I keep wondering why common sense is so uncommon or rare.  How did homo sapiens become so brainmucked?  We call our national, world, state, county, city etc. organizations “governments” and then wonder why we get what we got.  Do we not know that govern means control or rule over the rest of us?  When we talk  government this and that, aren’t we asking someone else to take away our freedom and responsibility?  A common saying is Freedom is not Free.  I think this commonly implies we have to fight for Freedom.  IMO, this should be apparent to anyone to mean, that to be Free, one must take equal responsibility for  one’s own actions.    The blame game gives your power and freedom away to others.  Too few want to take responsibility for their  situation.

I think our national constitution describes a Serverment rather than a Government.  That is, elected officials are meant to serve, facilitate, coordinate actions that provides everyone  the opportunity for Justice, Domestic Tranquility, Blessings of Liberty, and Common Defence.  That is not happening because we are asking to be controlled or ruled rather than served by using the word “government” instead “serverment” for our national organization.  Words have unconscious meanings as well as conscious meanings or applications.

Interestingly, I got to thinking that surely I am not the only one to have a problem with using “government” for our national organization.   So I googled for “Severment” expecting to draw a blank.  Lo and Behold I found  http://www.mygenerationpolitics.info/2011/03/serverments-instead-of-governments.html

Saturday, March 12, 2011 Serverments instead of Governments   In order to change the world, we must change its ideologies. We must change the way it thinks. We ought to realize that governments govern, and as long as they govern they will limit human rights in favor of political power. If the world wants a true form of freedom of the people, then governments should serve. Governments should become Serverments. Posted by Nolan A. Cary at 9:44 AM

Friday, November 12, 2010 A New Generation of Politics The vision of the 20th century lead the U.S. to dominant power, but created a vacuum that requires the U.S. to adopt a new approach to  politics. The Cold War ended, but only served to prove that communism was not able to win. It did not prove that capitalism was the pinnacle of human achievement. That point of view was basically a baby boomer’s perspective. The new generation of politics needs a new generation of leaders. The baby boomers cannot grasp the fact that times have changed. Generation X must now stand up and take command of the helm. Generation Y should also be ready to take action.

Generation X and Y understand that the biggest issues confronting the = U.S. are environmental issues and the rights of people over corporations = and special interests. Most Generation X and Y are more open to people = of all races and origins whereas the Baby Boomers are most offended by = other races and cultures. Most of the New Generation has a more rational = view of issues like same sex marriage and abortion, but the Baby Boomers = are still polarized. Most of the New Generation is not concerned about = socialism versus capitalism.

In short, new generation of politics equals new generation of leaders. = The Baby Boomers need to step down and stop trying to lead Generation X. Posted by Nolan A. Cary at 2:34 PM  =20 Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook=20

=20 Saturday, March 12, 2011 Commentary on the Spirit of the Founding Documents of the United States=20 I think the spirit of the Founding Documents of the United States of = America intended to unite the newly formed nation into a bond of mutual = security and benefit. It also intended to ensure the freedoms and rights = of the people of that nation against oppression from external enemies or = internal enemies.=20

The Constitution was a compromise of principles, and it was designed to = reflect a newly formed government. It made the best of certain realities = which were inhumane, like the issue of slavery and the fact that only = male land owners were allowed to vote. It was never, in my belief, = intended to be the last word on government.

If the Constitution is examined, then it will be noted that it has been = modified several times to keep up with the times. However, the great = achievement of that document was in the three branches of government = which helped to ensure a balance of power, because that was the chief = fear of the time it was written: That an oligarchy would take control if = reasonable means did not prevent it.

