If you’ve seen it before, then you would know. Maybe on television in a commercial, or on a billboard when you were on the road. The JY0010-50E from Citizen watches is perhaps the finest watch ever made by Citizen. With looks of regality and countless features that would require time to go over in the manual, the A-T titanium Citizen skyhawk model is very possibly the just right watch to satisfy your needs of style, looks and functionality. Being made of titanium you get a sleeker finish but also a stronger and yet at the same time lighter watch. The earlier models of Citizen signature skyhawk AT series had stainless steel case and many people felt the watches were too heavy for their wrist. In order to resolve this, the company came out with titanium case in JY0010-50E to make the weight of the watch lighter. The titanium is nearly half of the weight of stainless steel but almost 30% stronger than the stainless steel. Another advantage of titanium is, unlike steel it doesn’t make your wrist smell bad when you sweat. The watch has extremely good size, has a lot of features and more importantly you don’t need to feel all that weight on your wrist unlike previous similar models. The details on watch are extra ordinary, from the case and bracelet to the dial of the watch.

If you have owned Citizen watches before, then you would know that the company takes their craft very seriously and focuses their effort to bring out the best watches in the industry to all the watch consumers out there. And then they outdo themselves, again and again. Almost all the features in this watch are exceptional, but the atomic time feature is very noteworthy in that it ensures the most accurate timekeeping all over the world. The watch is able to read signals from virtually any available towers in the United States, Europe, Japan, and some other supported regions. Originally Citizen skyhawk meant to serve solely to the tastes of pilots who needed this real time function, but the watch soon became very admired among frequent travelers who need to travel between different time zones frequently. The watch displays dual time zone on the dial i.e. home time and visiting time.

Amid group of other features, there are four main features, which actually make the USP of this watch. The USP of this watch lies in the eco-drive technology, atomic time keeping abilities, dual time zone display, and titanium case. The eco-drive technology sets you free from dilemma of replacing the battery in your watch ever few years and the atomic time keeping function sets the time in your watch automatically and keeps it accurate and synchronized with atomic watches around the world.

When venturing into the upper echelon of Citizen watches you will find yourself face to face with this Citizen men’s titanium skyhawk A-T flight chronograph watch. Moreover, when you have the watch around your wrist, you would know why most of the watch collectors around the world have named Citizen JY0010-50E as watch of the year. You have to try it in order to believe it, and I am very certain you would not be disappointed. If you want to try one of the best, then have a look at this watch.

I’ve become particularly interested recently in the increasing number of cases where the outcome of inspection does not seem to bear out what happens in practice. Here are some examples of what I mean:

• The case of Children’s Services In Hackney where inspection ratings prior to the Baby P case had been positive
• The case of Basildon Hospital where the inspection report does not appear to have identified some real problems and reflected what was really happening on the ground
• The increasing concern about OFSTED reports by the local government association (LGA) and by Directors of Childrens Services
• Inspections of local councils under the comprehensive performance assessment regime that resulted in ratings that “poor’ or ‘weak’ councils with examples of good and excellent performance and good practice and vice versa
• Increasing signs of concern about the Audit Commission approach being voiced within the LGA

What do we think is going on here?

I wonder whether it is something to do with the methodology and the way that inspections are carried out? The difficulties seem to me to arise from the fact that inspections focus on the ‘professional’ and “organisational” end of the service and not enough on real examples of delivery – what actually happens on the ground.

So what we see often in inspection reports is critiquing and comment about policy, strategy, systems, processes and performance targets and indicators. What we see little of is real commentary about how services are delivered and what it feels like to users and citizens.

Maybe this is at the root of the current problems and concerns? A noticeable policy shift in the way that government, the major political parties and the public sector see the role and involvement of communities in the design and delivery of our public services. Total Place and the comprehensive area assessment (CAA) represent a move away from top down approaches to target setting to a world where partnership, collaboration, the community and the citizen play a pivotal part in designing, procuring and delivering local services within a place.

This signals a real paradigm shift.

So it not just about the policies, strategies, targets and processes. It is what is really happening on the ground, in the streets, in the wards and in families and communities that really matters.

