Tuesday-July 12, 2011
What is victory and what is defeat?
When we consider the question of victory and defeat, I believe that most of us would choose victory over defeat. I think it is fair to assume that defeat is not in most of our thoughts or in our vernacular on a daily basis. At least that is the way it is for me. But then again that’s me.
Last Friday, I wrote about what I would do if I were fortunate enough to represent the people. Yesterday, I echoed those words again.
Today, I am echoing some other words by some other people who do serve the people. The names don’t matter, but the thoughts do. Some say the American public thinks there should be shared sacrifice. Some say the rich, like millionaires, don’t pay their fair share in taxes. Some say no pain, no gain. Some even went as far to say we should raise taxes on the rich, so we don’t cut spending that would help the poor.
Yesterday, I wrote about a great map. Last week, I wrote about the first view our forefathers had when they heard the words of The Declaration of Independence for the first time. Though I am writing my opinion, I believe that opinion of mine is pretty close to what they saw and felt in their gut.
Yesterday, I wrote about a map in hopes of tying in the theme of Independence a little bit more this month: This great map two centuries ago illustrated what the Eastern part of the country meant to a new country’s liberty and freedom after a Declaration of Independence was written. The great map, as you moved west a century later, pictured Detroit as its future manufacturing capital which was surrounded by the majesty of The Great Lakes. Moving further west, you would have found the land of 10,000 lakes, which has at its tip a great river called the Mississippi, which connected North and South with commerce, the trade in those days was primarily produced here at home. The golden prairies followed on that great map and at its core the typography that outlined the grandeur of the Rockies held the stories of the great men of the mountains that paved the way so trade and intellectual property could be sent to the West Coast, where it was illuminated by the sunshine that starts every morning to its east. This was the goal by those who created it all.
Today, the President wants to tax the rich now and cut spending later. He also wants to raise taxes on the middle class. Many are asking the question: why raise taxes on anybody, when the economy has gotten worse in just the last six months alone? Only the president can answer that and he hasn’t.
The rich, as the president believes them to be, only constitute 1% of the tax payers. They already are scheduled, by law, to pay an additional 1 trillion dollars over the course of ten years. The law is scheduled to take affect in 2014. In addition, tax hikes for everyone that are scheduled to pay for Obama Care will also go into affect by 2014, when Obama care is enacted by law. And the president still wants more out of us.
The Associated Press said of the debt debate: “Proposals under consideration include raising taxes on small business owners and potentially low income families. You won’t hear about that from Obama. Instead, the President focuses on the very rich and speaks euphemistically.”
You might say that my thoughts are a bit fragmented today, even the spell check on the computer say they are. This is intentional on my part, because I am trying to prove a point. That point is this: the president’s plan, his wishes, his demands, call it what you want, are fragmented and this is why there is no consensus in Washington and worse, no confidence in what comes out of Washington.
Everyone on the left today will demonize the Tea Party. There is no reason to because the Tea Party is the only group who is making any sense. Don’t demonize them; support them, because they are not a fragmented group. Their thoughts are not fragmented, because they say one thing and one thing only: “Taxed enough already.”
The month of July in our history is loaded with significant events; tomorrow date holds two of them:
The Ordinance of 1787 was passed on July 13, 1787. The Northwest Ordinance (formally An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States, North-West of the River Ohio, and also known as the Freedom Ordinance or "The Ordinance of 1787") was an act of the Congress of the Confederation of the United States. The primary effect of the ordinance was the creation of the Northwest Territory as the first organized territory of the United States out of the region south of the Great Lakes, north and west of the Ohio River, and east of the Mississippi River. It also said that a territory can become 3 to 5 states at 60,000 in population. This ordinance also excluded slavery.
On July 13, 1832 the source of the Mississippi River was discovered.
I didn’t know this bit of history yesterday when I wrote about my thoughts of the great map, though these two dates helped with the growth of the map. That’s not important. What is important is that the greatness of the great map and the movement of the country was always towards Independence. We continually asked how a nation can make more of it.
Liberty and freedom was also the result of the movement towards Independence. The other question of how do we secure our future as a country and how do we secure, as the Constitution says, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” A country full of opportunity for the living and the unborn, our posterity, was the answer then and still should remain the answer today.
We have not run out of land, because of the westward expansion, but we are running out of opportunities that the westward expansion provided. We are running out of opportunities, because there is no more confidence with what that map gave. What is coming out of Washington is not creating the view that must have been present when that expansion to the west started. The confidence that was displayed by the early settlers and the early patriots is absent from the current scene. It is confidence in victory of thought and victory over peril that made America strong.
We now are experiencing defeat, because of the paralysis that the rich, the small business owner and now the struggling middle class are experiencing. This is what diminishes the opportunity for victory. And the president still wants more out of us.
It is no wonder that the next great horizon of America is now in question. It is no wonder that the next great horizon is being eclipsed by the nations that were kept in our rearview mirror, because of our victories.
All is not lost. Define for yourself what victory is. When you do, you will come to see that low taxes, reform of entitlements and freedom to expand liberty through independence are what worked before the malaise of Obama. Victory in 2012 will give victory in the biggest repeals in American history. When that happens, the world will see what victory is and they will feel the defeat when we restore the opportunities that those who created it all saw for the first time!
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: Victory is for the living. Opportunity is what we must guarantee for our posterity. This is all the victory that I need and this is what I am focusing on so that defeat is in our rearview mirror.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Monday, July 11, 2011
The killing field:
Monday – July 11, 2011
The killing field:
The FORUM from last Friday covered a lot of material. When I started to write two years ago on a daily basis, I was lucky if I could fill a half sheet of paper. I am not trying to put a lot of words on the sheet now so that it weighs a lot in hopes that it passes with a good grade.
What I am finding out is that there is so much material. There are so many facts and there is so many ways of posturing my thoughts and conveying those thoughts in a well articulated way so that my argument is well positioned, but better yet, my proof in defending my argument is understood and one that could be considered. I am not trying to change minds. What I am trying to do is make people think twice about their position and what effect their position has on the survival of our liberty and our freedom which is now under assault.
I wrote on Friday: “If I were fortunate enough to be representing the people today, I would be looking to find the answers through the prism of what Jefferson and Adams view was. I would be testing legislation through the Constitutional litmus rather than the entitlement litmus that runs Washington today. I would be looking at tax and spending issues through the prism of wealth generation and not through the prism of shared responsibility and spreading the wealth. I would be looking to create equal opportunity and not making an attempt to equalize the results of equal opportunity.
If I were fortunate enough to represent the people, I would not make a career out of it but rather to create the view of what was seen through the creation of these words: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”
In order to grow a more perfect union, our posterity must be given the chance to experience the promotion of general welfare, not through entitlements but through free enterprise, free markets and the freedom that our way of life brings if unaltered and if kept alone. Those who believe in liberty and who were taught to respect the law and who through moral standards create the wealth are the ones that will create an environment for our posterity to do the same. This is what I believe was the first view that our forefathers saw.”
These words could be a part of a future campaign speech or it could be a part of what I truly believe. Seeing that it is not a speech yet, you can trust that this is what I truly believe.
I was stunned when I heard what Bill Maher said last week. When I consider what I believe and what people like Bill Maher believe, I ask that you go to your higher sense and let him know that he is absolutely wrong and that his ignorance has now made him a part of the killing field.
Maher said: “If you can look at a crime where everything points to one answer and not see it you are a dumb****. If you can look at the deficit and not see that the problem is that the rich stop paying taxes you’re a Republican. Yes, Republican base, you are just like that jury. It is pathetically clear who’s killing the middle class but you keep letting them get away with murder.”