Now the three branches of government can no longer accomplish that act, = because over time political strategist and parties have devised means to = circumvent the three branch solution. The Constitution of the United = States of America is an outdated document that needs to be completely = overhauled for the future integrity of the United States of America. = This is the real issue at the heart of all political debates at this = time and in the near future, but people need to recognize it and make = the change. The power is in the hands of the people, and the new = generation of voters and soon to be voters need to take up the cause.=20 =20 Saturday, March 12, 2011 Trade Policy=20 Trade policy must be congruent with environmental policy. Generally, = trade policy is debated in a vacuum which only considers economic = matters, but the shift towards more sustainable designs in energy and = efficiency must also be set in trade policy.=20

The GDP and amount of products exported versus imported have been = largely debated since the Revolutionary War, but they ignore more in = those debates than they include. In fact, trade policy must revolve = around self sufficiency rather importing and exporting. Trade policy = must shift to a sustainable trade policy that will support local and = regional economies and ecosystems.=20

Trade policy must integrate reduced emissions into policies on exporting = and importing. If a region can produce a product and use that product, = then it should do that instead of exporting their product and then = importing a similar product to use. Trade policy should reduce shipping = distances rather than increase them, because it will be more energy = efficient and support the local and regional economies. Importing and = exporting should be frugal activities in trade rather than the basis of = trade.=20 Posted by Nolan A. Cary at 9:36 AM  =20 =20 Friday, March 4, 2011 Ten Boondoggles Strangling America to Death=20 According to Webster’s Dictionary, a boondoggle means a project funded = by the federal government out of political favoritism that is of no real = value to the community or nation.

These are ten boondoggles supported by many members of Congress: 1) Tax breaks and loopholes for oil companies. 2) Tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. 3) Subsidizing an already over-built highway system. 4) Tax payer bailout of auto industry. 5) Tax payer bailout of Wall Street. 6) Subsidizing factory farming. 7) The War in Iraq. 8) Unlimited financing of elections by corporation. 9) Subsidizing ethanol production and use. 10) Police-state tactics:=20 a) Illegal eavesdropping. b) Torture policies. c) Illegal detention practices. d) Travel restrictions. e) Fences on borders. f) Anti-immigration. g) Anti-workers rights.

All ten of those boondoggles allow the very wealthy to consolidate their = power over the people. A hand full of political families, like the Bush = Family and the Clinton Family, and big business tycoons are slowly = strangling the United States of America to death. Posted by Nolan A. Cary at 11:57 AM =20 Wednesday, September 28, 2011 The Big Political Questions and Answers are both Philosophical and = Practical=20 The big political questions that must be answered in America concern = where we are heading. I don’t know all the answers, but I know a few, = and maybe some other people can put forth some ideas. I think that is = how we need to approach the future as well as the present state of = affairs.

Here’s my view: I’m a 38 year old male in good physical health, I’m intelligent, I read, = study and apply myself at work and on other projects. I believe in = private enterprise, but I do not agree with unrestrained free markets. I = believe in living sustainable and preserving the environment. I believe = in corporate responsibility to both people and the environment. I = believe in a fair taxation system but I do not agree with corporations = as people or as entities that should get special privileges above common = people. I dislike corporate greed as much as I dislike it in individual = people.

I dislike the notion that the main argument of our time is about = capitalism and government. The fight between socialism and capitalism = only proved that both systems can wreck a political state and degrade = the environment. Neither system has brought unending health and = prosperity to the masses. If they have, then I missed out on my share = and I want it now.

I dislike the notion that a bunch of talk show hosts, political = analysts, corporate executives, or politicians can really understand what the average person faces on a day to day basis. I also dislike the notion that some good old buddy or uneducated hick who has bought the propaganda can truly understand the plight of the average. I dislike the  notion that the Palin’s, the Perry’s, the Bush’s, the Clinton’s, the Obama’s, and all the rest of those types can grasp the common person who happens to be fairly well read and schooled.

I also dislike the notion that some old man like Ron Paul or his son will solve all problems by just offering up more freedom and anti-regulation talk. Freedom is good, but restraint is sometimes necessary.

What do we want to be and what future do we want? Do you want to live in = a world that has been destroyed by over development, pollution, and greed? Do you really want to keep polluting airways, waterways, and the ground we walk upon? Are you really willing to accept with indifference whatever the top earners tell us?

