Corporations & Political Contrbutions

There are many who object to "corporations" being included in those "persons" recently freed from political contribution restrictions by the Supreme Court. But, do those persons' definition of "corporation" include such organizations as: Labor Unions, especially the very political teachers' unions of this era; NAACP; ACLU; Academic organizations and universities; The NRA; The various anti-NRA groups; National and State manufactures' associations; PTAs; The Boy & Girl Scouts; Many religious organizations (And those who oppose religion); And, many others groups of people. Arch-typically these organizations are incorporated.

Although many of them have no direct interest in "their" corporation making a profit, they all do pay off their members in money or political influence or other benefits.

Many of these corporations are organized to allow their members (Individual citizens and others) to pool their money, collective voices and other resources to, among other things, have a greater impact on politics. For many, this is not the sole or chief purpose of such corporations.

Therefore, I cannot see or understand why some incorporated groups of people (Who may have a primary profit goal) should be excluded from a corporate decision to attempt to influence public opinion as to elections.

These "people-purists" also failed to note the influence of such individuals as George Soros who gives huge sums of cash (Often through partially-or-fully hidden paths) to affect public-political opinion in the USA.

They are still welcome to (Perhaps through a non-profit corporation) attempt to amend the First Amendment. Until that occurs: "Congress shall make no law....".

Tea Parties, History, Arms-And-The Man

All Americans should know enough history to realize:
1. The National Guard was not formed until 1919;
2. Before that year the States had organized land and sea militias AND all adult males (Within certain age limits and only males, now probably unconstitutional) belonged to the "unorganized militia" which could and can be called to State service;
3. Until Mr. Sullivan forced the "Sullivan Act" (To control the possession of arms by his political opponents) into effect (Followed by other restrictive laws, any free (White I must admit) citizen could arm openly or by CCW himself and travel anywhere in the USA;
4. The 1770s "tea parties" were followed by tarring-and-feathering of tax officials, their exile from home communities AND, when the lawful government of that time attempted to seize the arms belonging to local militias, armed revolution; And,
5. Before 1775 what became the USA was full of corresponding-committees, secrete and radical small groups and many official and unofficial bands of armed men who assembled, drilled and practiced the arts-of-war.

Then the cry was "No taxation without representation"! Today, it appears to be "Too much taxation for the benefit of elected officials and not for the People!!".

In the early 1770s, right up to the British march on Lexington and Concord (And after-wards) there was hope that the British Government and the colonists could resolve their differences. But, the careful-and-prudent colonists planned for other possibilities, which became necessary for our national survival as a Free People. Only pathological pacifists will totally deny the potential for armed popular reaction if, and only if, the government attempts to seize the Peoples arms, control free speech (Including Fox and radio talk shows) and suppress real religions (All of these attacks have begun.)

At age-71 I am too old to participate in any (Hopefully never to happen) reactions to a more active government attacks on the People I do remember by 1956 military oath and, despite an Honorable Discharge, still consider it binding on me as to the defense of the People and NOT public officials. I would rather "go out in a blaze of gunfire" than support those who claim "It can't happen here"---Until it is too late to preserve the Republic.

Study Of History & Learning From It

This is in response to Mr. James Causey's Feb. 14, 2010 column on "Black History" in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

I am very much in favor of the study of ALL history and in paying close attention to the (Paraphrased) maxim: Those who do not learn from history will be condemned to repeat it. Rather than a "Black History Month", why not an "Immigrant History" theme and infuse the story of the first immigrants (Perhaps "Native Americans"), voluntary immigrants and those involuntary (Black and White) persons transported here as slaves, bound servants and sentenced criminals, legal-and-illegal migrants to be had throughout all history classes and programs in our schools, editorial comments and newspaper features, by parents, TV reporting and so on?

The lessons learned from those migrations could include their contributions-and-subtractions from the building of our agricultural and industrial nation. The impact of such persons on "high culture", popular culture, scientific development, political movements and every other facet of human activity from pizza to soul food, from Mozart to Jazz, ETC..

The learning of historical facts must NOT be limited to currently "politically correct" factoids; But, more and more as students age, to even the most controversial matters and, much more importantly, reasoned debate on such. All of those teachers listed above, and more, who cannot deal with such are failures as teachers.

SOME CHALLENGING TOPICS FOR HISTORY TEACHERS

I will now mount my avocational historian hobby horse and toot my politically incorrect horn and provide the following, Non-PC and challenging topics and questions for all history teachers (As partially listed above).