His remarks were in reference to the Casey Anthony verdict by a jury of her peers. How he got from there to what he said is any ones guess. What he didn’t say is, like it or not, our system worked for Ms. Anthony. I don’t blame the jury. I blame three people for the verdict. I blame Nancy Grace, I blame the judge and I blame the prosecutor. I would like to know what political party they attach themselves to. You’ll notice that I didn’t blame one Republican.
Our jury system and our court system are connected by strands of legalese, legal posturing and legal evidence. The facts Mr. Maher didn’t fit into his pathetic monolog was that the prosecutor failed to convict the defendant. The prosecutor overcharged the defendant. The judge didn’t manage the trial and Nancy Grace sensationalized it from the get go. If the case were not sensationalized, it would have become a local court case, with a verdict that was in line with the alleged crime. In the end, after three years, Ms. Anthony was not proven guilty. The verdict was not the result of a Republican, nor was it because the rich don’t pay taxes.
How Mr. Maher got from murder to taxes and then interjecting the Republicans is beyond me. I don’t think I want to get into the mind of Bill Maher, because it just might scare me to much. Oh by the way, 100% of the O.J. jury were all registered Democrats, but who is keeping score?
Some other facts that Mr. Maher didn’t work into his monolog is that the income tax breakdown in the US lets the poorest which constitute 40% of tax payers, pay nothing. My source for this information comes from the tax foundation analysis of the IRS. It was also George W. Bush who took the poorest off the tax roles when he proposed his tax cuts. This part of the tax cut should be repealed.
The problem we have in the country today is 9.2% unemployment and that rate is rising. Last month only 8,000 jobs were created. That breaks down to just 1 job created for every 1000 people out of work. This statistic and the creators of this statistic are part of the killing field that I am writing about today.
As the debt ceiling debate continues in Washington, the lawyers, the strategists and the politicians are making their arguments. At the same time, the only city in the country that has posted gains in home values, and that has posted huge increases in housing sales is Washington D.C. At the same time, the only city that is showing job gains in America is Washington, D.C. It is the rest of the country that has posted the largest drop in home values since the great depression and it is the rest of the country that is posting more jobless claims. It is the rest of the country, not Washington, D.C., that has become the killing field by those in Washington, DC.
In Washington this week a new bill called - The better use of the light bulb act – will be sponsored. This bill is designed to let consumers buy the kind of light bulbs they want. In January of 2012, incandescent light bulbs, the one Thomas Edison lit the world with, will be outlawed in the United States. The new ban will require every American to buy the new Compact Fluorescent Bulb which contains Mercury.
The typical 100 watt Incandescent light bulb has a cost of (.60) sixty cents per bulb. The typical 25 watt CFL which contains mercury cost ($3.40) three dollars and forty cents per bulb. These new light bulbs are not made here in the United States they are made solely with 100% content coming from China. You tell me who killed the light bulb jobs and the industry here and then sent it to China. It was not the Republicans, like Bill Maher would have you believe. It was not the Casey Anthony jury that Bill Maher would have you believe. It was your local Democratic party, headed up by the job killer himself, the President in Washington D.C. I have one question. How many homes and how many people were employed in Washington D.C., to kill this industry in the killing field of America?
What ever happens in Washington this week, there still will not be a growth agenda from this administration. High growth equals low unemployment levels. Bad economic policies by the Administration and the Democrats equal high unemployment levels like the current level of 9.2% that was reported last week. Either of which could never be determined by the Casey Anthony jury, Mr. Maher.
One statistic from the G.W. Bush Institute reports that a 1% increase in growth each year for ten years would cut $750 billion dollars a year from the deficit if jobs were being created that kept American dollars here at home. Low deficits mean low unemployment rates. In order to do this, the Corporate Tax rate in America must be lowered; currently it is the highest in the developed world and is the main cause of businesses moving off shore.
I hope that I have offered some new evidence to back up my argument about the killing field that is occurring all over the great map of America.
This great map two centuries ago illustrated what the Eastern part of the country meant to a new country’s liberty and freedom after a Declaration of Independence was written. The great map, as you moved west a century later, pictured Detroit as its future manufacturing capital which was surrounded by the majesty of The Great Lakes. Moving further west, you would have found the land of 10,000 lakes, which has at its tip a great river called the Mississippi, which connected North and South with commerce, the trade in those days was primarily produced here at home. The golden prairies followed on that great map and at its core the typography that outlined the grandeur of the Rockies held the stories of the great men of the mountains that paved the way so trade and intellectual property could be sent to the West Coast, where it was illuminated by the sunshine that starts every morning to its east. This was the goal by those who created it all.
I still believe in this great map, but it can no longer remain the killing field by people who either don’t understand or would like to change what that great map once represented.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: The killing field must now become the field that creates new economic life through ideas of great people who are willing to take great chances at their personal expense. Entrepreneurs that made the great economic contributions of the last two centuries can still be the example today to new entrepreneurs if given the same great chance and the same great opportunities. But these opportunities cannot be killed in the field by those who don’t understand the great map.
Today’s FORUM is dedicated to two great friends, Dan and Glen. Thanks for the support!
The killing field:
The FORUM from last Friday covered a lot of material. When I started to write two years ago on a daily basis, I was lucky if I could fill a half sheet of paper. I am not trying to put a lot of words on the sheet now so that it weighs a lot in hopes that it passes with a good grade.
What I am finding out is that there is so much material. There are so many facts and there is so many ways of posturing my thoughts and conveying those thoughts in a well articulated way so that my argument is well positioned, but better yet, my proof in defending my argument is understood and one that could be considered. I am not trying to change minds. What I am trying to do is make people think twice about their position and what effect their position has on the survival of our liberty and our freedom which is now under assault.
I wrote on Friday: “If I were fortunate enough to be representing the people today, I would be looking to find the answers through the prism of what Jefferson and Adams view was. I would be testing legislation through the Constitutional litmus rather than the entitlement litmus that runs Washington today. I would be looking at tax and spending issues through the prism of wealth generation and not through the prism of shared responsibility and spreading the wealth. I would be looking to create equal opportunity and not making an attempt to equalize the results of equal opportunity.
If I were fortunate enough to represent the people, I would not make a career out of it but rather to create the view of what was seen through the creation of these words: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”
In order to grow a more perfect union, our posterity must be given the chance to experience the promotion of general welfare, not through entitlements but through free enterprise, free markets and the freedom that our way of life brings if unaltered and if kept alone. Those who believe in liberty and who were taught to respect the law and who through moral standards create the wealth are the ones that will create an environment for our posterity to do the same. This is what I believe was the first view that our forefathers saw.”
These words could be a part of a future campaign speech or it could be a part of what I truly believe. Seeing that it is not a speech yet, you can trust that this is what I truly believe.
I was stunned when I heard what Bill Maher said last week. When I consider what I believe and what people like Bill Maher believe, I ask that you go to your higher sense and let him know that he is absolutely wrong and that his ignorance has now made him a part of the killing field.
Maher said: “If you can look at a crime where everything points to one answer and not see it you are a dumb****. If you can look at the deficit and not see that the problem is that the rich stop paying taxes you’re a Republican. Yes, Republican base, you are just like that jury. It is pathetically clear who’s killing the middle class but you keep letting them get away with murder.”
His remarks were in reference to the Casey Anthony verdict by a jury of her peers. How he got from there to what he said is any ones guess. What he didn’t say is, like it or not, our system worked for Ms. Anthony. I don’t blame the jury. I blame three people for the verdict. I blame Nancy Grace, I blame the judge and I blame the prosecutor. I would like to know what political party they attach themselves to. You’ll notice that I didn’t blame one Republican.
