Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Backwards Thinking ^ | Brett L. Baker

Posted on 10/01/2012 6:57:10 AM PDT by Brett L. Baker

A general dissolution of principals and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.

Samuel Adams

The sanctioned backwards display of the U.S. flag is a perfect example of the backwards thinking of our federal and State governments, as well as our laughable policy-makers in general within the United States. The sad examples of what we call leaders, do much more than support this sort of idiocy, they enthusiastically promote more of the same. But there are other examples of backwards thinking we can look at, not just the flag. Let’s look at the bills Congress passes or attempts to pass. Even a moron tries to read what he is going to sign, although he may be incapable. But Congress routinely signs bills without reading them. The Legislative and Executive Branches have created more public debt than could be paid off in a millennia, yet they continue to foolishly borrow more money from foreign nations with the sole intent of giving that same money to other foreign nations in the form of aid which will never be repaid, only to leave the U.S. taxpayer dangling on the hook with more debt to suffocate him. We allow this by giving the so-called fix to our junkie lawmakers time and time again. Another example is government refusal to police our international borders while we police the borders of foreign nations who neither pay for the service nor wish for our presence in those nations. At the same time, they encourage and we allow overzealous policing of ourselves by an overly militarized police force right here in the United States. Then there is the hypocrisy of government when they speak of the evils of China and Russia (or the former Soviet Union if you will), only to turn around and gladly incarcerate more U.S. citizens than either China or Russia incarcerate, and at a staggering cost. But remember, we are the ‘land of the free.’

So what do We the People do? We enable these forked-tongued prevaricators by giving them whatever they desire, rather than disabling them so they have to slither on their bellies like the snakes which they actually are. This is the backwards thinking of our government officials at every level and these are just some of the tools which they are using to happily bury us with what appears to be our consent.

If you look at the U.S. flag code Section 175 (i), which deals with the position and manner of display of the flag. It states, “When displayed either horizontally or vertically against a wall, the union should be uppermost and to the flag’s own right, that is, to the observers left.” Just so you are not confused by this, it is quite simple. The canton or union, which is blue and holds the stars, always, goes in the upper left hand corner as the crowd is looking at it. So if you hang the flag from your porch, while you look out of your own window and see the canton in the upper right corner, to the people who pass by and see the flag, the canton is in the upper left hand corner. Now we get to my problem. The backwards display of the flag on military uniforms as ordered by the federal government. While the U.S. Army claims this ‘backwards’ display has always been the case (at least for the Army), so the soldiers appear to be advancing and not retreating is really nothing more than a misleading argument. In no way is it possible for a patch of the U.S. flag on the shoulder of a uniform capable of giving anyone the appearance of retreating. I looked at hundreds if not thousands of photos of troops who fought in WWII through the Viet Nam War; I could not find one photo of the patch which was displayed in that fashion. If there was a patch, the canton was always in the upper left corner, I don’t care on what sleeve the patch was on. If you look at old photos of U.S. military aircraft, if there was a flag on the starboard side of the aircraft, the canton was in the upper left hand corner. I asked a friend of mine who is a retired U.S. Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant if I was right or wrong, he agreed with me. He stated, with a disturbed look on his face, “The canton always goes in the upper left corner, but in the upper right…that was never the case.” The canton always was in the upper left hand corner, until maybe 2002-2003 when some mental midget in the government thought it would be a good idea. I know people think this is a good idea, I personally think it is disgraceful, wrong and it makes me sick. Let’s move on, because the government and at least some of the people seem to have what they want, something backwards.

A good government implies two things; first, fidelity to the objects of the government; secondly, a knowledge of the means, by which those objects can best be attained.

Joseph Story

Since the Republican National Convention just happened in Tampa Florida and the Democratic National Convention is happening right now in Charlotte North Carolina, these are good examples. According to an article, “Congress set aside $50 million for security at each of the party conventions for 2012, for a total of $100 million. The total cost to taxpayers of the two national party conventions in 2012 exceeded $136 million.” Here in Tampa, it was like some sort of police state. I personally have never asked the government to protect me in this manner. There were barricades impeding pedestrians and vehicles, cops in gangs roaming about. In fact you couldn’t walk 100 ft. without encountering a bunch of them. Did they bother people? No, but that isn’t the point. If I wanted to live in the Middle East, that’s where I would go. So are we to actually believe, our so-called leaders need this type of security? If they do, then they are obviously doing something wrong. I cannot believe the security was to protect them against al Qaeda, because we know it was to protect them from Americans. What would possibly make U.S. politicians feel as though they need that type of security to protect themselves from U.S. citizens? If the massive security was to protect property from protesters, then it also seems like overkill. People do have the right to protest, whether I agree with them or not. But to assume they will be a violent mob in some way violates the 1st Amendment; the right to the people to peaceably assemble. Where does it say peaceably assemble under threat of an overly militarized police force? Or in the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; nor be deprived of…liberty…without due process of law. Barricades and an excessive police presence do in fact deprive us of our liberty. But once again I will state, in no way did the police act in a Nazi-like fashion. However, I still have a problem with the apparent lack of trust by our elected government officials who feel this type of security is needed with regard to U.S. citizens.

