logically rational discussion. Indeed on these issues it would appear that there are gross gaps and severe lacking of any rational reason for prohibition and mountains of impartial evidence on why both activities, under the social contract theory law is based on, should be permitted. It is the willingness of the populace to buy into the fallacies of the prohibitionists and the willful blindness of the consequences inherent in allowing those arguments to hold sway at the ballot box. We must, to progress socially and individually, see past these scam arguments to the facts and reason and carry that into the voting booth. Thoughts or comments?
Tag Archives: Patriot
For Discussion:
Here is a recent article and the discussion I contributed. I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts (insightful and intelligent discussion please):
James Bianco ·
The military offers themselves in defense of their country as patriots and they are well compensated for it. My family is composed of nothing but veterans and anyone who serves this country expecting laud, or special treatment or for any reason other than a humble desire to protect freedom is not a patriot, just a mercenary who doesn’t deserve to wear the uniform. Sailors who quibble because they couldn’t get into a club and then demand additional freebies because of it are no different than the mafia offering protection for a price. True patriots fight because America and her freedoms are worth fighting for, not for glory and gold. Thank you for those who don’t need fleet week, only their conviction. To the rest, please learn real service or get out. I doubt General Washington, General Lee, General Grant or even General Eisenhower cared about fleet week or any bar turning them down.
An aside, Dress Blues are only appropriate in certain situations, this being one of them, and currently the formal tuxedo and ball gown are the highest form of dress according to civilian etiquette viz Emily Post. The bouncer was in the wrong but the sailor’s cousin was even more so. Dishonoring the uniform with a petty squabble trumps a guy doing his job who was simply misinformed.
As to the navy officer suing, under what area would she sue? She was not discriminated against, it was a universal dress code. Hurt feelings don’t fall under tort. And there is no precedence or statute entitling the military to get into any civilian establishment without permission, there’s even an amendment prohibiting quartering. It was just a misunderstanding that if the bouncer were fired or suspended for HE could sue for wrongful termination. Get over it, the hotel has already done more than it should have. An apology would have sufficed. Serve to protect, expecting praise is serving only yourself. To those who truly serve out of dedication, I am eternally grateful. I will not thank extortionates or their apparently abundant supporters.
Feel free to call me the names I anticipate, though I would rather hear well thought arguments if you disagree. After all, intelligent discourse is the only way I can evaluate and correct my ideas as necessary.
Biff S.-
The sailor probably had to wear the uniform for fleet week – it’s a big PR thing for the Navy – believe me, most don’t like having to wear their uniforms in public outside of duty as the uniforms get dirty easily, especially the whites and they aren’t that easy to properly maintain -I don’t think they wanted freebies, they just wanted to go where any other civilian could go – I don’t think most military members except special treatment, they just want equal treatment, they don’t want to be penalized by the Country they serve for wearing the uniform – there are those who only signed up for the education benefits, etc, but usually those people drop out when they find out they have to be deployed to a war zone – you don’t know how many people popped positive on drug tests once a deployment was announced – As far as true patriots of the past – if we had lived during those times, it would be different – Grant was called a butcher of his own men and was accused of being a drunk, a subaltern, and worse – Lee owned Slaves as did Washington -in fact he used teeth from his slaves to construct his dentures (he tried ivory, and many other things) – Eisenhower had a mistress during the war and was never a combat soldier, he was always a desk jockey – but time makes heroes, saints and patriots of many. But you do make a point about true patriotism vs self interest. As a retired military member myself, sometimes I fall into the trap of being bitter about the chronic unemployment and homelessness of vets while at the same time, many of the same people who deny entry to a military person in uniform or refuse to hire veterans will still self righteously say “thank you for your service” That is the kind of thing I am against – but well meaning people that say it is fine – I should have made that more clear.
Reply · Unlike · 1 · 19 hours ago
Jake W. High School Student
jimmie – AND how Well do you think that our military members are Compensated?