Our jury system and our court system are connected by strands of legalese, legal posturing and legal evidence. The facts Mr. Maher didn’t fit into his pathetic monolog was that the prosecutor failed to convict the defendant. The prosecutor overcharged the defendant. The judge didn’t manage the trial and Nancy Grace sensationalized it from the get go. If the case were not sensationalized, it would have become a local court case, with a verdict that was in line with the alleged crime. In the end, after three years, Ms. Anthony was not proven guilty. The verdict was not the result of a Republican, nor was it because the rich don’t pay taxes.
How Mr. Maher got from murder to taxes and then interjecting the Republicans is beyond me. I don’t think I want to get into the mind of Bill Maher, because it just might scare me to much. Oh by the way, 100% of the O.J. jury were all registered Democrats, but who is keeping score?
Some other facts that Mr. Maher didn’t work into his monolog is that the income tax breakdown in the US lets the poorest which constitute 40% of tax payers, pay nothing. My source for this information comes from the tax foundation analysis of the IRS. It was also George W. Bush who took the poorest off the tax roles when he proposed his tax cuts. This part of the tax cut should be repealed.
The problem we have in the country today is 9.2% unemployment and that rate is rising. Last month only 8,000 jobs were created. That breaks down to just 1 job created for every 1000 people out of work. This statistic and the creators of this statistic are part of the killing field that I am writing about today.
As the debt ceiling debate continues in Washington, the lawyers, the strategists and the politicians are making their arguments. At the same time, the only city in the country that has posted gains in home values, and that has posted huge increases in housing sales is Washington D.C. At the same time, the only city that is showing job gains in America is Washington, D.C. It is the rest of the country that has posted the largest drop in home values since the great depression and it is the rest of the country that is posting more jobless claims. It is the rest of the country, not Washington, D.C., that has become the killing field by those in Washington, DC.
In Washington this week a new bill called - The better use of the light bulb act – will be sponsored. This bill is designed to let consumers buy the kind of light bulbs they want. In January of 2012, incandescent light bulbs, the one Thomas Edison lit the world with, will be outlawed in the United States. The new ban will require every American to buy the new Compact Fluorescent Bulb which contains Mercury.
The typical 100 watt Incandescent light bulb has a cost of (.60) sixty cents per bulb. The typical 25 watt CFL which contains mercury cost ($3.40) three dollars and forty cents per bulb. These new light bulbs are not made here in the United States they are made solely with 100% content coming from China. You tell me who killed the light bulb jobs and the industry here and then sent it to China. It was not the Republicans, like Bill Maher would have you believe. It was not the Casey Anthony jury that Bill Maher would have you believe. It was your local Democratic party, headed up by the job killer himself, the President in Washington D.C. I have one question. How many homes and how many people were employed in Washington D.C., to kill this industry in the killing field of America?
What ever happens in Washington this week, there still will not be a growth agenda from this administration. High growth equals low unemployment levels. Bad economic policies by the Administration and the Democrats equal high unemployment levels like the current level of 9.2% that was reported last week. Either of which could never be determined by the Casey Anthony jury, Mr. Maher.
One statistic from the G.W. Bush Institute reports that a 1% increase in growth each year for ten years would cut $750 billion dollars a year from the deficit if jobs were being created that kept American dollars here at home. Low deficits mean low unemployment rates. In order to do this, the Corporate Tax rate in America must be lowered; currently it is the highest in the developed world and is the main cause of businesses moving off shore.
I hope that I have offered some new evidence to back up my argument about the killing field that is occurring all over the great map of America.
This great map two centuries ago illustrated what the Eastern part of the country meant to a new country’s liberty and freedom after a Declaration of Independence was written. The great map, as you moved west a century later, pictured Detroit as its future manufacturing capital which was surrounded by the majesty of The Great Lakes. Moving further west, you would have found the land of 10,000 lakes, which has at its tip a great river called the Mississippi, which connected North and South with commerce, the trade in those days was primarily produced here at home. The golden prairies followed on that great map and at its core the typography that outlined the grandeur of the Rockies held the stories of the great men of the mountains that paved the way so trade and intellectual property could be sent to the West Coast, where it was illuminated by the sunshine that starts every morning to its east. This was the goal by those who created it all.
I still believe in this great map, but it can no longer remain the killing field by people who either don’t understand or would like to change what that great map once represented.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: The killing field must now become the field that creates new economic life through ideas of great people who are willing to take great chances at their personal expense. Entrepreneurs that made the great economic contributions of the last two centuries can still be the example today to new entrepreneurs if given the same great chance and the same great opportunities. But these opportunities cannot be killed in the field by those who don’t understand the great map.
Today’s FORUM is dedicated to two great friends, Dan and Glen. Thanks for the support!
Saturday, July 9, 2011
The first view!
July 8, 2011
The first view!
On today’s date, in 1776, John Nixon gave the first public reading of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia.
Upon finalizing the text of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776 Congress issued the Declaration in several forms. It was initially published as a printed broadside that was widely distributed and read to the public. The most famous version of the Declaration, a signed copy that is usually regarded as the Declaration of Independence, is on display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Although the wording of the Declaration was approved on July 4, the date of its signing has been disputed. Most historians have concluded that it was signed nearly a month after its adoption, on August 2, 1776, and not on July 4, as is commonly believed.
The sources and interpretation of the Declaration has been the subject of much scholarly inquiry. The Declaration justified the independence of the United States by listing colonial grievances against King George III, and by asserting certain natural and legal rights, including a right of revolution. Having served its original purpose in announcing independence, the text of the Declaration was initially ignored after the American Revolution. However, its stature grew over the years, particularly the second sentence, which brings human rights into the political structure of the colonies. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
This sentence has been called "one of the best-known sentences in the English language" and "the most potent and consequential words in American history". The passage has often been used to promote the rights of marginalized people, and came to represent a moral standard for which the United States should strive. This view was notably promoted by Abraham Lincoln, who considered the Declaration to be the foundation of his political philosophy, and argued that the Declaration is a statement of principles through which the United States Constitution should be interpreted.
It is fitting that in July we talk about independence and it is essential that we understand the reasons why our independence was sought.
This week, I have tried to bring into focus some of the facts and a few of the political considerations that our forefathers were aware of and used to their benefit in developing the concept of independence from Great Britain. Jefferson who has been credited for the draft and the final wording was in fact in love with the idea of a separate nation under its own rule. He along with many of the original signers made it abundantly clear that with independence would come the question of self rule and that the governed have the final say over their government.
Jefferson wrote: “Believe me, dear Sir: there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America.”
—Thomas Jefferson, November 29, 1775
By the time the Declaration of Independence was adopted in July 1776, the Thirteen Colonies and Great Britain had been at war for more than a year. Relations between the colonies and the mother country had been deteriorating since the end of the Seven Years' War in 1763. The war had plunged the British government deep into debt, and so Parliament enacted a series of measures to increase tax revenue from the colonies. Parliament believed that these acts, such as the Stamp Act of 1765 and the Townshend Acts of 1767 were a legitimate means of having the colonies pay their fair share of the costs to keep the colonies in the British Empire.
Many colonists, however, had developed a different conception of the empire. Because the colonies were not directly represented in Parliament, colonists argued that Parliament had no right to levy taxes upon them. This tax dispute was part of a larger divergence between British and American interpretations of the British Constitution and the extent of Parliament's authority in the colonies. The orthodox British view, dating from the “Glorious Revolution of 1688”, was that Parliament was the supreme authority throughout the empire and so, by definition, anything Parliament did was constitutional.
