Politics

When politics are not self defined by the individual, politics become a group telling an individual their rights- from forcing you to wear a seatbelt, to how you should walk on the Appalachian Trail.  Know what's going on with your Government.  Don't let others take your inalienable rights away.  The weaker we are as an individual (social security, healthcare, government education)...the stronger the Government.  The masses are asses.  This country is a republic, not a democracy.  The links below help you to think beyond group thinking.

Want to know where you stand on the political map , but don't follow politics...try the World's Smallest Political Quiz.  It's Only 10 questions!

Thousands of candidates and elected officials. Who works for you? Who is seeking your vote?

A free press in a free society: A watchdog exposing government waste, fraud, corruption and abuse of power

"You shall know the Truth and...the Truth shall make you Mad!" Want to know the Democrats secret plan for America?...I believe that the principal difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats just want to grow our Imperial Federal Government a bit faster than the Republicans do.  I am Neal Boortz...

Want to read the thoughts of two Hott ladies with brains?:  Michelle Malkin & Ann Coulter

Can't decide if you're a Democrat or Republican-  Let the Ladies help you out!

Rights vs. Laws

Where to live based on your political values.

Political Scenarios: 

Topics that come up in politics, so I decided to write them down.

Pie
- In America we all eat a portion of pie.  Liberals believe that our pie should be divided as equally among us as possible-  No one receiving more than the others.  While non-liberals want to bake a bigger pie.

Your Money & the Gun
- "I am walking down the street, eating a sandwich, when I am approached by a hungry man. He wants to share my sandwich. Now if I give him the sandwich, I have done a good deed, and I feel good about it. The hungry man feels grateful to me, and even if he cannot repay me for my kindness, possibly he will try to help someone else when he has the chance. So this is a transaction that benefits both the giver and the receiver.

But see what happens if the government gets involved. The government takes my sandwich from me by force. Consequently, I am a reluctant giver. The government then bestows my sandwich on the hungry man. Instead of being thankful to me, however, the man feels entitled to this benefit. In other words, the involvement of the state has utterly stripped the transaction of its moral value, even though the result is exactly the same.

Now let’s keep the same scenario but change the outcome. I am approached by the hungry man, as before, but this time, instead of agreeing to share my sandwich, I refuse to do so. Along comes a third man, who pulls out a gun, points it at my head, and forces me to hand over my sandwich to him, upon which he gives it to the hungry guy. What is the moral quality of the gunman’s action? I think most people would consider him an unscrupulous thug who should be apprehended and punished. Yet when the government does precisely the same thing—forcibly seizing from some in order to give to others—the liberal insists the government is acting in a just and moral manner." - Dinesh D’Souza (Read the Article)

Public Education
- (taken from an article on democracticunderground.com) Why I should pay for the education of other peoples' children, I have a simple and straightforward answer: "Because I prefer to live in the company of educated neighbors, and in a country with educated citizens."   If I were a businessman or an entrepreneur, setting out to establish an innovative and high-tech business enterprise, I would add: "I pay school taxes so that our country might have an educated work-force, without which my enterprise could not possibly succeed." (Read the article)

Eminent Domain
-The Supreme Court ruling on June 23, 2005 will stand as the groundwork as to where America decides to steer its future.  I am not one to promote the buying or selling of private property to obtain wealth.  This land was here before you, and will remain after your family's offsprings have deceased, sticking your name on it will not outlast mother nature.  The right of a government to appropriate private property for public use for the welfare of the majority is arguable if you belong to the majority, but I fail to see how taking a person's possessions is justifiable.  What is considered to be achieved from this ruling: "thousands of jobs and significant revenue that officials project would be generated by the redevelopment on a 90-acre parcel. New London's plan would include a waterfront hotel and conference center, office space and 80 residential properties" (USA Today Article).  The ruling by the majority stated that "creating jobs" should be considered to satisfy the Fifth Amendment.

The ruling by the Supreme Court is a sad example of how majority blinds individuals into thinking with others, instead of for others (individuals).  Read the full decision here.

Dissenting Judges Reactions:

Justice O’Connor:

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random.  The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms." "As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result.  Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded."

Justice Thomas:

"The court has erased the Public Use Clause from our Constitution.  Today's decision is simply the latest in a string of our cases construing the public use clause to be a virtual nullity, without the slightest nod to its original meaning."

Backcountry & Environmental Politics

Reserving a Campground: now online at Reserve America.

Appalachian Trail Ridge Runner: Gizmo        (Taken from "The Appalachian Trail Journal"  By: Ben Corr)

"While I was shaving, I overheard Billy being hassled by Ridge runner 'Gizmo'. The guy wanted Billy to stop playing Game Boy, look him in the eye and shake him by the hand. This didn't go down well at all with Billy. Later on we got to hear this same guy tell us how it is impossible for people to hike more than 20 miles/day without destroying their bodies, before moving on to lecture Will on the inadequacy of his boots. Annoying douche.

A ridge runner basically mans a certain section of the Appalachian Trail for both safety and awareness to hikers and the environment.  The Appalachian Trail ridge runner, Gizmo, does not deserve any type of credit or appreciation of our Appalachian Trail thru-hike.  I just see him as one of the ludicrous individuals that passed by on our journey.  Gizmo, unfortunately, thought he was a part of our hike and told us how we should do it."

Human Population...can we please have some more?  A "global view of consumption by humans as it relates to the total amount of plant-derived resource production worldwide."  Learn more about the map.