Research the Top Pay for a Top Admiral or General.
James Bianco ·
Biff S. Excellent points and this incident probably did not initially involve self-interest, but due to its escalation and the posting of this article it shows a demand for more than what was due and will inspire less scrupulous members of the forces to take advantage of a uniform that should symbolize patriotism but will become a tool of capitalism at its worst. You are correct about both the arrogant self-righteousness of those who can’t appreciate sacrifice and duty but claim to know what service was really provided as well as the horrible way we treat our vets. That change must come from the people but too few of them know or care (when I research an article it can take me days to find sufficient info on vets and previous engagements that were not popular, just to write and try to raise awareness and educate on how many people are living in squalor and who gave decades of their life in service), and even less active duty know or care because they are young and are not thinking of the future. I think we are on the same page for the most part, though I know this story will only serve to divide and no real conversation will come of it. Though many things have changed over the centuries, one truth remains- avarice will reign until real conversation and real action happens. I pray it doesn’t happen to my parents, but my father was a Senior Master Sergeant in the Air Force and he was an Aircraft Mechanic-it is still difficult to find a job. You’d think 30yrs of service would mean something at least in education and experience. Again, change has to come from the citizenry. My concern is that this one escalation will divide people even more and self-interest will override patriotism. Thank you for your points, it’s nice to hear a good argument that is well-thought out and not just some bigot assuming I hate America!
James Bianco ·
Just a reminder to everyone, Memorial Day does NOT remember active duty, it only commemorates those who died while in service. Please quit using Memorial Day as a reason for any action, good or bad, at, from, towards, or near those who are still alive and currently serving. We honor them to honor them, not because it’s Memorial Day.
Andy P. University of Florida Professor
James, that is by far the best first paragraph I have ever read in any comment section.
The “humble desire to protect freedom” is honor enough in itself. Thank you.
I am sooo tired of the fake patriotism (thank you for your service) tossed like cheap confetti at airports.
If you’re so thankful, go volunteer at the local VA or homeless shelter.
James Bianco ·
Jake W. I have, and when one adds in exchange discounts, value of Tricare compared to market insurance, access to facilities and the cost of similar access for a private citizen, value of retirement, quality of actual healthcare available versus quality of average citizen healthcare, educational opportunities, death benefits to families, availability of base housing, training, etc. you can come up with a real compensation value (compensation is the value of average pay plus the value of any and all benefits both actual and in-kind). Compared to a police officer or national guard member (the DOL’s comparative occupations) the compensation of most NCOs is far above. Take in to consideration the current average compensation of the citizens the military is designed to protect and even a private looks comparatively wealthy. That is not to say they are but at least a private can live on their salary, someone who works even overtime on minimum wage can not. Ultimately it boils down to members of the military volunteer to serve to protect freedom, the compensation should reflect the danger they are put in relative to the degree of danger (and based on need) others experience (physical, psychological, and social). It should also reflect the public’s perception of their value. FYI pay for any member of the military will vary by allowances, special skills, hardship, combat pay, and any number of other factors. The only “military” (he’s a civilian) pay that is set is the Commander-in-Chief who receives roughly $569,000 directly from the tax coffers, he is not the highest paid, as you requested.
So the short answer is, given all known factors, the average pay and benefits of the military is a reflection of the public’s value, can sustain a family during service, provides more than comparable occupations, and is more than the public’s value on itself. Active duty is well compensated for the task of being a patriot, poorly for a mercenary, and the question misses the point of the entire conversation. The sarcasm was nicely done though.
James Bianco ·
Spot on Andy, personally I like Habitat for Humanity as my volunteering of choice. We see a lot of young vets struggling to make it but with that military grit to never say die. I am always impressed with how they keep their heads up despite circumstances that would crush the rest of us.
PLEASE COMMENT:
The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly
These past few weeks have been rather eventful though hardly novel. A quick review of the best and worst moments might add a little perspective to the pulse of the United States and the world.