In the colonies, however, the idea had developed that the British Constitution recognized certain fundamental rights that no government—not even Parliament—could violate. After the Townshend Acts, some essayists even began to question whether Parliament had any legitimate jurisdiction in the colonies at all. Anticipating the arrangement of the British Commonwealth by 1774 American writers such as Samuel Adams, James Wilson, and Thomas Jefferson were arguing that Parliament was the legislature of Great Britain only, and that the colonies, which had their own legislatures, were connected to the rest of the empire only through their allegiance to the Crown.
Now that you have the first view of how our Declaration of Independence came to be, we must start to ask the same questions that Jefferson, Adams and Wilson were asking. The questions today are the same as they were then. It is over jurisdiction; the rights of separate state legislatures, fundamental principles and “among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The answers to the essential questions we have today should be viewed through the prism of history and what the historical facts tell us. The first view of our independence was through “certain unalienable” rights and not through what politicians believe our rights should be.
If I were fortunate enough to be representing the people today, I would be looking to find the answers through the prism of what Jefferson and Adams view was. I would be testing legislation through the Constitutional litmus rather than the entitlement litmus that runs Washington today. I would be looking at tax and spending issues through the prism of wealth generation and not through the prism of shared responsibility and spreading the wealth. I would be looking to create equal opportunity and not making an attempt to equalize the results of equal opportunity.
If I were fortunate enough to represent the people, I would not make a career out of it but rather to create the view of what was seen through the creation of these words: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”
In order to grow a more perfect union, our posterity must be given the chance to experience the promotion of general welfare, not through entitlements but through free enterprise, free markets and the freedom that our way of life brings if unaltered and if kept alone. Those who believe in liberty and who were taught to respect the law and who through moral standards create the wealth are the ones that will create an environment for our posterity to do the same. This is what I believe was the first view that our forefathers saw.
I end each week with a quote: “If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair.”
-George Washington
The first view is the correct view, because it is unhampered and it is so inspiring. But then again, this is just my opinion.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: The prism in which I speak of can be viewed for the first time if you view the original context of what independence, liberty and freedom was designed to give. Government could never provide it because the view of the forefathers put the responsibility into the hands of the governed. We must view the principals of what Jefferson put into words and what Lincoln saw.
The first view!
On today’s date, in 1776, John Nixon gave the first public reading of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia.
Upon finalizing the text of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776 Congress issued the Declaration in several forms. It was initially published as a printed broadside that was widely distributed and read to the public. The most famous version of the Declaration, a signed copy that is usually regarded as the Declaration of Independence, is on display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Although the wording of the Declaration was approved on July 4, the date of its signing has been disputed. Most historians have concluded that it was signed nearly a month after its adoption, on August 2, 1776, and not on July 4, as is commonly believed.
The sources and interpretation of the Declaration has been the subject of much scholarly inquiry. The Declaration justified the independence of the United States by listing colonial grievances against King George III, and by asserting certain natural and legal rights, including a right of revolution. Having served its original purpose in announcing independence, the text of the Declaration was initially ignored after the American Revolution. However, its stature grew over the years, particularly the second sentence, which brings human rights into the political structure of the colonies. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
This sentence has been called "one of the best-known sentences in the English language" and "the most potent and consequential words in American history". The passage has often been used to promote the rights of marginalized people, and came to represent a moral standard for which the United States should strive. This view was notably promoted by Abraham Lincoln, who considered the Declaration to be the foundation of his political philosophy, and argued that the Declaration is a statement of principles through which the United States Constitution should be interpreted.
It is fitting that in July we talk about independence and it is essential that we understand the reasons why our independence was sought.
This week, I have tried to bring into focus some of the facts and a few of the political considerations that our forefathers were aware of and used to their benefit in developing the concept of independence from Great Britain. Jefferson who has been credited for the draft and the final wording was in fact in love with the idea of a separate nation under its own rule. He along with many of the original signers made it abundantly clear that with independence would come the question of self rule and that the governed have the final say over their government.
Jefferson wrote: “Believe me, dear Sir: there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America.”
—Thomas Jefferson, November 29, 1775
By the time the Declaration of Independence was adopted in July 1776, the Thirteen Colonies and Great Britain had been at war for more than a year. Relations between the colonies and the mother country had been deteriorating since the end of the Seven Years' War in 1763. The war had plunged the British government deep into debt, and so Parliament enacted a series of measures to increase tax revenue from the colonies. Parliament believed that these acts, such as the Stamp Act of 1765 and the Townshend Acts of 1767 were a legitimate means of having the colonies pay their fair share of the costs to keep the colonies in the British Empire.
Many colonists, however, had developed a different conception of the empire. Because the colonies were not directly represented in Parliament, colonists argued that Parliament had no right to levy taxes upon them. This tax dispute was part of a larger divergence between British and American interpretations of the British Constitution and the extent of Parliament's authority in the colonies. The orthodox British view, dating from the “Glorious Revolution of 1688”, was that Parliament was the supreme authority throughout the empire and so, by definition, anything Parliament did was constitutional.
In the colonies, however, the idea had developed that the British Constitution recognized certain fundamental rights that no government—not even Parliament—could violate. After the Townshend Acts, some essayists even began to question whether Parliament had any legitimate jurisdiction in the colonies at all. Anticipating the arrangement of the British Commonwealth by 1774 American writers such as Samuel Adams, James Wilson, and Thomas Jefferson were arguing that Parliament was the legislature of Great Britain only, and that the colonies, which had their own legislatures, were connected to the rest of the empire only through their allegiance to the Crown.
Now that you have the first view of how our Declaration of Independence came to be, we must start to ask the same questions that Jefferson, Adams and Wilson were asking. The questions today are the same as they were then. It is over jurisdiction; the rights of separate state legislatures, fundamental principles and “among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The answers to the essential questions we have today should be viewed through the prism of history and what the historical facts tell us. The first view of our independence was through “certain unalienable” rights and not through what politicians believe our rights should be.
If I were fortunate enough to be representing the people today, I would be looking to find the answers through the prism of what Jefferson and Adams view was. I would be testing legislation through the Constitutional litmus rather than the entitlement litmus that runs Washington today. I would be looking at tax and spending issues through the prism of wealth generation and not through the prism of shared responsibility and spreading the wealth. I would be looking to create equal opportunity and not making an attempt to equalize the results of equal opportunity.
If I were fortunate enough to represent the people, I would not make a career out of it but rather to create the view of what was seen through the creation of these words: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”
In order to grow a more perfect union, our posterity must be given the chance to experience the promotion of general welfare, not through entitlements but through free enterprise, free markets and the freedom that our way of life brings if unaltered and if kept alone. Those who believe in liberty and who were taught to respect the law and who through moral standards create the wealth are the ones that will create an environment for our posterity to do the same. This is what I believe was the first view that our forefathers saw.
I end each week with a quote: “If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair.”
-George Washington
The first view is the correct view, because it is unhampered and it is so inspiring. But then again, this is just my opinion.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: The prism in which I speak of can be viewed for the first time if you view the original context of what independence, liberty and freedom was designed to give. Government could never provide it because the view of the forefathers put the responsibility into the hands of the governed. We must view the principals of what Jefferson put into words and what Lincoln saw.
Friday, July 8, 2011
The old one two:
Thursday-July 7, 2011
The old one two:
Everyone in Washington is talking tough. Everyone in Washington is holding their ground, with regard to raising the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is the limit at which the government can borrow money.
On May 16, of this year, the United States hit it’s legal debt limit of $14.3 trillion. Unless that limit is raised, the Treasury will, on Aug. 2, be unable to pay its bills. It will have to either stop spending money on government programs or default on paying the nation’s creditors. This is the standard line, none of which is likely to happen.
