Wisdom from Abe and Tex

By Tex

If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? Five? No, calling a tail a leg don't make it a leg.  -Abraham Lincoln

Obama keeps telling us that he has been on top of the BP disaster from day one.  He can tell us over and over that he has the situation under control, but the truth is that he is in over his head.  -Tex

Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed.  -Abraham Lincoln

The public does not want government run healthcare.  But apparently Obama thinks he knows better than Abe.  -Tex

Republicans are for both the man and the dollar, but in case of conflict the man before the dollar.  -Abraham Lincoln

Democrats want to own both the man and the dollar.  -Tex

A house divided against itself cannot stand.  -Abraham Lincoln

Just because you won an election does not mean you can ignore your opponent.  -Tex

We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.  -Abraham Lincoln

Tuesday, November 2, 2010.  -Tex

From The Heart

By C.T. Taz

Such is the nature of life, that the Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh.  On Christmas morning the Lord called my Taz to sit by his side.  He could not ask for a better friend.  It may sound funny, but I know God is enjoying Taz, as he brought so much joy to me, I know he brings that much happiness with him.  I know He has a great field of rabbits for Taz to chase and that field is full of carrots.  I miss Taz, I love him, and I know I’ll see him again some day.

In my mourning, after I took my Taz’s earthly remains to the animal hospital, I took a long hot shower, mostly in prayer, and through the tears, seeking advice.  I didn’t get advice, just a greater understanding of life, its triumphs, its tragedies.

Still in that shower, I did catch a sign; Tex was out there waiting for me, for us, for the whole of the family.  Just as He took my Taz, he sent me Tex, not to replace Taz, but rather to carry on his work.  I asked my mom and dad to find Tex.  They did, within three hours.

We welcome Tex to the family.  I know he was as much sent to us as we were to him.

The Weather Outside Is…

Not So Bad

By C.T. Taz

The great Copenhagen climate change summit to halt global warming has come and gone.  I think it’s very funny that a large number of visitors and delegates from the U.S. arrived at the summit late because of the blizzard in Europe, and then left early because of the blizzard on the American eastern seaboard.  Yes, these blizzards are proof of global warming.  It doesn’t make sense to me, but Al Gore says it’s so, and he invented the internet.

Ok, on the more serious note, how arrogant can these people be?  Do they seriously think themselves so smart as to be able to control nature?  If they think humanity is such a scourge on the planet, why do they ask others to sacrifice when they would not do so themselves?  (Indulgences for sale…  No, wait; this isn’t the fifteenth century Catholic Church…  Carbon Off-Sets for sale) Or better yet, why not help solve the problem by removing themselves from the population?  Worst of all are the protesters outside this summit, these are dirty, drugged up, foul smelling hippies who seek “climate justice”.  What the hell is “climate justice”?

We all know the answers to these questions already.  How arrogant can they be?  There is no limit to their arrogance, because they seriously believe that the very nature of life itself revolves around them and their actions.  They are selfish and self righteous, a most dangerous combination.  Of course they think humanity is a pox on the planet, but they are the enlightened ones here to save the rest of us from our own stupidity.  It’s not like we’ve doubled life expectancy over the last century or greatly improved quality of life.  No, we the “deniers” need their wisdom.

As for “climate justice” well that’s simple.  They want to take money from the productive hard working people and give it to, well, less productive people.  They live in the bubble of a zero sum world where for one to flourish another must fail.  (This bubble is also filled with drugs and lacks showers and other basic hygiene products.)  The sadness is that their Utopic ideal is based in that same zero sum world.  I believe when one flourishes he pulls others up with him, and while not everyone succeeds at the same level, no one fails, and all flourish.

What should we take away from this whole climate summit?  First, these are a bunch of selfish, self righteous people self aggrandizing.  Second, Al Gore is an idiot.  Third, China is the only state with any common sense in their government on this issue, which is really sad because they are a ruthless tyrannical regime that oppresses its own people, represses free speech, and on occasion runs over dissidents with tanks.