The Good: Not unexpectedly the good comes from a change to once dearly treasured (though not backed by solid research) traditions. Oregon, that great trail of a state (sorry, couldn’t resist the old game reference), has elected a bisexual woman to the highest office of the state, Governor. Though the election has long since past, this woman is preparing to enter her first term as the Honorable Governor of the State of Oregon. Whether this is her only term is debatable, but one thing is sure, she is the first person to open up to the press about this highly personal issue (odd how heterosexual people don’t have to justify their qualifications for office with detailed descriptions of their bedroom activities) and to stand behind her clear beliefs (her platform is well-defined, somewhat partisan though no more than anyone else, and was well enumerated to the people prior to the election on numerous occasions). She is the first lawfully elected Governor that has stated she is bisexual and unabashedly stands behind it. (Before I get a note, here is an addendum: Though she was elected as Secretary of State, she assumes her office lawfully and can thus be considered to be elected to the position of Governor, should the Governor resign, die, etc. as part of the Constitution of Oregon which the people retain.)
Why it’s good: In the LGBTQIQ (Political correctness for the recognized orientations- Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersexed, and Questioning- Intersex includes things like hermaphroditism, gender dysphoria, and other conditions in which the “parts” as it were are not matching up to the gender a person identifies with. The 2 “Q’s” are best left to the experts(PFLAG) to explain.) bisexualism is seen as the “black sheep” as it were of the community. Gays typically view them as closeted homosexuals and heterosexuals view them as simply promiscuous. A cursory search of the social networks can easily confirm this. Currently the United States seems to vacillate between approving and disapproving of these classifications, but that has nothing to do with the good here. The good is that, for once, the system worked precisely as it should: a candidate expressed her viewpoints and plan of action clearly and concisely during the campaign and started her term as Governor with what appears to be an honest and open administration, the people elected her and soon she will assume office, despite the hemming and hawing of the Right wingers across the nation whose argument against her is only her bisexuality (her platform would have been an easier target since it does all the things they don’t want done, but hey, I’m not their strategist). Her being bisexual is something that shows promise for that state, not because of the orientation issue, but because she was honest about her life (as far as is possible for us to know) and was willing to run with a label that has never been widely approved of attached to her. She did not run away, hide an affair (Gay Governor of New Jersey resigned for this), or try to make it look like anything more than what it is nor did she apologize for her being her. This is the good, hope that politicians might see this and take heed, and that we have a Governor willing to run as she is.
The Bad: The bad is probably readily apparent, but with all the terrible things going on it may have gotten lost in the woodwork: Obama’s War Powers Proposal and Congress’s Response. Essentially it seems that the only way Congress will cross Party boundaries is with their desire to do absolutely nothing. The whole story amazed me but can be broken down quite simply: Boehner and other Hawks in Congress requested Obama do something about ISIS (because using their ability to declare war would require work and would inch them closer to the Constitutional powers they are given). Obama, in a bid to have a moderate strategy came up with a vague but more potent version of 2001’s war powers. Republicans and Hawk Democrats complained it was too mild. Democrats and Dove republicans claimed it was too strong. Both agreed to decline the powers and did NOTHING more. They are the only branch that can declare war but for 14 years they have relied on Executive Orders authorizing military action (the Executive’s version of war-in essence it’s all the death of war, but doesn’t pay our soldiers wartime pay, which is substantially larger than current pay and can be roughly equated to hazardous duty pay or overtime, albeit VERY roughly, and as a bonus it doesn’t require Congress to do their job or put their own necks on the chopping block as it were) and the good old-fashioned, tried and true method of “blame someone else so I can get elected again”.