The White House is trying to convince Congressional Republicans that the debt ceiling needs to be raised. The impasse is how to constrain the deficit’s rapid growth due to governmental spending. Meanwhile, some people have theorized that there’s a way to get around the debt limit.
Several law professors and Senators, even Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, have suggested that section 4 of the 14th Amendment, known as the public debt clause, might provide a silver bullet. This provision states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law ... shall not be questioned.” They argue that the public debt clause is sufficient to nullify the ceiling — or can be used to permit the president to borrow money without regard to the ceiling.
The Supreme Court has addressed the public debt clause only once, in 1935, in the case of Perry v. United States. The court observed only that the clause confirmed the “fundamental principle” that Congress may not “alter or destroy” debts already incurred.
Some have argued that this principle prohibits any government action that “jeopardizes” the validity of the public debt. By increasing the risk of default, they contend, any debt ceiling automatically violates the public debt clause.
This argument goes too far. It would mean that any budget deficit, tax cut or spending increase could be attacked on constitutional grounds, because each of those actions slightly increases the probability of default. Moreover, the argument is self-defeating. If it were correct, the absence of a debt ceiling could likewise be attacked as unconstitutional — after all, the greater the nation’s debt, the greater the difficulty of repaying it, and the higher the probability of default.
Both approaches provide the false hope of a legal answer that obviates the need for a real solution.
The Constitution grants only Congress — not the president — the power “to borrow money on the credit of the United States.” Nothing in the 14th Amendment or in any other Constitutional provision suggests that the president may usurp legislative power to prevent a violation of the Constitution. Moreover, it is well established that the president’s power drops to what Justice Robert H. Jackson called its “lowest ebb” when exercised against the express will of Congress.
Worse, the argument that the president may do whatever is necessary to avoid default has no logical stopping point. In theory, Congress could pay debts not only by borrowing more money, but also by exercising its powers to impose taxes, to coin money or to sell federal property. If the president could usurp the congressional power to borrow, what would stop him from taking over all these other powers, as well?
There comes a time when true leaders must say enough is enough. Yesterday, the title of the FORUM was “the responsible one”. I tried to put into words the intent Jefferson had when writing the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson was the responsible one who through his words illustrated the words of independence to a nation that was in need of a leader.
In short, today’s FORUM simply says that the Republicans should not give into the demands of the Democrats or the president. The Republicans should be saying that the Democrats demands are irrelevant, they are wrong for the times and that raising the debt ceiling will rob future generations of their wealth. The Republicans must start driving home the point that the president and the democrats and no one else are the ones that are responsible for the nation’s ills today. The president should be called down on his attempt to make this crisis political and on his attempt to walk away from the responsibility of his actions.
The president’s rhetoric about the tax breaks for corporate jets, as being the problem of why there is a debt crisis, is insane and is ludicrous. The president must be given the old one-two in the most American of ways. The president must be stopped and the Republicans must stand their ground and not give in to the demands of the Democrats. If the Republicans say no to raising the debt ceiling, the president will be forced to run the government on what the government takes in. What is so wrong with that?
The country will not default on making the payments or making the payments on the interest owed. The country might have to reduce the size of government so that the cost of entitlement spending is possible for the short term, what is so wrong with that?
The Democrats are talking about raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans as a way to create more revenue. It is a proven fact that raising taxes only hurts economic growth especially in a downward economic cycle. We need new jobs so that there are new tax payers contributing to the system so that we don’t have to borrow money to keep the entitlements afloat. The problem we have today is that we spend more than we bring in. The other part of the problem is that 48% of Americans don’t pay any tax at all. The question must be asked: who is responsible for that?
Until an argument can be made over the truth of our debt nothing will be done. Raising taxes and eliminating the depreciation on corporate jets alone will not solve the problem. Waging war on the middle class and initiating class warfare alone is not the way out of the dilemma that we find ourselves in.
The way out is having the Republicans stand their ground and give the opposition the old one-two punch. This consists of telling the truth and facing the facts and giving a reason why we should not rob our posterity for false prosperity today.
It offends me that the president thinks that he has a Constitutional right to borrow on the nation’s credit. If the forefathers thought this was true, then their words about liberty, freedom and independence would never have seen the light of day.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: The old one-two punch is strictly an American thing. Giving the old one-two is what Washington continues to do to us. It’s time to reverse that trend!
Todays FORUM is dedicated to my good friend who just joined!
The old one two:
Everyone in Washington is talking tough. Everyone in Washington is holding their ground, with regard to raising the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is the limit at which the government can borrow money.
On May 16, of this year, the United States hit it’s legal debt limit of $14.3 trillion. Unless that limit is raised, the Treasury will, on Aug. 2, be unable to pay its bills. It will have to either stop spending money on government programs or default on paying the nation’s creditors. This is the standard line, none of which is likely to happen.
The White House is trying to convince Congressional Republicans that the debt ceiling needs to be raised. The impasse is how to constrain the deficit’s rapid growth due to governmental spending. Meanwhile, some people have theorized that there’s a way to get around the debt limit.
Several law professors and Senators, even Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, have suggested that section 4 of the 14th Amendment, known as the public debt clause, might provide a silver bullet. This provision states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law ... shall not be questioned.” They argue that the public debt clause is sufficient to nullify the ceiling — or can be used to permit the president to borrow money without regard to the ceiling.
The Supreme Court has addressed the public debt clause only once, in 1935, in the case of Perry v. United States. The court observed only that the clause confirmed the “fundamental principle” that Congress may not “alter or destroy” debts already incurred.
Some have argued that this principle prohibits any government action that “jeopardizes” the validity of the public debt. By increasing the risk of default, they contend, any debt ceiling automatically violates the public debt clause.
This argument goes too far. It would mean that any budget deficit, tax cut or spending increase could be attacked on constitutional grounds, because each of those actions slightly increases the probability of default. Moreover, the argument is self-defeating. If it were correct, the absence of a debt ceiling could likewise be attacked as unconstitutional — after all, the greater the nation’s debt, the greater the difficulty of repaying it, and the higher the probability of default.
Both approaches provide the false hope of a legal answer that obviates the need for a real solution.
The Constitution grants only Congress — not the president — the power “to borrow money on the credit of the United States.” Nothing in the 14th Amendment or in any other Constitutional provision suggests that the president may usurp legislative power to prevent a violation of the Constitution. Moreover, it is well established that the president’s power drops to what Justice Robert H. Jackson called its “lowest ebb” when exercised against the express will of Congress.
Worse, the argument that the president may do whatever is necessary to avoid default has no logical stopping point. In theory, Congress could pay debts not only by borrowing more money, but also by exercising its powers to impose taxes, to coin money or to sell federal property. If the president could usurp the congressional power to borrow, what would stop him from taking over all these other powers, as well?
There comes a time when true leaders must say enough is enough. Yesterday, the title of the FORUM was “the responsible one”. I tried to put into words the intent Jefferson had when writing the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson was the responsible one who through his words illustrated the words of independence to a nation that was in need of a leader.
In short, today’s FORUM simply says that the Republicans should not give into the demands of the Democrats or the president. The Republicans should be saying that the Democrats demands are irrelevant, they are wrong for the times and that raising the debt ceiling will rob future generations of their wealth. The Republicans must start driving home the point that the president and the democrats and no one else are the ones that are responsible for the nation’s ills today. The president should be called down on his attempt to make this crisis political and on his attempt to walk away from the responsibility of his actions.
The president’s rhetoric about the tax breaks for corporate jets, as being the problem of why there is a debt crisis, is insane and is ludicrous. The president must be given the old one-two in the most American of ways. The president must be stopped and the Republicans must stand their ground and not give in to the demands of the Democrats. If the Republicans say no to raising the debt ceiling, the president will be forced to run the government on what the government takes in. What is so wrong with that?