Christmas In Christmas Shows

by C.T. Taz

So, this morning, while half asleep in bed, the radio was tuned to 820AM and I became focused on the conversation when a caller brought to the host’s attention an article in the Dallas Morning News.  This article was a review of, Radio City Christmas Spectacular, a stage show being performed at the Nokia Theater in… whichever city it’s in.

The caller brought up an important point about the article.  In addition to getting the title of the production wrong, (she called it Radio City Music Spectacular, instead of Radio City Christmas Spectacular) the last opinion paragraph of the piece, the author, Joy Tipping, wrote the following:

"The show is completely secular, holiday magic suitable to viewers of any belief system, until the ending, a heavy-handed living (but undeniably gorgeous) Nativity that seems out of place. Chiffon and glitter and velvet in the desert? Even the live camels wear velvet." (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/ent/performingarts/stories/DN-rockettesreview_1215gd.State.Edition1.31ccf70.html)

Am I the only one confused by the notion of the phrase idea of “secular, holiday magic”?  Seems like an oxymoron to me.  Should I be surprised that there are Christian themes in a show titled Radio City Christmas Spectacular?  I can see Christ in Christmas offending people in San Francisco, Boston, or New York, but this Dallas.

My God, (oops can’t say that) she sounds quite offended that they would dare to put a Nativity scene in a Christmas show.  Which brings me to A Charlie Brown Christmas.  It’s funny how, to me, most things Christmas revolve around that half-hour.  Throughout the first twenty minutes of the cartoon, the kids are acting like… well kids around Christmas.  They are getting ready to put on a play at the church/school/wherever it is, and they are making their lists for Santa Claus, and sending greeting cards, and shopping for trees.  They are living the superficial and fleeting side of Christmas, dare I say, the secular side. 

What makes A Charlie Brown Christmas a classic for all time, is that it makes a sharp break from the superficial and secular.  When Linus performs his soliloquy, he brings the holy to the holiday.  Perhaps Ms. Tipping of the Dallas Morning News would rather see the class taken out of that classic too?

Selfishness and Sacrifice

By C.T. Taz

Selfishness and sacrifice are as inextricably linked as wrong and right.  So, in order for someone to be selfish someone else must sacrifice and, in reverse, to ask someone to sacrifice is to act in a selfish manner.  Selfishness is as much a poor character trait as the willingness to sacrifice is virtuous (and please do not confuse selfishness with self preservation; that is a whole other topic).

So, I know, you as a reader are sitting there asking yourself, “This truth seems self evident and elementary, why would Taz take the time to point out such a simple proposition?” (and I know those were your exact words too).  Well because politically speaking, our government is asking us more and more often to sacrifice.  We sacrifice so they can be selfish.  For example, we have to sacrifice and pay higher taxes so the President can take the first lady to Broadway for a show, Paris for a shopping expedition, London to meet the queen, and so on.  We are asked to sacrifice more in tax dollars so the Speaker of the House can fly on a luxury private jet from Washington to her luxury vineyard on the California coast whenever she sees fit, or just has the whim.  Our soldiers, police officers, and other emergency personnel are asked to sacrifice their safety, and possibly their lives, to allow the rest of us to pursue our own interests.  What’s worse is that this President and Congress ask them to increase the risk exponentially with ridiculously inane rules of engagement.  (Read about this Obamanation here: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/16/us-troops-battle-taliban-afghan-rules/?feat=home_top5_commented)  

Let’s look at my three “favorite” initiatives that are selfish in nature coming from Washington. 

1)         Cash for Clunkers:  When the government gives money to anyone for anything, it is taking money from someone else.  Those who use the program are selfish.  Those who pay to support it sacrifice.  Try asking a total stranger for money so you can buy a new car, see how far you get.   But then why take the time when Big Brother Barry can do it for you.