An example of our leaders not paying attention is the Read the Bills Act of 2011 (RTBA). Why would there need to be such an Act if our legislators actually read what they were signing? According to Downsize DC, “Ignorance of the law is no excuse for citizens. Neither should it be for Congress.” The report goes on to state, “Any member of Congress wishing to cast an affirmative vote for more spending, greater regulation, or the creation or retention of a program of bureaucracy, must sign an affidavit swearing that he or she has either…read the entire bill or heard the entire bill read.” Can you actually imagine our geniuses in Congress passing legislation without reading the bill first? Keep in mind, this isn’t like reading a thousand page novel, this is difficult stuff and takes time, effort and thought. We know there is absolutely no way they can read and understand something that large or complex in a short period of time. Maybe if the plumbing wasn’t so difficult, it wouldn’t be so easy to stop up the drain. Bills should be simplified and they should stick to the proposed idea or intent of the bill and not have phony pork-laden trailers added ad nauseam. So the easy answer to what has been happening is, Congress is and has been passing bills without reading them. I believe this is criminal behavior. Why you ask? Simple, fraud is a crime in the United States. To enact a law which affects us all without knowing what is actually in the law is fraudulent. The devil is always in the details and lawmakers should know that. US News reported, “Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives…all but admitted that few if any members of Congress will read the healthcare reform bill before voting for it.” Representative Hoyer further stated, “If every member pledged not to vote for it if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes.” That would actually be a good thing. But be that as it may, it certainly is nice to know our elected leaders don’t find it important enough to take the time to read, digest and discuss the bills which have a huge impact on American citizens. Someone should really slip in something that states these fools will accept a 95% pay cut, but you can bet they would read that part of any bill.

An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation.

John Marshall

A perfect example of us borrowing money just so we can give it back to the same nation would be China. House “Republicans and Democrats bashed the programs during a hearing before the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Asia and Pacific panel, calling them a “giant mistake of thinking” by the State Department and “an insult” to taxpayers in America.” For once I can actually applaud the words of some politicians. But, even though Congress controls the purse-strings, they still allow this to happen. So once again the State Department and their misguided foreign policy agenda strikes and our impotent House members can only be ‘insulted.’ According to the Daily Mail in the UK, “The U.S. is providing hundreds of millions of dollars of foreign aid to some of the world’s richest countries – while at the same time borrowing billions back.” Articles like this one make it very difficult to think that U.S. lawmakers aren’t slightly ‘special’ when it comes to intelligence. The report went on to name some of the countries receiving the aid in 2010, “China…$27.2m, India $126.6m, Brazil $25m, and Russia $71.5m. Mexico also received $316.7m and Egypt $255.7m.” This is why we pay so much money in taxes. The government throws our money around the globe like the Secret Service does while on duty in a Columbian brothel. How and why we allow this to continue is beyond me, but it is quite easy to see why our public debt as of 4 September 2012 is a whopping $16,009,448,000,594.65. Remember how Thomas Jefferson described public debt, as “A departure of principle” which reduces us to “Mere automations of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering…The fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.” Thomas Jefferson was not wrong.

According to Vet Friends, “No military in the history of the world has been more widely deployed as the United States. Currently, the United States has military personnel deployed in about 150 countries…This covers 75% of The World’s Nations.” In a Tampa Bay Times report, Ron Paul states, “We’re in 130 countries. We have 900 bases around the world. We’re going broke.” Even if we split the difference between 150 and 130 nations, that’s still 140 nations out of roughly 196 nations (that number changes depending on who is calculating the number). Still, if we had those troops in the United States, securing our borders instead of everyone else’s borders, do you think it would cost so much? Plus, the United States and our borders would be better protected and at a much lower cost to the taxpayer. Does South Korea really need us there to secure the DMZ? I’ll bet if we left and told them what they do is their business, the ROK would stomp on North Korea in no time. How about Europe? Maybe Europeans nations should guard their own borders, I like Europe, but if they can’t handle their own security, maybe they should be called something else. Either way, that wouldn’t be my concern, it would be theirs. My concern as should be the concern of all Americans is the United States of America, not every other nation on the planet. Read the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. To ‘provide for the common defence… to ourselves and to our Posterity’ is for the United States, not Korea, Germany, or any other nation. I don’t believe in the U.S. being the policemen of the world and if we are going to be that, then I believe people of other nations should be paying us handsomely for the service.