Perhaps the inspection regime has some catching up to do? Unless it is to fall into disrepute, it will need to make that paradigm shift too.

****  Important update below  ****

**** Correction by John Charlton, November 27, 2:30 PM ET ****

From The Gouverneur Times.

“Impossible Numbers Certified in NY-23

Written by Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.   
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 15:32″

“The election results certified by the St. Lawrence County Board of Elections for New York’s 23rd Congressional District contain some numbers that are mathematically impossible.  These numbers were requested in person and transmitted by e-mail just hours before certification on Tuesday, November 24th, 2009.

For six election districts in St. Lawrence County (the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 7th districts in Canton, the 14th district in Massena, and the 2nd district in Oswegatchie) negative numbers appear in the column for “blank” ballots, known in other states as “undervotes.”

Blank vote counts are ballots in which the voter did not choose any candidate in a given election and are determined by subtracting the total number of votes cast for the candidates from the number of voters who completed ballots.  The remaining number would be those voters who didn’t cast a vote for that election.

In Canton’s 7th district, the certified results show a total of 148 ballots cast. The results of those votes were counted as 88 votes for Owens, 11 votes for Scozzafava, and 80 votes for Hoffman.  The problem is that these numbers add up to 179 votes counted for the candidates, and there were only 148 ballots cast;  St. Lawrence County certified these numbers to the state as accurate with the number of ‘blank’ ballots reported as -31.

The Board of Elections stated repeatedly that their numbers add up, and strictly speaking, they do.  But negative numbers should not be required to make this happen. 

Election analysts refer to this phenomenon as “phantom voters,” because they are apparitions.  They do not actually exist.  There can never be more votes counted for any office than the number of actual voters who cast ballots.  There could be one or two, if on occasion an actual voter forgot to sign the poll book, but never 31.”

“Fundamentally, the fault does not lie with the Board of Elections, although perhaps they should have noticed the negative numbers before certifying them.  The fault lies with computerized vote counting and our willingness to trust it.
It has already been reported that zero votes were incorrectly reported in numerous precincts in Jefferson, Madison, and Oswego Counties for one of the Congressional candidates, and that voting machine failures occurred in dozens of polling places in at least three different counties.
In St. Lawrence County, ballots from eight polling places had to be hand counted due to voting machine failure.  Machines in Louisville, Waddington, Clare, and Rossie “broke” early in the voting process on Election Day.  Republican Commissioner Deborah Pahler said that the machines kept “freezing up… like Windows does all the time”.  Machines in Hermon, Lawrence, Colton’s 2nd district, and Massena’s 1st and 2nd districts failed to print the results. Frank Hoar, an attorney for the Democratic Party, initially ordered the impoundment of malfunctioning machines but released the order on November 5th so that Bill Owens could be sworn in to Congress in time to vote on the House health bill on November 7th.
Electronic vote counting is much too vulnerable to failure and/or manipulation.  If a mechanical (lever-style) machine breaks down, the failure is visible, and only the one machine is affected.  With electronic vote counting, one person can change the outcome of an election and not leave a trace.  This has been shown over and over again in scientific studies, including those commissioned by the Secretaries of State in California and Ohio.
But more than that, how can we have a democracy if we cannot know if the vote count is accurate?  If election officials cannot know, and if the candidates cannot know, and if the voters cannot know that the official results are true and correct, why even have an election?  Why go through the motions?”

Read more:

http://www.gouverneurtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8425:impossible-numbers-certified-in-ny-23&catid=60:st-lawrence-news&Itemid=175

Several days ago, as I am prone to do, I read the New York State Election statutes. Before the election in 2008 I read almost half of the 50 states election laws. Here are some of those statutes regarding voting irregularities. Read them and decide if any of them apply to the chicanery that has taken place.
“ §  17-106.  Misconduct  of election officers. Any election officer who
  wilfully refuses to accord to any duly  accredited  watcher  or  to  any
  voter  or candidate any right given him by this chapter, or who wilfully
  violates any provision of the election law relative to the  registration
  of  electors or to the taking, recording, counting, canvassing, tallying
  or certifying of votes, or who wilfully neglects or refuses  to  perform
  any  duty  imposed  on  him  by  law,  or  is guilty of any fraud in the
  execution of the duties of his office,  or  connives  in  any  electoral
  fraud, or knowingly permits any such fraud to be practiced, is guilty of
  a felony.