2)         Bank Bailouts:  Banks and financial institutions that have received money to save them from their own mistakes are selfish.  People who took loans on property they couldn’t afford are selfish.  The politicians who put in place the rules that allowed these conditions to exist are the worst kind of selfish.  Have you seen the bumper stickers that say “Honk if I’m paying your mortgage?”  Those who have to float the bill for these monstrosities sacrifice. 

3)         Welfare and Healthcare:  This falls under that self-evident truth category; that to expect the government to give you food, money, or healthcare in exchange for nothing is the height of selfishness.  Yes, that job at McDonalds is beneath you, why should you have to work when you could stay home and watch Oprah, or the President’s daily longwinded self aggrandizement?  Why not bring more children into this poverty so you can get a slightly larger government check?    Tax payers are at the same time asked to sacrifice still more of their life and property to support this foul selfishness of others.

The biggest problem many people have with the selfishness of government and government programs is that they demand sacrifice.  And just as selfish as many people are, many more are denied the opportunity to act in a selfless manner.  Americans are, as I have repeatedly stated, the world’s most generous people.  If one needs, we will give what we can.  We are charitable and give of ourselves freely.  We are selfless even after we sacrifice.  Just think about that the next time the word sacrifice comes across our President’s lips.  Because he will continue to use the word more and more often as his selfishness fully manifests itself in his social engineering.

Name That Despot!

By C.T. Taz

Everybody loves a good quiz on occasion, so I asked an empty room, “Why not write up a quiz testing everyone’s knowledge of despot rulers?”  The fact that I said it aloud may seem silly, but then again sometimes talking to one’s self is the only way to have an intelligent conversation.  So without further ramblings, here is the five question name that despot quiz.

1)  A lack of connection between tyrant and the people they mean to rule on economic issues is not uncommon.  Which “leader” held/holds lavish parties and social events while the people of that country suffered severe economic hardships?

            A. Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union

            B. King Louis XVI of France

            C. Tsar Nicholas II of Russia

            D.  Barak Obama of The United States of America

 2)  For any despot to be successful in suppressing opposition and ruling a people, enemies and conspirators are a necessity.  Which “leader” used/uses propaganda to demonize and marginalize his political opposition?

            A.  Barak Obama

   B.  Joseph Stalin

            C.  Adolph Hitler

            D.  Mao Zedong        

 3)  To effectively oppress a people, a government and its authoritarians must obtain and control the means of production, which means the nationalization of banks, agriculture, and industry.  Which “leader” effectively wrest away control of privately held industrial interests giving day-to-day operations of the industry to personal friends or political allies?

            A.  Hugo Chavez

            B.  Fidel Castro

            C.  Barak Obama

  D.  Josip Broz Tito

 4)  The appearance of a glamorous, iconic wife is of most importance to tyrannical rule.  Which “leader’s” wife was known for lavish spending on clothing and accessories and other social excesses, as well as policy intervention?

            A.  Imelda Marcos wife of Ferdinand Marcos (Philippines)

            B.  Michelle Obama wife of Barak Obama

            C.  Eva Peron wife of Juan Peron (Argentina)

            D.  Marie Antoinette wife of King Louis XVI (France)

  5.  “Change” is a term used by demagogues to persuade an unsuspecting people that ideas alien to them and bad for them are a prudent course of action.  “Change” in most historical cases has been directed at those of low education, low income, or high gullibility implying that social justice will be served by the theft/redistribution of property from one person or organization (who created and earned it), and then given to its “rightful owners” (who ironically have no natural right to it).  Which “leaders” have championed “change” as a reason for their ascension into power?

            A)  Barak Obama

   B)  Barak Obama

   C)  Joseph Stalin

   D)  Fidel Castro

Okay, so you may have noticed that the answer to all five questions was in fact all the choices.  You may also have noticed that the word “leader” was always in quotes and that in the sentence preceding the questions was used synonymously with the terms “demagogues”, “tyrannical rule”, “authoritarians”, “despot”, and “tyrant”.  This is there for an important reason:  free people do not need leaders, slaves do.  Free people have the God given ability to reason for themselves, and to decide how best to live their lives.  Slaves need someone to give orders and demand adoration. 