The country will not default on making the payments or making the payments on the interest owed. The country might have to reduce the size of government so that the cost of entitlement spending is possible for the short term, what is so wrong with that?
The Democrats are talking about raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans as a way to create more revenue. It is a proven fact that raising taxes only hurts economic growth especially in a downward economic cycle. We need new jobs so that there are new tax payers contributing to the system so that we don’t have to borrow money to keep the entitlements afloat. The problem we have today is that we spend more than we bring in. The other part of the problem is that 48% of Americans don’t pay any tax at all. The question must be asked: who is responsible for that?
Until an argument can be made over the truth of our debt nothing will be done. Raising taxes and eliminating the depreciation on corporate jets alone will not solve the problem. Waging war on the middle class and initiating class warfare alone is not the way out of the dilemma that we find ourselves in.
The way out is having the Republicans stand their ground and give the opposition the old one-two punch. This consists of telling the truth and facing the facts and giving a reason why we should not rob our posterity for false prosperity today.
It offends me that the president thinks that he has a Constitutional right to borrow on the nation’s credit. If the forefathers thought this was true, then their words about liberty, freedom and independence would never have seen the light of day.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: The old one-two punch is strictly an American thing. Giving the old one-two is what Washington continues to do to us. It’s time to reverse that trend!
Todays FORUM is dedicated to my good friend who just joined!
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
The responsible one!
Wednesday - July 6, 2011
The responsible one!
When we ask the question who is responsible for a crime, a heroic effort or a job well done, we usually get the answer quickly. The answer can come by what a witness says, a co-worker’s observation, a video taken by a passer by and even through written history.
Usually we find out who the responsible one was when something good happens but when something bad or unexpected happens this is when it becomes a bit more difficult.
This week we celebrated our 235 birthday of declaring independence from Great Britain and King George’s oppressive taxes and his oppressive rule over the colonies.
When we ask the question who is the responsible one, who gave us Independence, we can name off a list of patriots like Franklin, Payne, Adams, Hamilton and Jefferson. But, for today’s FORUM, let’s just say Jefferson was the responsible one. It is easy to credit Jefferson for the Independence that we celebrated on Monday, because he wrote the Declaration of Independence. After all it was submitted by him and it was written in his long hand style of the written word.
The question I have today is this: did Jefferson raise the bar so high that no one else could be the responsible one in giving us independence or in securing our independence. Is the bar raised so high that no one else today thinks that they could fill Jefferson’s shoes or walk a mile in them?
Today, we are waiting for the president’s summit tomorrow, Thursday July 7, regarding managing the nation’s debt and questioning just how high we should raise the debt ceiling, so that the nation can borrow more to spend more. Tomorrow, we will see the president act like the responsible one by coming forth and bringing the two sides of Congress together to find common ground.
When Jefferson and the delegates met, to initially discuss the notion of separation and declaring independence, it was for very much the same reasons that the summit is being held tomorrow. The difference between then and now is that we had responsible people who looked at the nation’s wealth, its promise and the notion that government is to be ruled by the governed.
It took responsible people to secure our independence, our liberty and yes, the freedom that was ours to take, because it was ours to have. While the president and some in Washington speak the words of liberty, freedom and say they want to give us independence from government, they have actually been doing the opposite.
Today’s title “The responsible one” should describe the one person who has striped us of the wealth, the leadership position in the free world and has reduced the capacity for this nation to remain the financial leader of the world. The responsible one has given us record deficits, record unemployment and record government growth into every aspect of our lives.
The responsible one today, the president, remains the leader of the free world. If he wants to lead the free world, why destroy all that secures this nations leadership position? This is the $64,000 question.
Leadership is not asking the other side to surrender. Leadership is not demanding that the rich pay their fair share. Leadership is not creating stimulus after stimulus so that your political allies can profit at the cost of their vote. The question of the debt ceiling, the creation of crisis is not independence and is not what the responsible one 235 years ago by the name of Jefferson had envisioned when he took pen in hand to write what became one of the worlds greatest documents of freedom. In fact, the responsible one 235 years ago has not been out done by the authorship of another document anytime else in history.
The responsible one today had a Twitter session answering questions about the debt and tomorrow’s summit. I don’t want a president spending time on Twitter. I want him to be responsible by following what the rules of the game are. I want a responsible president to manage the nation’s economy with fiscal strength and with moral authority. Jefferson had it, but this president doesn’t. The debt ceiling question can be solved if we solve the problem of spending. The president released a report on the effectiveness of his stimulus. It has cost 666 billion dollars to save or create the 2.4 million jobs that the responsible one said he has created. The 666 billion dollars that was spent to save or create those jobs equates to $278,000 per job. It would have been cheaper to just give each one of those who got those jobs $100,000 cash for their trouble and for the exchange of their vote.
The question we are not asking all those who are responsible is why can’t the government just live within its means? This is the $64,000 question that no can answer let alone gives a chance to be asked.
It took a responsible hand to create the freedom that was born 235 years ago. It also takes an irresponsible hand that will further destroy it tomorrow.
On today’s date, in 1776, the Declaration of Independence was announced on the front page of the “Pennsylvania Evening Gazette.” On today’s date, a year earlier in 1775, Congress issued the “Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms”, listing a list of grievances against the King, but denying the intent to be independent. Even then politics played a role, but the politics led in the direction of independence. Today the politics are reversing the course set in motion by the patriots 236 years ago. The president, the responsible one, today, is leading in the politics of the reversal of our independence instead of the politics of preserving our independence.
Today, we need a leader that recognizes what independence gave us; not only by the words, but in the spirit of the responsible one who put the words to paper and whose actions caused other men to take action.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: 235 years of independence was the result of responsible leaders, 3 years of the loss of independence can be blamed on one person who now is the responsible one for the loss of our independence.
The responsible one!
When we ask the question who is responsible for a crime, a heroic effort or a job well done, we usually get the answer quickly. The answer can come by what a witness says, a co-worker’s observation, a video taken by a passer by and even through written history.
Usually we find out who the responsible one was when something good happens but when something bad or unexpected happens this is when it becomes a bit more difficult.
This week we celebrated our 235 birthday of declaring independence from Great Britain and King George’s oppressive taxes and his oppressive rule over the colonies.
When we ask the question who is the responsible one, who gave us Independence, we can name off a list of patriots like Franklin, Payne, Adams, Hamilton and Jefferson. But, for today’s FORUM, let’s just say Jefferson was the responsible one. It is easy to credit Jefferson for the Independence that we celebrated on Monday, because he wrote the Declaration of Independence. After all it was submitted by him and it was written in his long hand style of the written word.
The question I have today is this: did Jefferson raise the bar so high that no one else could be the responsible one in giving us independence or in securing our independence. Is the bar raised so high that no one else today thinks that they could fill Jefferson’s shoes or walk a mile in them?
Today, we are waiting for the president’s summit tomorrow, Thursday July 7, regarding managing the nation’s debt and questioning just how high we should raise the debt ceiling, so that the nation can borrow more to spend more. Tomorrow, we will see the president act like the responsible one by coming forth and bringing the two sides of Congress together to find common ground.
When Jefferson and the delegates met, to initially discuss the notion of separation and declaring independence, it was for very much the same reasons that the summit is being held tomorrow. The difference between then and now is that we had responsible people who looked at the nation’s wealth, its promise and the notion that government is to be ruled by the governed.
It took responsible people to secure our independence, our liberty and yes, the freedom that was ours to take, because it was ours to have. While the president and some in Washington speak the words of liberty, freedom and say they want to give us independence from government, they have actually been doing the opposite.