§  17-108.  False  affidavits;  mutilation,  destruction  or  loss  of
  registry list or affidavits. 1. Any person who wilfully  loses,  alters,
  destroys or mutilates the list of voters or registration poll ledgers in
  any  election  district,  or  a  certified  copy thereof, is guilty of a
  misdemeanor.
    2. An applicant for registration who shall make, incorporate or  cause
  to  be  incorporated  a  material  false statement in an application for
  registration, or in any challenge or other  affidavit  required  for  or
  made  or filed in connection with registration or voting, and any person
  who knowingly takes a  false  oath  before  a  board  of  inspectors  of
  election,  and  any  person  who  makes  a material false statement in a
  medical  certificate  or  an  affidavit  filed  in  connection  with  an
  application for registration, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
    3. A person who shall wilfully suppress, mutilate or alter, or, except
  as  authorized  by  this chapter, shall destroy, any signed challenge or
  other affidavit required  for  or  made  or  filed  in  connection  with
  registration or voting, and any person who, except as authorized by this
  chapter,  shall  remove such an affidavit from the place of registration
  or polling place, is guilty of a felony.
    4. A person other than the applicant who, prior to the filing  of  the
  application,  shall  willfully suppress, mutilate, materially alter, or,
  except as authorized by this chapter, destroy a signed  application  for
  registration by mail, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

§  17-120.  Misconduct  in  relation  to certificate of nomination and
  official ballot. A person who:
    1. Falsely makes or makes oath to, or fraudulently defaces or destroys
  a certificate of nomination or any part thereof; or,
    2. Files or receives for filing a certifiate  of  nomination,  knowing
  that any part thereof was falsely made; or,
    3.  Suppresses  a certificate of nomination which has been duly filed,
  or any part thereof; or,
    4. Forges or falsely makes the official indorsement of any ballot; or,
    5. Having charge of official ballots, destroys, conceals or suppresses
  them, except as provided by the law. is guilty of a felony.

§  17-124.  Failure  to  deliver  official ballots. Any person who has
  undertaken to deliver official ballots to  any  city,  town  or  village
  clerk,  or  inspector  as  authorized  by  this chapter, and neglects or
  refuses to do so, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

§  17-128. Violations of election law by public officer or employee. A
  public officer or employee who knowingly and wilfully omits, refuses  or
  neglects  to  perform  any  act  required  of him by this chapter or who
  knowingly and wilfully refuses to permit the doing of any act authorized
  by this chapter or who knowingly  and  wilfully  hinders  or  delays  or
  attempts  to  hinder  or delay the performance of such an act is, if not
  otherwise provided by law, guilty of a felony.