Thanksgiving Message

By C.T. Taz

As Americans we have much to be thankful for this year as we do most years.  So please allow me this sentimental moment to review some of the greatest aspects of American society as a prelude to this most uniquely American holiday.

We should be thankful that Americans are the most giving people on earth.  Our charity knows no bounds.  Unlike many nations of the world, we see to it that no one in this country starves.  I’m not talking about food stamp programs or state run welfare; I’m talking about the Boy Scouts and high schools groups going door to door collecting food for the most needy, food pantries run by churches and civic organizations.  When disasters hit, volunteers from the Salvation Army and other groups deliver food, medical supplies, and clothing to those who have been struck by nature’s more violent side.  Our generosity knows no bounds or rather no political boundaries.  We send aid to anyone in the world, even our enemies, if nature deals them a foul blow.  I’m thankful that Americans give of themselves, not for themselves.

We should be thankful for our armed forces.  We have the most brave and selfless men and women in the world.  Our forces put themselves at much greater risk to protect and shield civilians from the horrors of war than most.  Though often demonized by demagogues, tyrants, and statists, no military does more to defend freedom and uphold liberty than ours.  They build hospitals and schools for the oppressed people while under fire from rouge elements who are the bane of civilization.  I’m thankful that we have such great people.

We should be thankful for the medicine we have in this country.  Should we fall ill or be injured anytime day or night there is always someone there to take care of us.  We have the most advanced drugs to fight off infection and combat disease while being treated in state of the art facilities that are second to none.  The sick are never turned away, and our technology is exported most selflessly to the rest of the world.  Since my illness a few weeks ago I am especially grateful and eternally thankful for this.

Finally, we should be most thankful for what freedoms we have.   We are free to choose where we live and how and with whom we do business.  We are free to celebrate our religions without fear of our government or our communities oppressing us.  We have the ability to learn of, understand and embrace liberty, and enjoy all the gifts God has included in such a simple concept with infinite possibilities.  I am thankful for these.

Is He Really That Stupid?

By C.T. Taz

So, Big Brother Barry has decided that the best way to handle mass murdering thug terrorists is to treat them as though they were members of the civil society.  When they declared war on America by crashing jetliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing over 3000 people, they gave up any supposed rights to be treated as civilians. 

However, there are some problems with his scheme.  Upon arrest or detainment in the American system of criminal justice, those being charged with a crime are to be read their rights in accordance with the 1966 Supreme Court decision Miranda v. Arizona.  Failure to read a defendant his rights is generally an automatic dismissal of the case.  I’m not positive about these specific “defendants” (because they are no longer “enemy combatants” or “terrorists”), but my friends in the military tell me they typically don’t read rights to POWs.  This starting point does not bode well for the proceedings.  There’s no way he could be that stupid.

Should they somehow get past the non-reading of rights thing, there are a few other little snags in the scheme.  First and foremost is evidence collection; what methods were employed to find these “defendants” (you know TOP SECRET CIA/NSA/FBI stuff).  All the people who worked on tracking down these “defendants” could be called to testify, so it is possible that there would be a witness list hundreds of pages long, many of whom might be reluctant to testify since the terrorist barbarians (the ones who aren’t yet defendants) will threaten death to those who participate in the process.  Also those top secret technologies employed would have to be disclosed publicly and openly, critically crippling our intelligence gathering capabilities.  I wonder if our president has considered this.  He is a lawyer, surrounded by lawyers, surely someone brought this up?  Maybe he is just that stupid?

Next, the “defendants” would get the opportunity to take the stand themselves.  Did Big Brother Barry stop to think that watching would be martyrs being “persecuted” by the evil Americans on Al Arabia or Al Jazeera might be a useful recruiting tool for the terrorist organizations?  Maybe he did?  Maybe he just doesn’t care?  Maybe he really is that stupid?