Let’s take a moment to talk about prison populations around the globe. While we all know for a fact we are the land of the free, which might not actually be true when you stop to consider we have more people in prison than any other nation on this planet. According to Nation Master, we have 715 people out of 100K people in prison, while Russia has 584 per 100K and China has 119 out of 100K. If you take these numbers, you come up with about 2.5m incarcerated in the U.S. to China’s 1.6m. If Nation Master’s figures are correct, and if you figure China has 1.34 billion people and we have 350 million, then we incarcerate the most per capita. Stop and consider the fact that China has a population over 4 times greater than the United States, but we have nearly 1m more people incarcerated. However, in a 2006 report by Natural News, “The United States has 5 percent of the world’s population and 25 percent of the world’s incarcerated population.” The report goes on to state, “A report released by the justice department…a record 7 million people -- were incarcerated, on probation or on parole at the end of 2005, with 2.2 million of them in prison or jail.” So how ever you do the math, the United States has far more people incarcerated than any other nation per population. Then there is “China ranking second with 1.5 million prisoners, and Russia sitting in third with 870,000.” A CBS News report about the U.S. prisons or ‘Incarceration Nation’ stated, “A report by the organization, “The Price of Prisons,” states that the cost of incarcerating one inmate in Fiscal 2010 was $31,307 per year. In states like Connecticut, Washington state, New York, it’s anywhere from $50,000 to $60,000.” It seems fairly obvious there has been a push in the United States to incarcerate as many people as possible in order to sustain what I believe is an institution which has no intention of ever getting smaller. Prisons are now being built and operated by private companies, not that it wasn’t bad enough to have the government doing this to their own people, now it is for-profit prisons and we all know they are only going to get bigger. “Is it fair to call the United States “incarceration nation”?” Fairness has nothing to do with what is happening in the United States to the people through petty laws meant to strip us of our freedoms and keep us locked up in prisons so a profit can be turned.

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.

Patrick Henry

We should all remember how the founding fathers of this nation wanted limited federal government. While the people within each sovereign State can easily make up the laws as they see fit, nobody needs to go there if those laws are too draconian. But when the federal government gets it claws into you, there is little chance you will ever break free. While you may or may not like my analogy of the backwards flag, keep in mind our so-called leaders are backwards, and they prove it time and time again. Why else would they pay $100 million for security for 2 weeks of political conventions, when we know they are trying to protect themselves from us, not to protect the cities from a foreign attack. Why would they sign bills without reading them? Those bills impact us greatly. Why would they borrow money from foreign nations only to give it back to foreign nations, while we suffocate under a $16 trillion plus public debt? Why would we have our troops in 75% of the nations of the world, while we are policed by an overly militarized police force right here at home? Are we that much of a threat? Yet our borders protections are much like a malfunctioning sieve, allowing practically anyone or anything to pass. I guess in the end that is why we have 5% of the world’s population and 25% of the world’s prison population. It’s nice to know the U.S. government has such affection for its people. Perhaps we should show our government the same kind of affection. I realize they don’t think the laws apply to them, but they do.

God Bless this Great Republic, the United States of America.

Brett L. Baker

TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: congress; unitedstates; usgovernment; usprisons

1 posted on 10/01/2012 6:57:22 AM PDT by Brett L. Baker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Brett L. Baker

This needs to be stated over and over again..

The fault lies not with the politician, but with the voters that continue to put the politician into office..

If, by some chance, an outsider who just wants to do his or her public duty even tries to get on the ballot, this person is thrown out, not by the party, but by the sheer ignorance of the voting public..

You see, actually taking the time to research where the candidate falls on the issues is just too hard..

better to let rush, hannity and levin make these hard decisions for you..

Individualism, the one thing that has made this country the greatest place on the face of this earth, is just too hard.

It has all but disappeared..

However, there is hope.

It is simple...

Starting in 2014..

Primary ‘em... ALL of them..

Let’s make a commitment to start with a fresh crop..

Every election.

2 posted on 10/01/2012 7:14:10 AM PDT by joe fonebone (The clueless... they walk among us, and they vote...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brett L. Baker

“There are men in all ages who mean to exercise power usefully—but who mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern; they promise to be kind masters, but they mean to be masters.

– Daniel Webster

3 posted on 10/01/2012 7:39:01 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C. S. Lewis

All who doubt the wisdom of Lewis might watch the video of the President's recent remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast. There, Obama arrogantly misappropriated Jesus's spiritual challenge to individuals, claiming those words as validating and authorizing abusive use of coercive power by himself and his cronies to "take" from some in order to buy votes and accumulate more power to themselves--all in the name of "helping" the beneficiaries of such unconstitutional "takings."