(A) IMMIGRATION: Many facts as to immigration, especially as to recent and illegal movements into the USA, are suppressed by prostituting politicians (But, I repeat myself: Paraphrased from an American humorist) selling themselves for such votes and will keep them in office, by editors in favor of open borders and, perhaps, some church leaders who wish to inflate the numbers of persons in their denominations or who fail to understand that citizenship is something which "belongs to Caesar" and by such business and union interests which specially benefit from illegal immigration.
1. What, if anything, do immigrants collectively owe those who came to the USA before them?
2. If, and only if, such collective payments are owed: Who should receive them; And, should the costs of some immigrants-groups charges against our criminal justice, educational and other social programs be subtracted from any such payments?
3. What are the costs of illegal immigration VS contributions to the economy and the "common good" (Including the entry level jobs so needed by our youth, especially Blacks, most specially in this recession-or-depression)?
4. What proportion of the Nobel Prize winners are of Jewish or Asian decent and were immigrants into the USA? Why are those groups different from others?
5. What are the effects of Muslim immigration into the USA and other nations?
Post: Islam's Nature & Growth Patterns: Key Document
Link: http://crusaderknight.blogspot.com/2009/03/islams-nature-growth-patterns-key.html

(B) RACE MORE GENERALLY: This is, unfortunately still a touchy issue in the USA.
1. Who is Black or Latino or Asian or Jewish or Arab or Slav in a more-and-more racially mixed society?
2. How is racial or ethnic identification decided? Is this a matter of personal and not family or social decisions? (I could claim "Asian" as I am <1/256 Tartar by physical evidence AND by the "one drop of blood" rule.)
3. What do such highly educated "minority" persons as Mr. B. H. Obama, the many doctors of Asian decent and such-like have in common with the mass of sweat-of-brow and very distant relatives who came to the USA before them?
4. Are we progressing from a post-racial to a very class-limiting society where even public university education is priced beyond the means of many or most of the "under-class" or even the lower middle class?
5. Do race-based "Bell Curves" still have any value in projecting collective academic success? If not, how are differences between Jewish-and-Asian students explained other than on a racial or culture basis?

(C) ISLAM: Almost too many questions to list here; But, ....
1. What are the effects of non-military Muslim immigration? (Please see A-5 above.)
2. Why are so many teachers, journalists, religious leaders, politicians and others reluctant to point out that the teachings of the Koran and other Islamic works are unalterable and allow or encourage and, sometimes command, the use of murder, rape-and-enslavement, genocide, perpetual war against all who do not view (Their brand of) Islam as superior to all other belief-systems, unequal treatment of all women and all "unbelievers" and the other and like teachings of Mohammed?
3. Why (Other than Arab oil) do so many people fail not the connection between Islam and such acts of individual jihad as represented by Major Hasan at Ft. Hood and almost weekly, and barely reported, incidents?
4. What are the differences in "world view" between Muslims, believers in other ideologies/religions, Secularists, Marxists and others?
5. What does "dhimitude" mean and does Islam have "any room" for non-Muslims in any condition other than that?

(D) Learning From History: Although there are manly more "learn from history" questions which might be asked, I will deal with three issues as to "learning from history so as to not be condemned to repeat it".
1. What happens to a successful nation (eg The Roman Republic before Caesar; England before 1960; The USA until recently) when large masses of aliens who will not be integrated into the general society of such lands? (Consider the very limited impact of very Orthodox Jews, race conscious Asians, Sikhs VS the effective integration of German, Italian, Slav and most immigrants VS the exclusive and other-rejecting sub-culture of the true-believers of Islam: Please see A-5 above.)
What lessons are to be learned here???
2. How has militarily aggressive Islam been stopped in the past? By talking or "reaching out" or other pacifist means? Or, was it by dogged and effective use of military force as at such places as: Tours; The Bay of Lepanto; The gates of Vienna; The Eastern border of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, The bay of Navarino (Greek war of independence); And other places.
What lessons can be learned from such campaigns and battles VS "negociating" with Islamic nations and movements?
3. With special regard to current events, what can be learned from the early 1800s bribe compromises with the Islamic Barbary Pirates and the latter-and-successful armed USA campaign against these horrid criminals VS the repeating bribe-by-ransoms compromises with the like Islamic pirates of the Sudan?

No doubt that some of you, who have even the least amount of intellectual and historical honest, could come up with more, non-PC, questions and issues. DO IT!

University Of Wisconsin Salary Increase Plot

This morning's news brought the information that UW's President has formed a "commission" to find reasons to increase salaries within that non-system. That logically leads to the following conclusions:
1. He is unwilling to make such proposals himself and is searching for a way to hide and diffuse responsibility for making suggestions, in this time of economic hardship on most citizens (Especially students and their families), for that indefensible goal.
2. He is shirking the responsibilities of his job and NOT earning his over-inflated salary and even more grossly puffed-up fringe benefits.
3. He is bypassing the UW Regents where basic responsibility for such actions lay.
4. By probable loading that commission with persons who are in favor of such increases he is shutting out those persons who might raise reasonable doubts as to the propriety of such increases.

I can save UW the trouble of any such commission by setting the following rules:
1. Increases should and must be tied to the mean income of all Wisconsin residents, increasing only when that increases and being set back when such decreases; AND,
2. Tuition and costs for students being tied to the same measure.

Now, isn't that simple-and-fair?

The People and Legislature of our State must UW back into the real world of a major economic recession and for other reasons by direct election of the Regents (eg Two from each Congressional District) by the People for four-year terms during the General Elections.

Defining "Political Correctness"

The following is the 2007 winning entry from an annual contest at Texas A&M University calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term. This year's term was 'Political Correctness'.

The winner wrote: "Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."