Why it’s bad: Why its bad should be a little evident already and requires little explanation: 1)Congress declares war and there’s a reason for that- the people are represented in Congress (ideally) and since military action of any kind involves ALL of America, the people should at least be consulted prior to sending their sons and daughters to die. 2)War pays more both in the life and death of a soldier as is commensurate with the dangers and risks inherent in war (or ANY military action beyond EXTREMELY limited engagements-2 weeks tops) and the trauma to entire communities when they lose loved ones. It also provides more supplies to our troops and comes with international restrictions like the Hague Conventions and the Geneva Convention that protect our troops and engender world support (and that we are not currently observing). 3)MILITARY ENGAGEMENTS ARE WAR- excepting in certain circumstances (limited engagements that limit exposure). A famous line from Shakespeare says it all, “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet,” or my version, “You can call a turd a life-vest but if you do, I’m never sailing with you!” Take your pick. finally 4)The three branches of government should all work together, checked by their equals through the Constitution, NOT bickering like children, NOT expanding their own powers beyond what they are lawfully or even ethically entitled to, and NOT IGNORING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE! It amazes me how Congress didn’t think to go back to their districts, ask the voters what they want (war or not war) and then return to Washington to REPRESENT their constituents. They didn’t even look at the polls, just their own desires. Tho I will not argue it here in full, if a government (which governs by consent of the governed) is ignoring the very people it is duty-bound to protect, it loses its authority to govern.
AND NOW THE UGLY:
The Ugly is a picture everyone should be familiar with, and ashamed of. Vote by your convictions, not Red/Blue, Dems/Reps, N/S or any other reason.
How far we’ve come or “Welcome Back McCarthy”
A little background information: John McCain on CodePink
First a little background information (for those of you who passed 5th grade civics class I apologize for the review; it’s more for our illustrious representatives): The opening to the founding document and the highest law in the land begins with “We the People,” includes numerations of rights assured to the people (including Freedom of Speech and Expression), and has been interpreted by one of our greatest Presidents as meaning a nation, “for the People, by the People, and of the People.” Even our Declaration of Independence describes the fundamental principles on which liberty is founded and includes, in part, a description of legitimate government as being, “Government by consent of the governed,” and assures us of the right to alter or abolish any unjust government that has become so oppressive as to be tyrannical in nature and practice. Above all though, these documents make it clear that the entire purpose of the legislature (state and/or federal) is to listen to the constituency and act according to what the people want (while protecting the minority from abuse).
Now the current way things work: The legislature is elected by infusing commercials with misinformation and relying on the comparatively tiny amount of voters that participate. Once in office, the majority of them rely on “Campaign Contributions” from special interest groups while conveniently ignoring the pleas of their people (or at least the ones without money).
All of this leads me to the group CodePink, a women’s anti-war group that frequents congressional hearings (their right as citizens) and are routinely thrown out for “disruptions” no different than Republican disruptions in a Democratic congress and vice versa. A good deal of them are Mr. McCain’s constituents, yet because of their unpopular opinion, he calls them scum. Sen. Feinstein (D) threw them out of a CIA confirmation hearing because of less than audible disruptions: Audio of Hearing and no Congress or Executive has given credence to this large movement (a very poignant fallback to the difficulties of the Suffragettes).
If the problem is not evident by now, let me spell it out. While I may agree with CodePink and what they are trying to do, that point is irrelevant. I disagree with Westboro Baptist Church, the KKK, and many other bigoted groups, but they still have the right to express their opinions (so long as they do not interfere with others self-same rights) and should be heard in the context of their overall populace representation. That is what Freedom of Speech means! I may not like what you say (or I may support it on different levels) but everyone has the right to be heard. Government employees at every level are duty bound to hear and give credence to their citizenry. If they feel it is interrupting their important “business” (you know, bilking the public and so forth), their responsibility would be to offer truly public hearings that would allow those voters to express themselves and give the legislature (Executives and Justices as well) the full picture, regardless of personal opinions.