These are just the smallest of procedural and logical questions from a simple dog.  Imagine what a team of well trained ACLU lawyers could do in front a leftist federal court in New York.  It seems like a pretty stupid idea to me, so again I ask the question, could Big Brother Barry really be this stupid?

For better understanding of why Obama is so stupid and in conflict with all pre-existing law and case law, read the Constitution, and the Supreme Court cases Ex parte Milligan, Ex parte Merryman, and Ex parte Quirin.

Healthcare

By C.T. Taz

So, Friday evening I fell ill.  Very, very ill.   I collapsed on the floor around 6:30, unable to walk, roll over, even sit up.  I was so sick I required a trip to the Doggie Emergency room.  Fortunately, there is such a thing as a doggie ER and within an hour of my collapse I was seeing a vet, getting the x-rays and medication I needed.  (In addition to the compressed spine that has been causing me great pain, I have a heart murmur, and had  pneumonia.)  With rest and the medications I received, and a couple bottles of PowerAde I should be back to normal within a week. 

The irony I find in the situation is that less than twenty-four hours after I had my medical emergency, the House voted to pass the abomination that is their Health Care Redistribution act.   Now if this bill passes the Senate, the kinds of tests I received from the vets at the Doggie ER, and the ones I got the next morning from my family vet would be rationed by the government and not left to the discretion of the doctors.  I’m an older dog, and if the President’s human plan was enforced on dogs, the doctors might have decided I’d lived long enough and reserved the tests for younger dogs.  Even worse they might have seen all the patients they were allotted to see during the week and would have had to turn me away.

It’s funny that people are largely dumb enough to leave something as important as their health in the hands of politicians.  The same politicians that have mismanaged, bankrupted, and otherwise ruined Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, the highway system (no, there aren’t too many cars on the roads, there aren’t enough roads for the cars), education (even though they don’t know the capital of Iowa at least our kids can find Mexico on the map), and immigration (is it really that hard to build a fence?).  Are these politicians the people you want to control your access to your doctors?

Well, it doesn’t phase me all that much, I’m on the mend, and if I get sick again I’ll be able to get all the tests, medications, and vets I need.  I will continue to enjoy my access to the best healthcare in the world, and, if the president gets his way the American people won’t have the same opportunity.  Thank God I’m just a dog.

Two Party System

By C.T. Taz

The party system is almost as old as the republic itself.  Its inception came at the behest of Thomas Jefferson who believed an ordered presentation of competing ideas would best serve the public debate,  and further, political parties serve to promote the best individuals for elected office. 

But why the two party system?  European democracies have scores of parties.  Each party in the European system functions more as a single interest group buying and selling their allegiance to the highest bidder.  This vote auctioning is good for tiny minorities/interest groups to pass their special interests, but detrimental to the state as a whole.  In the recent European parliamentary elections the “Piracy Party” won a single seat.  This party believes it is fair to “pirate” copyrighted materials.  Essentially they believe that the printed word, art, music and movies are not private property.  Now in a close vote on a major issue, say the lawful detainment of criminal terrorist murdering thugs, this party can sell its vote to whichever coalition is inclined to later or in conjunction with the present legislation allow the theft of intellectual property.  For some stopping the terrorists might be worth sacrificing a little liberty and property.   For others the lawlessness and the pandering to terrorist demands is a means of security.  Still others (communists and hippies) might not think the abolition of private property is a bad thing.  In the end, any serious effort to pass or defeat the fictitious terror bill will give the “Pirate Party” undue and obscene influence.

Now I know, yes in the US special interests get their way a lot, and yes there is a similar competition for votes, but in the end votes aren’t controlled by pirates, and for the pirates to have influence they need much greater numbers and serious popular support from a large base of individuals.  The two party system, by design, serves to moderate debate and limit the power of extremists.  And while most of the time no one is completely satisfied with the candidates presented, most of the time a rational person lands in elected office or is offset by more moderates within the party.

Our problem right now is that one of our two political parties has captured the leadership of a party and is trying to push an extremist agenda.  Today, Election Day 2009 that party is set to be rebuked by the American people sending a message to congress and state governments that we the people are not happy with their lies, distortions, corruption and other shenanigans.  Democrats in more moderate districts which comprise the majority of districts, not those from San Francisco or Chicago, should see the message that if they wish to keep their jobs they should and likely will stand up to their leadership. 

Ten Months, Five AKomplishments

By C.T. Taz

Well, the President has been in office for a bit under ten months, so I figured I should review my ten favorite BHO accomplishments.

1.       As promised, he ended racial politics.  Since he’s taken office we haven’t heard anyone accuse their opposition of racism.  It’s not like Jimmy Carter ever said: 
"When a radical fringe element of demonstrators and others begin to attack the president of the United States as an animal or as a reincarnation of Adolf Hitler or when they wave signs in the air that said we should have buried Obama with Kennedy, those kinds of things are beyond the bounds," the Democrat who served from 1977-1981 told students at Emory University.  "I think people who are guilty of that kind of personal attack against Obama have been influenced to a major degree by a belief that he should not be president because he happens to be African American.  "It's a racist attitude, and my hope is and my expectation is that in the future both Democratic leaders and Republican leaders will take the initiative in condemning that kind of unprecedented attack on the president of the United States."   (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/15/carter.obama/index.html)              Seriously, if a prominent Democrat ever said something like that it would mean that Barry hadn’t ended racial politics like he promised he would.

2.      He fostered peace and security in the Middle East and throughout the world by giving speeches and submitting to terrorist demands.  As proof of this he won the Nobel Peace Prize.  If his decision to close Gitmo and send some of the terrorists being held there to luxurious Caribbean islands was a bad one, there would probably be an emboldening of terrorist groups around the world and a rise in casualties in places like Afghanistan. Since this has not happened, and, Iran and North Korea have given up their nuclear ambitions and our European allies are safer than ever because of the missile shield we’ve installed, Obama has made the world a safer, more peaceful place.

3.      He finally took over some of those evil corrupt auto manufacturers.  Now the cars we get in America will not be the cars that we want and ask for, we’ll be given the chance to finally get the cars we need.  Small, fragile, mostly plastic, slow, poor accelerating and environmentally friendly; these are the cars he knows are best for us and he’s been so kind as help take the thinking and choice out of our hands.  But Barkak isn’t done yet, he’s also going to cripple the evil coal, oil, and natural gas industries and finish off nuclear power once and for all. Finally we can spent three times as much on electricity, have half as much available, and know what life is like in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  Democratic is in the name so it’s got to be good right?

4.      He has destroyed the American dollar.  I know I’m not the only one who wanted the American dollar to be worth less than the Canadian, Australian and South African dollars.  All of Europe and most of Asia had been working to that end for more than 50 years.  All Barry had to do is triple our deficit over the net three years and multiply it by an order of seven and a half times over the ten year period.  It wasn’t that hard to devalue American currency, why did we wait so long?    

5.      With all that Barak Obama has done for America in these first ten months, just choosing five has been tough.  So I round out the top five with the most important accomplishment.  The silliness of his agenda and goals has raised the tension level in America to a point not seen since the 1850’s.  American political culture has lost track of its principles, allowed its media to become subservient to demagogues, and treaded down the dangerous path of ignoring constitutional limitations.  I do suspect that is what he means by “remaking America”.  Some of the reporters at CNS News (http://www.cnsnews.com/public/default.aspx) have been asking congressional leaders where they derive the authority to legislate national health care (among other things).  The responses are shameful.  Look them up for yourself, perhaps taking that small step will help you begin to see the larger political world.  

Maybe I’m just a little out of touch with the world; I am, after all, just a little dog.  It’s also probable that I’ll be content in life with a warm place to sleep and enough food and water to get by.  But then I am a dog, and people should strive for better.  When one becomes content to sleep instead of fostering noble ambition, he quits his humanity and become just another animal lumbering through finite span of years.  Until next time… woof.