Today’s title “The responsible one” should describe the one person who has striped us of the wealth, the leadership position in the free world and has reduced the capacity for this nation to remain the financial leader of the world. The responsible one has given us record deficits, record unemployment and record government growth into every aspect of our lives.
The responsible one today, the president, remains the leader of the free world. If he wants to lead the free world, why destroy all that secures this nations leadership position? This is the $64,000 question.
Leadership is not asking the other side to surrender. Leadership is not demanding that the rich pay their fair share. Leadership is not creating stimulus after stimulus so that your political allies can profit at the cost of their vote. The question of the debt ceiling, the creation of crisis is not independence and is not what the responsible one 235 years ago by the name of Jefferson had envisioned when he took pen in hand to write what became one of the worlds greatest documents of freedom. In fact, the responsible one 235 years ago has not been out done by the authorship of another document anytime else in history.
The responsible one today had a Twitter session answering questions about the debt and tomorrow’s summit. I don’t want a president spending time on Twitter. I want him to be responsible by following what the rules of the game are. I want a responsible president to manage the nation’s economy with fiscal strength and with moral authority. Jefferson had it, but this president doesn’t. The debt ceiling question can be solved if we solve the problem of spending. The president released a report on the effectiveness of his stimulus. It has cost 666 billion dollars to save or create the 2.4 million jobs that the responsible one said he has created. The 666 billion dollars that was spent to save or create those jobs equates to $278,000 per job. It would have been cheaper to just give each one of those who got those jobs $100,000 cash for their trouble and for the exchange of their vote.
The question we are not asking all those who are responsible is why can’t the government just live within its means? This is the $64,000 question that no can answer let alone gives a chance to be asked.
It took a responsible hand to create the freedom that was born 235 years ago. It also takes an irresponsible hand that will further destroy it tomorrow.
On today’s date, in 1776, the Declaration of Independence was announced on the front page of the “Pennsylvania Evening Gazette.” On today’s date, a year earlier in 1775, Congress issued the “Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms”, listing a list of grievances against the King, but denying the intent to be independent. Even then politics played a role, but the politics led in the direction of independence. Today the politics are reversing the course set in motion by the patriots 236 years ago. The president, the responsible one, today, is leading in the politics of the reversal of our independence instead of the politics of preserving our independence.
Today, we need a leader that recognizes what independence gave us; not only by the words, but in the spirit of the responsible one who put the words to paper and whose actions caused other men to take action.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: 235 years of independence was the result of responsible leaders, 3 years of the loss of independence can be blamed on one person who now is the responsible one for the loss of our independence.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
235 and one day!
Tuesday-July 5, 2011
235 and one day!
Today, our country is 235 years and one day old! Why is this significant? Why even bring it up?
For some, today was just another day in 2011. Or it was just another day in which we went back to work after a long holiday weekend. For others, the day was consumed by driving back home from the summer visits during the July fourth holiday.
Today, I realized something that was very personal. I thought about liberty, freedom and Independence in a new light. I thought about how the day after the Declaration of Independence was introduced how it must have changed the perspective and the lives of those who stood by the adoption and passing of the document, not to mention a nation that was in revolt.
For me, today, when I thought about the historical aspects of the July fourth holiday I got some sort of renewed spirit. I wanted to know more of what our forefathers wanted us to do to invigorate, restore and inspire people to want more of what the Declaration of Independence was meant to be and what is was meant to give us.
Today, I realized that we must remind people of what the document was and the history behind the document. A day after our July fourth holiday the leaders in the Senate and our leader in the White House called for a tax hike on the rich, or those who make more than $250,000 a year to pay for the abuses that our government has inflicted upon us. Our Independence was established over a principle: no taxation without representation. You would have thought that some Senator or some Congressman would have pointed that out; or at least reminded a few of. Today, if you lose your job and you are above fifty years old, chances are you will never find a replacement of that job. The sick thing is that in 2007 it took a fifty year old five months, on average, to find a replacement and it usually paid more. This is the result of the loss of liberty, freedom and independence.
We must renew a spirit that has been long lost even in the most conservative of circles. We must dedicate ourselves to living the words of the Declaration and to inspire others to do the same. What most forget is that the Declaration of Independence started a movement which culminated with the most indelible words ever written: “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
Two months earlier, John Adams drafted the preamble that would explain the purpose of the resolution to write the Declaration of Independence. He wrote then: “This day the Congress has passed the most important resolution, that ever was taken in America.” John Adams, May 15, 1776.
For some, it is an easy task to live the words of independence and see the benefits that independence gives. For others it becomes an out dated obsolete document which came to light for a brief moment in another century.
This July fourth holiday marked a personal achievement for me. I have been writing and speaking about liberty, freedom and independence for two years now in a public platform. I have been doing it my way and in my time. I have been learning what I wanted and at a pace that suited me. I have made progress and I believe that my efforts to practice what I preach are now being listened to.
I believe that the spirit I am seeking is one that will help me move forward at a greater pace in the remaining portion of this year.
My focus now will be to renew what the lady of liberty is all about. My focus will be to research more of what the forefathers said and what their desires were. I am beginning to think that our forefathers left us a will. In this case their will spells out what they wanted us to do with their riches. The riches I speak of are the gifts they to us in the form of liberty, freedom and independence. There will was designed to guarantee the rights and privileges under law, they bequeathed to us their fortune of thought and wisdom and in that will they told us how to protect it. They also said that if we didn’t protect it we would lose the riches that were bequeathed to all of us.
When I wrote, I viewed today in a different way I gave thought to many of the words and the actions displayed by the men of revolution and the men that stood tall the day after there words were announced to the world.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: It didn’t take 235 years and one day to write the Declaration, but I fear it will take less time before we are told to forget about it. In the remaining portion of this year I will remind all not to forget.
235 and one day!
Today, our country is 235 years and one day old! Why is this significant? Why even bring it up?
For some, today was just another day in 2011. Or it was just another day in which we went back to work after a long holiday weekend. For others, the day was consumed by driving back home from the summer visits during the July fourth holiday.
Today, I realized something that was very personal. I thought about liberty, freedom and Independence in a new light. I thought about how the day after the Declaration of Independence was introduced how it must have changed the perspective and the lives of those who stood by the adoption and passing of the document, not to mention a nation that was in revolt.
For me, today, when I thought about the historical aspects of the July fourth holiday I got some sort of renewed spirit. I wanted to know more of what our forefathers wanted us to do to invigorate, restore and inspire people to want more of what the Declaration of Independence was meant to be and what is was meant to give us.
Today, I realized that we must remind people of what the document was and the history behind the document. A day after our July fourth holiday the leaders in the Senate and our leader in the White House called for a tax hike on the rich, or those who make more than $250,000 a year to pay for the abuses that our government has inflicted upon us. Our Independence was established over a principle: no taxation without representation. You would have thought that some Senator or some Congressman would have pointed that out; or at least reminded a few of. Today, if you lose your job and you are above fifty years old, chances are you will never find a replacement of that job. The sick thing is that in 2007 it took a fifty year old five months, on average, to find a replacement and it usually paid more. This is the result of the loss of liberty, freedom and independence.
We must renew a spirit that has been long lost even in the most conservative of circles. We must dedicate ourselves to living the words of the Declaration and to inspire others to do the same. What most forget is that the Declaration of Independence started a movement which culminated with the most indelible words ever written: “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
Two months earlier, John Adams drafted the preamble that would explain the purpose of the resolution to write the Declaration of Independence. He wrote then: “This day the Congress has passed the most important resolution, that ever was taken in America.” John Adams, May 15, 1776.