So let CodePink speak, at the very least, with equal opportunity as the wealthy special interest groups. Their message is sound and agreed with by 66% of American (27% Approve): American Current War Support. And their message is not in least bit unsound: CodePink. Yet the opinions of the citizens (unless they pander and flatter to those with money and/or power) are ignored even though Congress works far less than anyone in any country (not counting their “vacation” which come out of your taxes). To verify, follow this link (the blue days are work days and Congress is paid even when they don’t work): Congress work days and what they spent their time on (bear in mind some activities overlap and were done at the same Time: Congressional Breakdown. This is the President’s priorities (golf is more important than poverty apparently): Presidential time. Finally, the Supreme Court works 5 hours per day(End of October to beginning of June, excluding federal holidays, can choose which cases to accept, recesses frequently and takes an enormous amount of time to be even heard and thus works a maximum of 143 days or 715 total hours: Work days Supreme Court Calculator. The point being that no elected official works enough to even logically say they can’t listen to their constituency.
CodePink deserves to be heard and McCain’s comments are indicative of how Congress feels and by extension how the government feels about our populace. They are so disconnected sitting in their golden mansions an deaf ears that they use the guise of democracy (which we have none nor are we headed towards it again) and placate the people with plenty of gadgets, games, and make sure no one notices the clear violations of the social contract (for example, several wars that are killing our young people in droves but few efforts are being made to change things because as long as we have “Candy Crush” we can ignore our attempt to occupy the world and keep our populace ignorant by reducing education, science, etc.). If we were to educate our young and old people we might understand CodePink, and at least have rational debates on the many viewpoints out there.
I fear, however, that we have past this point. The income divide is too great and the people too indolent to make the changes necessary. I encourage CodePink and any of those who share the beliefs of a free, peaceful, and united nation to join together in arms to set up and defend a nation founded and sealed on truth, justice, liberty, equality, and brotherhood (sisterhood, etc.). We have been oppressed and insulted by the wealthy rulers long enough, We must join together and exercise our right to revolt: Declaration of Independence. If a new and better nation that listens and addresses your complaints, concerns, ideas, etc. sounds like a place you would want to be a part of, feel free to contact me. If you believe we can save this current United States, please contact me for a rational discourse. I am always looking for new ways of looking at things.
Foundational Documents:
The Right to know
When Edward Snowden made his disclosures regarding the NSA’s actions against their own citizens and against our allies abroad, Americans responded with a less than adequate level of disgust. Senators, attempting to pander to their constituents called him a traitor and used words like “treason” and “terrorist”. Americans still did not respond. The question, however, remains one of immense importance regardless of the response of the citizenry. Do we have the right to know what the government is doing? In matters like the Manhattan Project it was an easy question to answer. During that time citizens knowing what the government was doing could have put the whole world at risk. This time, however, is much different. We are not talking about a weapon or even the plans of a war, we are talking about domestic surveillance of innocent people with the remote chance a threat might be found. As a free society, we have the right and the duty to know that our government is conducting these kinds of activities. We have the right to know when our government is putting us at risk by listening to our allies covertly. They are, after all, our allies and we should do everything we can to make sure that alliance is not jeopardized by some power hungry bureaucracy. Our senators responding by calling him names and attempting to extradite him so vigorously should raise the alarm that Snowden’s disclosures were only the tip of the iceberg. Indeed I wonder if this post will not subject me to surveillance by the government I have put my faith in to protect me. The right of the people to know the abuses of power of their government is an absolute. The right to privacy is what separates us from the people who seek to destroy us. It does not mean we are doing anything wrong (I use the restroom in private and I am not doing anything wrong, it is simply something I have the right to choose not to share with my government) it simply means we are exercising a fundamental right that all men and women should have. Snowden is not a traitor or terrorist, he is a refugee from a government that is rapidly heading towards a Big Brother kind of society. The reaction of the citizenry is not just disappointing, but disgusting. We can raise troops of protesters for a murder in Florida, but we can’t even raise a finger to petition our own government to stop their heinous crimes against their own citizens. Both issues are important, and we must, to continue to live free, react equally as vigorously to the revelations of Mr. Snowden as we did to the acquittal of Mr. Zimmerman. What do you think about Edward Snowden?
The Valeyard 