Can I get you to see that our economic condition is a result of our waste and avarice or will you simply reject common sense and what your eyes tell you? Will you stand with me and reject the right, the left, and the false center? Will you open the door to a better future that combines cutting edge, resource and energy efficient technologies with = ambitious goals to improve people’s lives? Or will you continue in the mold of your mother and father and their mother and father? Will you allow the top earners who are few in number to continue their oppressive rule?

I can’t answer all the questions for you. I’m not a Rush Limbaugh who thinks he knows everything. I only know what I know. I know Rush does not have a clue what the average person faces. I can look him in the eyes and know that. He is part of the problem. He rants but it does not improve my work conditions, my pay, my living conditions, my environment. He never helps me. He is overweight, and I am fit. How can I respect him? Maybe he has more money, but his money never helps me. He  talks and that’s all he does. Can I get you to see his words are poison to the average person? He takes but he does not deliver.

Chris Matthews is a favorite of mine, but I disagree with him many times. Please listen to me Chris, stop saying build more roads. We have enough. Have you seen all the roads? They are everywhere and cars clog  them. We need rails. More rails. Commuter rails, high speed rails, maglev rails.

Dylan Ratigan speaks much truth about the economy, but he is sadly mistaken on some fronts. Get on board with renewable energy and reject  all fossil fuels. Get on board with rails. Help us recycle. Trash is waste and aren’t you tired of waste. Sustainability or green living is about reducing waste. If we reduce natural resource waste, then the economic waste attached to it will follow. Dylan, please do the math. I know you have it in you. Follow the true resource efficiency trade model. That is the key you are looking for.

I have more to say to both the average person and specific people, but now I will listen to you. What do you think? What will you do? Posted by Nolan A. Cary at 3:25 PM

Saturday, March 12, 2011 The Ways of Governing

The government exists to govern the people and the resources of the people. It provides infrastructure, order and security for the people. If the government fails to govern the people, then the people will be incited to rebellion. If the government succeeds, then the people will remain pacified.

Governments can govern by three basic means: 1) Expansion via annexation and/or territorial conquest. 2) Expansion via increased freedoms and rights. 3) Restriction via reduced freedoms and rights.

Most just and prosperous governments employ a combination of all three  means, but will lean most towards increased freedoms and rights and annexation. Territorial conquest and reduced freedoms and rights are oppressive measures and should only be used sparingly.

A government that pacifies the people by directing discontent through = territorial conquest will become imperialistic and oppress external people. A government that expands via annexation will be in accord with the people both internally and externally, because they both agree to terms for mutual benefit.

A government that expands freedoms and rights will gravitate towards a = more natural form of government that is neither oppressive nor = intrusive. A government that restricts rights and freedoms will = gravitate towards a police type state.

All police states have these common attributes: 1) Polarized politics. 2) Sealing off boarders. 3) Restrictions on travel. 4) Torture and intense interrogations. 5) Confining people without proof of guilt or charging them with crimes. 6) Profiling and singling out certain groups of people. 7) Eaves dropping and spying on citizens. 8) Accumulation of wealth and power in a small group of peoples’ hands. 9) Corrupt politicians and political policies.

Both imperialism and police states are similar in nature, and they are often used together to expand outwardly while oppressing inwardly. These  states are doomed to failure though, because the people internally will not always concede and will ultimately rise up. The people externally affected will not be completely subdued, so that between these two circumstances a state must eventually meet failure.

An imperialistic state will maintain itself for a long time if it has  advantages which its enemies cannot overcome, but it must also meet failure when it reaches a point of overextension. All governments that = expand by conquest have a natural geographic limit which cannot be exceeded without peril. Once this overextension occurs, a government must change its method of governing or it will end in disaster. The worst policy is to become a police state, because the people in an imperialistic state have generally enjoyed the fruits of conquest and they are unaccustomed to oppressive measures.

The best policy for an imperialistic state is to adopt a method of annexation and increased freedoms and rights. The annexed will benefit from the size and general well being of the imperialistic state. The people internally will benefit by a buffer from growing external enemies. The extension of rights and freedoms will ensure prosperity and keep the people pacified and willing to improve infrastructure. Posted by Nolan A. Cary at 9:31 AM