For some, it is an easy task to live the words of independence and see the benefits that independence gives. For others it becomes an out dated obsolete document which came to light for a brief moment in another century.
This July fourth holiday marked a personal achievement for me. I have been writing and speaking about liberty, freedom and independence for two years now in a public platform. I have been doing it my way and in my time. I have been learning what I wanted and at a pace that suited me. I have made progress and I believe that my efforts to practice what I preach are now being listened to.
I believe that the spirit I am seeking is one that will help me move forward at a greater pace in the remaining portion of this year.
My focus now will be to renew what the lady of liberty is all about. My focus will be to research more of what the forefathers said and what their desires were. I am beginning to think that our forefathers left us a will. In this case their will spells out what they wanted us to do with their riches. The riches I speak of are the gifts they to us in the form of liberty, freedom and independence. There will was designed to guarantee the rights and privileges under law, they bequeathed to us their fortune of thought and wisdom and in that will they told us how to protect it. They also said that if we didn’t protect it we would lose the riches that were bequeathed to all of us.
When I wrote, I viewed today in a different way I gave thought to many of the words and the actions displayed by the men of revolution and the men that stood tall the day after there words were announced to the world.
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: It didn’t take 235 years and one day to write the Declaration, but I fear it will take less time before we are told to forget about it. In the remaining portion of this year I will remind all not to forget.
Monday, July 4, 2011
The time and the day and a year after!
Monday- July 4, 2011
The time and the day and a year after!
At the time of the signing of the Declaration the US consisted of 13 colonies under the rule of England's King George III. Leading up to the signing, there had been growing unrest in the colonies surrounding the taxes that colonists were required to pay to England. The major objection was "Taxation without Representation" -- the colonists had no say in the decisions of English Parliament.Rather than negotiating, King George sent extra troops to the colonies to help control any rebellion that might be arising. The following timeline will give you a perspective of the history that lead to the signing of the Declaration of Independence and America's break from British rule.
In 1774 - The 13 colonies sent its delegates to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to form the First Continental Congress. While unrest was brewing, the colonies were far from ready to declare war.
April 1775 -- King George's troops advance on Concord, Massachusetts, prompting Paul Revere's midnight ride that sounded the alarm "The British are coming, the British are coming." The subsequent battle of Concord, famous for being the "shot heard round the world," would mark the unofficial beginning of the American Revolution.
May 1776 -- After nearly a year of trying to work out their differences with England, the colonies again sent their delegates to the Second Continental Congress. June 1776 -- Admitting that their efforts were hopeless, a committee was formed to compose the formal Declaration of Independence. Headed by Thomas Jefferson, the committee also included John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Philip Livingston and Roger Sherman. June 28, 1776 -- Jefferson presents the first draft of the declaration to congress.
July 4, 1776 -- After various changes to Jefferson's original draft, a vote was taken late in the afternoon of July 4th. Of the 13 colonies, 9 voted in favor of the Declaration; 2, Pennsylvania and South Carolina voted No; Delaware was undecided and New York abstained. John Hancock, President of the Continental Congress, was the first to sign the Declaration of Independence. It is said that he signed his name "with a great flourish" so "King George can read that without spectacles!"
July 6, 1776 -- The Pennsylvania Evening Post was the first newspaper to print the Declaration of Independence. July 8, 1776 -- The first public reading of the declaration took place in Philadelphia's Independence Square in mid afternoon. The bell in Independence Hall, then known as the "Province Bell" would later be renamed the "Liberty Bell" after its inscription - "Proclaim Liberty Through out All the Land Unto All the Inhabitants Thereof."
August 1776 - The task begun on July 4, the signing of the Declaration of Independence, was not actually completed until August. Nonetheless, the 4th of July has been accepted as the official anniversary of United States independence from Britain.
July 4, 1777 -- The first Independence Day celebration takes place. It's interesting to speculate what those first 4th festivities were like. By the early 1800s the traditions of parades, picnics, and fireworks were firmly established as part of American Independence Day culture.
As we end our day this year we should remember the time line that lead to our independence, we should remember the day on which our independence was established and we should remember the fight for our independence. Treat all this history with respect and be conscience of the time at which it occurred, the day at which it started and let’s look forward to next year when we meet once again to celebrate our independence!
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: Today marks the beginning of the second year of pinecone conservatives. The fight for our liberty and the fight for our independence did not happen overnight. The fight for Liberty, freedom and independence is a lifelong story that many patriots over the course of 235 years have helped to make possible. The time is marked by days and the days are marked by years but as the years grow so should our liberty, freedom and our independence. Happy Birthday America!
The time and the day and a year after!
At the time of the signing of the Declaration the US consisted of 13 colonies under the rule of England's King George III. Leading up to the signing, there had been growing unrest in the colonies surrounding the taxes that colonists were required to pay to England. The major objection was "Taxation without Representation" -- the colonists had no say in the decisions of English Parliament.Rather than negotiating, King George sent extra troops to the colonies to help control any rebellion that might be arising. The following timeline will give you a perspective of the history that lead to the signing of the Declaration of Independence and America's break from British rule.
In 1774 - The 13 colonies sent its delegates to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to form the First Continental Congress. While unrest was brewing, the colonies were far from ready to declare war.
April 1775 -- King George's troops advance on Concord, Massachusetts, prompting Paul Revere's midnight ride that sounded the alarm "The British are coming, the British are coming." The subsequent battle of Concord, famous for being the "shot heard round the world," would mark the unofficial beginning of the American Revolution.
May 1776 -- After nearly a year of trying to work out their differences with England, the colonies again sent their delegates to the Second Continental Congress. June 1776 -- Admitting that their efforts were hopeless, a committee was formed to compose the formal Declaration of Independence. Headed by Thomas Jefferson, the committee also included John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Philip Livingston and Roger Sherman. June 28, 1776 -- Jefferson presents the first draft of the declaration to congress.
July 4, 1776 -- After various changes to Jefferson's original draft, a vote was taken late in the afternoon of July 4th. Of the 13 colonies, 9 voted in favor of the Declaration; 2, Pennsylvania and South Carolina voted No; Delaware was undecided and New York abstained. John Hancock, President of the Continental Congress, was the first to sign the Declaration of Independence. It is said that he signed his name "with a great flourish" so "King George can read that without spectacles!"
July 6, 1776 -- The Pennsylvania Evening Post was the first newspaper to print the Declaration of Independence. July 8, 1776 -- The first public reading of the declaration took place in Philadelphia's Independence Square in mid afternoon. The bell in Independence Hall, then known as the "Province Bell" would later be renamed the "Liberty Bell" after its inscription - "Proclaim Liberty Through out All the Land Unto All the Inhabitants Thereof."
August 1776 - The task begun on July 4, the signing of the Declaration of Independence, was not actually completed until August. Nonetheless, the 4th of July has been accepted as the official anniversary of United States independence from Britain.
July 4, 1777 -- The first Independence Day celebration takes place. It's interesting to speculate what those first 4th festivities were like. By the early 1800s the traditions of parades, picnics, and fireworks were firmly established as part of American Independence Day culture.
As we end our day this year we should remember the time line that lead to our independence, we should remember the day on which our independence was established and we should remember the fight for our independence. Treat all this history with respect and be conscience of the time at which it occurred, the day at which it started and let’s look forward to next year when we meet once again to celebrate our independence!
Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives
A footnote: Today marks the beginning of the second year of pinecone conservatives. The fight for our liberty and the fight for our independence did not happen overnight. The fight for Liberty, freedom and independence is a lifelong story that many patriots over the course of 235 years have helped to make possible. The time is marked by days and the days are marked by years but as the years grow so should our liberty, freedom and our independence. Happy Birthday America!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