Such an arrogance of power is neither benevolent nor charitable, robbing all of the individual dignity they deserve.

Hear Samuel Adams:

"Is it now high time for the people of this country to explicitly declare whether they will be free men or slaves. It is an important question which ought to be decided. It concerns more than anything in this life. The salvation of our souls is interested in this event. For wherever tyranny is established, immorality of every kind comes in like a torrent, it is in the interest of tyrants to reduce the people to ignorance and vice.” - Samuel Adams


“The utopian schemes of leveling and a community of goods, are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the crown. These ideas are arbitrary, despotic, and, in our government unconstitutional.” - Samuel Adams

4 posted on 10/01/2012 8:42:13 AM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brett L. Baker

I think you might want to be using “principles” instead of “principals” in the opening. Please check on this.

5 posted on 10/01/2012 8:47:26 AM PDT by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brett L. Baker
The President recently said something to the effect that his opponents wished to take us back to the time of black and white television.

You know, his analysis may be the very best endorsement the so-called "tea party movement" needs. He is so out of touch with our Constitution's own formula for freedom that he views those who advocate a return to the idea of Creator-endowed liberty to be regressive. That's the "progressive" wisdom. Now, let's examine that view.

The "media" strategy which presents "regressive" as "progressive," "backward" as "forward," and "down" as "up." On and on it goes.

It's a strategy which goes deep into the decades-long effort to "fundamentally change" America from its new and revolutionary foundations in Creator-endowed liberty backward into the Old World and later Marxian ideas of control by imaginary human grantors and protectors.

Perhaps an answer to the once-asked question here on FR: "Why does Christianity 'scare' . . . ?" may lie in the degree to which the foundtion ideas upon which America's Declaration of Independence were laid and from which the concept of Creator-endowed individual liberty and the Source from which that liberty is derived have been removed from "the American mind" (Jefferson).

Perhaps the so-called "progressive" enemies of freedom understand better than those who fancy themselves as "conservatives" that in order to reverse the Founders' ideas of "People over government," and institute "government over People," they must first marginalize and destroy the ideas from which liberty is derived.

The writings of America's Founders are replete with references which rebuke would-be tyrants and cite a Higher Source for life, liberty and rights. Early histories confirm those facts.

As so-called "progressives" have led a movement in forsaking the Founders' "reliance on Divine Providence," and belief that individuals are "endowed by their Creator," they also have forsaken the principles underlying America's Constitution and Declaration of Independence, and are systematically dismantling the greatest protections for liberty ever established for a people.

"Ideas have consequences"(Weaver).

The ideas of 1776 came out of a set of ideas consistent with liberty.

We tend to forget, or have never considered, that other world views existed then, as now.

Unless today's citizens rediscover the ideas of liberty existing in what Jefferson called "the American mind" of 1776, we risk going back to the "Old World" ideas which preceded the "Miracle of America."

There are those who call themselves "progressives," when, in fact, their ideas are regressive and enslaving, and as old as the history of civilization.

Would suggest to any who wish an authentic history of the ideas underlying American's founding a visit to this web site, at which Richard Frothingham's outstanding 1872 "History of the Rise of the Republic of the United States" can be read on line.

This 600+-page history traces the ideas which gave birth to the American founding. Throughout, Richard Frothingham, the historian, develops the idea that it is "the Christian idea of man" which allowed the philosophy underlying the Declaration of Independence and Constitution to become a reality--an idea which recognizes the individual and the Source of his/her "Creator"-endowed life, liberty and law.

Is there any wonder that the enemies of freedom, the so-called "progressives," do not promote such authentic histories of America? Their philosophy puts something called "the state," or "global interests" as being superior to individuals and requires a political elitist group to decide what role individuals are to play.

In other words, they must turn the Founders' ideas upside-down in order to achieve a common mediocrity for individuals and power for themselves.

So, the still-revolutionary idea stated by both Ryan and Romney last week about the Source of our rights became fodder for the current President's disdain recently, when he declared that they were "reruns" from the 20th Century and better suited for "black and white" television. (Actually, Mr. President, they are from a time much earlier than that.)

As Jefferson wisely observed:

"History, by apprising the people of the past, will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views."

All of which reinforces our conviction that the ideas of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution are as revolutionary and objectionable to tyrants as they were in 1776 and 1787!

6 posted on 10/01/2012 8:52:39 AM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Good catch, my eye sight isn’t so good anymore! Thanks.

7 posted on 10/01/2012 11:02:53 AM PDT by Brett L. Baker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: loveliberty2

“The issue is never the real issue - the real issue is always The Revolution. The cause is never the real cause - the real cause is the acquisition of power.”

David Horowitz, quoting a 60s radical

8 posted on 10/01/2012 11:43:15 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson