Discussing Obamacare with the US House of Reprehensibles this week, Mississippi’s Republican governor, Haley Barbour, said, "Believe it or not, we love our constituents as much as you all do, and we want to do right for them…"
Is the man an imbecile, ignorant of the English language, or both?
Dictionary.com defines "love" as "1. a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person. 2. a feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend. 3. sexual passion or desire."
If Hal and his fellow thugs feel such sentiments for their victims, I think I speak on behalf of us all when I say, "Get a grip, buddy, that’s disgusting – and for sure it ain’t requited." But obviously they don’t: what they harbor instead is lust. Love seeks to please the other; lust exploits the other to please the self. Love exalts and advances the other, often at the expense of self; lust exalts and advances the self at the other’s expense. Call me unromantic, but a guy with his foot on my neck is a loser lusting for power, not a lover.
Indeed, we might easily confuse politicians’ "love" with a farmer’s for his hogs at butchering time. Thanks to Our Rulers, 4439 Americans lie dead in Iraq, we’ll "pay more taxes in 2010 than [we spent] on food, clothing and shelter combined," the Transportation Security Administration gate-rapes us at airports, and "1 in every 32 [American] adults" is "on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole ... " And those are just a few from government’s infinite list of evils. What the bozos in office show us is about as far from love as John Edwards was from a faithful husband.
I have long puzzled over the fallacy of the "caring" politician. It’s such an absurd contradiction in terms – sorta like a "compassionate serial murderer" or a "thoughtful thief" – that you’d think even the public schools’ semi-literates would scorn it. And yet some taxpayers crave these warm, fake fuzzies from their predators; let a ruler cry crocodile tears, and he can plunge his hand into their pockets and nose into their lives as deeply as he pleases.
Heck, he can even slaughter families at a religious compound or shoot mothers holding babies so long as he prattles "Ah feel yer pain" (and why wouldn’t he? He inflicted most of it. Speaking of Beelzebubba, weren’t his wife’s comments on another murderous dictator earlier this week a hypocritical hoot? How lucky for this criminal couple that meddlesome foreigners didn’t "[work] to translate the ‘world's outrage into action and results’" when their administration was gassing Waco). Only morons believe sociopaths professing affection as they lie to, rob and murder us.
Serfs who look to Our Masters for love are lookin’ in all the wrong places. Ditto for those who seek it from entrepreneurs and businessmen. These stalwarts of the marketplace operate out of self-interest – and be happy they do. Self-interest, like the perfect love St. Paul describes in I Corinthians 13, never fails: your parents may disown you, your spouse divorce you, your friends scold and shun you, but an entrepreneur will accept your money every time. After a nasty fight at home, you can head to the nearest restaurant – or, depending on the severity of the squabble, the nearest hotel – and know that a friendly welcome awaits though your kin aren’t speaking.
That’s part of the market’s magic. It persuades – but never forces – folks with little in common, from other sides of the world, of various temperaments, languages and ethnicities, to get along as harmoniously as a loving family. Nor does it allow even momentary departures from that standard. The entrepreneur who offends his customers as frequently as your in-laws insult you will soon declare bankruptcy.
So praise God for the market’s "invisible hand"! Effortlessly and without thought on our part, it transforms self-interest into a facsimile of genuine love. Like a newborn’s doting mother, the successful businessman anticipates and fills our needs. He’s as generous as your best friend on your birthday, selling us what we want at a good price. He overlooks our shortcomings as would a beloved aunt, happily dealing with us though there’s dirt under our fingernails or stains on our shirt.
No wonder the State’s jealous. Nor should we be surprised that it attacks the market with regulations and restrictions, anti-monopoly and minimum-wage laws, compulsory unionism and corporatism. And yet the wounded market struggles to provide us with all good things, necessities or luxuries, like the most loyal of friends.
What a contrast to Leviathan’s "love"! Though it speaks with the tongues of men and of devils, government hath not charity.
March 5, 2011
Becky Akers [send her mail] writes primarily about the American Revolution.
Recent historyFrom at least 1998, a former Commodities Trading Advisor (CTA) of fourteen years Walter Bubien [7] AKA Burien - CAFR1 [8], and a federal auditor of thirty years Gerald Klatt who died on his birthday July 11th 2004 as noted in the SS death index who was from Tucson, AZ [9] have made specific and detailed claims upon showings seen and from referencing within the now 184,000 local government CAFRs, AFRs and other Federal audit reports such as; Audit of the IRS [10]; US Treasury Audit of Bank derivative holdings (tables 1, 2, 3 on pages 22, 23, 24 show that the top three banks were trading and holding over 150 trillion dollars worth of derivatives, apparently in primarily government accounts)[11]; US Treasury Audit of Bank Mortgage holdings [12]; Federal Consolidated Financial Statements [13]; CAFR for the Federal Reserve [14]; local Government's CAFR[15].
How many governments exist in the United States? The 1997 Census of Government says it best... "There were 87,504 governmental units in the United States as of June 1997. In addition to the Federal Government and the 50 state governments, there were 87,453 units of local government. Of these, 39,044 are general purpose local governments - 3,043 county governments and 36,001 sub-county general purpose governments, including 13,726 school district governments and 34,683 special district governments."
Some have called these the "2nd set of books", but as Mr. Burien says, the CAFR is "the book" with the budget being a section contained therein. Their assessments of government assets, holdings and investment supporting globalism, ownership by government investment "for profit" and government's international investments profits, significantly enhanced with the use of the now 600 trillion dollar international derivatives markets with government investments strategically placed for profit from free trade, war, commodity market, stock market, International investment movement and extreme price volatility is created by these massive moves by "institutional government funds" speculators scattered around the globe manipulating the market either deliberately or by volume.
Since 1998, with the CAFR being brought to the attention of the public by the efforts of Walter Burien and Gerald Klatt [16] the Government Accounting Standards Board, a private organization whose guidelines for CAFR accounting are followed by local governments,[17] starting with transmittal letter 31 in 1999 and now up to transmittal letter 46 as of 2007) made changes. This resulted in claims that such changes are calculated steps to hide from the general public's view, massive domestic and international wealth; investment assets and authority "enterprise funds" all of which could be seen more visibly outlined in the combined financial columns of 1999 and previous CAFRs which required a showing of gross totals. The modifications in effect transitioned the accounting from a showing of gross totals to a showing of "net" totals as now noted in the CAFRs. Anyone who operates a business knows there is a very big difference between final figures expressed as "gross" or "net" accounting. These changes are being done with virtual secrecy due to the money involved and because of virtually no media attention on these issues.
While a budget might indicate that a specific government or agency has financial trouble and debt, because of excess spending or mismanagement within the select grouping of "general fund" accounts presented, the CAFR may indicate, that overall, the same government entity, has many facets possessing large holdings and income considerably greater than what is shown in a budget report or the "general fund" alone. A few examples from recent history include, Jesse Ventura's returning 1.8 billion dollars (from the 8 billion targeted by him) of the government surpluses to voters as governor of Minnesota. Another example, in 1994, Orange County California government lost about $1.5 Billion on investments in the now massive derivative market and claimed they needed to declare bankruptcy per their general purpose budget even while holding several billion(about 11.3 billion) in profitable holdings in their investment portfolios as seen in the CAFR. The University of Kentucky's holdings of 85% of CHA Health [3] insurance stock was exposed in 2005 in the Lexington Herald Leader newspaper when CHA was sold to a rival firm [4] as part of the UK president's effort to raise a billion dollars to fund becoming a "top 20" research university an ongoing effort; to name a few examples.
A more recent example of CAFR mention is when a congressman from Oregon Rep. Bruce Hanna in 2010 during general session when the floor was discussing what to do about the state's 3.5 billion dollar budget shortfall (fire employees, cut back on services, close state parks), stood up with the cover page from the state of Oregon CAFR in his hand and pointed out that in less than a few minutes he found 3.5 billion dollars to satisfy the state shortfall and poof, no shortfall when the dots were connected between the state CAFR and the previous selective presentation of the State general purpose operating budget.. This video is State Rep. Bruce Hanna, openly exposing the Oregon State CAFR surplus to the Oregon Legislature. A must see! - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ8YhJyxPQo and then a comment on the same from the Oregon Republican party site - http://www.oregonrepublicanparty.org/node/291
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