The Purpose Of Government

   By C.T. Taz

What is the purpose of our government?  Is there any way of knowing what jobs the government is and isn’t supposed to do?  After a little research I think I found the answer.  There is this old document called the Constitution, and as luck would have it, it tells us right at the start what the job of the government is!  It 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, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

I’ll try to dumb it down for any liberals who might be reading this.  The job of the government is to establish justice, keep peace at home, secure the borders, not hurt the people, and ensure liberty for the citizens of the United States.  The parchment continues to list pretty clearly what the government may do, and what the government may not do.

But I found out that the men who designed this thing thought the may have left some things out, so they used a mechanism they had built into the system to make some changes and clarifications.  The first ten of these “Amendments” are written into a document called the “Bill of Rights”, which like its name suggests lists the rights citizens have under the law.  Or at least that’s what some people would have you believe.  By reading them, it seems apparent that the Bill of Rights in fact tells us what the government may not do, in essence, limitations.  For example the first Amendment starts off, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” the second says, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”  If you take the time to read them and come to understand them, you’ll probably see that the power the government should have is explicitly limited.  But why should laws and constitutions impede the passions and pleasures of bureaucrats so called intellectuals?

So, what is the purpose of government?  In the general sense it is the coming together of a group of people in an effort to secure a set of rights, security, justice and prosperity.  The famous forming of the civil society.

This society comes in six basic forms.  Three are good, three are bad; all are flawed and none work perfectly outside of theory.

  THE POWER OF ONE

The first two forms of government share the characteristic of rule by a single individual (autocrat).  In history they have been called kings, sultans, czars, dictators, popes, emperors and a slew of other titles that indicate only one thing, all power is concentrated in the will and thought of a single human.  The good regimes, of which history records very few (and mythology a great many), are led by the noble king who would sacrifice his own prosperity and health for the good of his people.

In contrast to the near fictitious noble king, history records an ever expansive list of tyrants, men who rule not for the good of all, but rather for the benefit of themselves.  This contrast between the “good” and the “bad” also exists in the next two sets of governmental types.

POWER OF THE WISE FEW

The aristocrat.  History has tarnished the term and twisted its connotation.  An aristocrat is a wise individual who shares power with very few select fellows.  Their actions are pure with the good of all at heart and their actions secure justice in its purest and most sacred sense.  They are the best few of the people, who work selflessly for the people.  Again history fails to leave traces of successful aristocracy.

Instead, history is littered with the memory of failed states run by a few with special interests.  A small group of tyrants take care of their friends and families, their own false glorification which is built on the stolen labor of the masses.  (think communism and the great politbureau)

THE SHARED RULE OF ALL

This is where we reach democracy, this most noble form of government is a utopic society where all work for each other with each other and all are equal under law with equal say in matters of law.  True democracy is the greatest fairytale of all.  The corruption and self interest natural to man inevitably leads to factionization and the imposition of the larger group’s ideas over those of the smaller.  This is often referred to as a mass tyranny.

POLITY

The polity is the most typical of modern governance.  It is not a different form of government but rather simply the mixture of two or more of the former governmental types.  Often referred to as a “mixed regime” the polity offers a greater level of stability of time than any of the other forms standing alone.  The reasons for this are many, which we’ll look at some other time. 

Concluding

Before barking about particular issues, it is important to understand the foundations of governments, their types and purposes.  These ideas and classifications aren’t anything new, I couldn’t devise anything this great, I’m just a dog.  Most of these ideas were first set to pen by Plato, Aristotle, and many of the other great philosophers from eras past.

I recommend reading Plato’s “The Republic”; Aristotle’s “Politics”; “Democracy in America” by Alexis de Tocqueville for starters.  But if you like short cuts read Mark Levin’s Liberty and Tyranny.  

Next week I’ll bark about the purpose of American Government.  And pay attention Saturday as the Buckeyes take a bite out of Wisconsin.