§ 17-130. Misdemeanor in relation to elections. Any person who:
    1.  Acts  as  an  inspector  of election or as a clerk at an election,
  without being able to read or write the  English  language,  or  without
  being otherwise qualified to hold such office; or,
    2.  Being  an inspector of election, knowingly and wilfully permits or
  suffers any person to vote who is not entitled to vote thereat; or,
    3. Wilfully and unlawfully obstructs, hinders or delays,  or  aids  or
  assists  in  obstructing  or  delaying  any  elector  on  his  way  to a
  registration or polling place, or while he is attempting to register  or
  vote; or,
    4.  Electioneers on election day or on days of registration within one
  hundred feet, as defined herein, from a polling place. Said  prohibition
  shall  not  apply  to  a  building  or room that has been maintained for
  political purposes at  least  six  months  prior  to  said  election  or
  registration  days,  except  that  no  political  displays,  placards or
  posters shall be exhibited therefrom. For the purposes of this  section,
  the  one  hundred feet distance shall be deemed to include a one hundred
  foot radial measured from the entrances, designated by the inspectors of
  elections, to a building where the election  or  registration  is  being
  held.
    5. Removes any official ballot from a polling place before the closing
  of the polls; or,
    6.  Unlawfully  goes  within  the  guard-rail  of any polling place or
  unlawfully remains within such guard-rail after having been commanded to
  remove therefrom by any inspector of election; or,
    7. Enters a voting booth with any voter or remains in a  voting  booth
  while  it  is occupied by any voter, or opens the door of a voting booth
  when the same is occupied by a voter, with the intent to  watch  such  a
  voter  while  engaged  in  the  preparation  of  his  ballot,  except as
  authorized by this chapter; or,
    8. Being or claiming to be a voter, permits any other person to be  in
  a  voting booth with him while engaged in the preparation of his ballot,
  except as authorized by this chapter, without openly protesting  against
  and asking that such person be ejected; or,
    9.  Having  lawfully  entered  a  voting booth with a voter, requests,
  persuades or induces such voter to vote any particular ballot or for any
  particular candidate, or makes  or  keeps  any  memorandum  of  anything
  occurring  within  the  booth,  or  directly  or  indirectly, reveals to
  another the name of any candidate voted for by such voter; or,
    10. Shows his ballot after it is prepared for voting, to any person so
  as to reveal the contents, or solicits a voter to show the same; or,
    11. Places any mark  upon  his  ballot,  or  does  any  other  act  in
  connection  with his ballot with the intent that it may be identified as
  the one voted by him; or,
    12. Places any mark upon, or does any other act in connection  with  a
  ballot  or  paster  ballot,  with  the  intent that it may afterwards be
  identified as having been voted by any particular person; or,
    13. Receives an official ballot from any person other than one of  the
  clerks or inspectors having charge of the ballots; or,
    14.  Not being an inspector of election or clerk, delivers an official
  ballot to a voter; or,
    15. Not being an inspector of election,  receives  from  any  voter  a
  ballot prepared for voting; or,
    16.  Fails to return to the inspectors of election, before leaving the
  polling place or going outside the guard-rail, each ballot not voted  by
  him; or,
    17.  Wilfully  defaces,  injures,  mutilates, destroys or secretes any
  voting maching which belongs to any municipality or board  of  elections
  for use at elections, and any person who commits or attempts to commit a
  fraud in the use of any such voting machine during election; or,
    18.  Not  being  lawfully authorized, makes or has in his possession a
  key to a voting maching which has been  adopted  and  will  be  used  in
  elections; or,
    19.  Not  being  an inspector or clerk of election, handles a voted or
  unvoted ballot or stub thereof,  during  the  canvass  of  votes  at  an
  election; or,
    20.  Intentionally  opens an absentee voter’s envelope or examines the
  contents thereof after the receipt of  the  envelope  by  the  board  of
  elections and before the close of the polls at the election; or,
    21.  Wilfully  disobeys any lawful command of the board of inspectors,
  or any member thereof; or
    22. Induces or attempts to induce any poll clerk, election  inspector,
  election  coordinator,  or  officer,  clerk  or employee of the board of
  elections discharging any duty or performing any act  required  or  made
  necessary by the election law, to do any act in violation of his duty or
  in violation of the election law; or,
    23.  Not  having  been appointed or named an inspector of elections or
  clerk and not having taken the  oath  for  such  office  shall  wear  or
  display  any  button,  badge  or  emblem  identifying  or  purporting to
  identify such person as an inspector of election or clerk, is guilty  of
  a misdemeanor.

§   17-136.  False  returns;  unlawful  acts  respecting  returns.  An
  inspector or clerk of an election who intentionally makes,  or  attempts
  to  make,  a  false  canvass  of  the ballots cast thereat, or any false
  statement of the result of a canvass, though not signed by a majority of
  the inspectors, or any person who induces or attempts to induce any such
  inspector or clerk to do so, is guilty of a felony.

§  17-148.  Bribery  or intimidation of elector in military service of
  United States. Any person  who,  directly  or  indirectly,  by  bribery,
  menace  or  any other corrupt means, controls, or attempts to control an
  elector of this state enlisted in the military  service  of  the  United
  States, in the exercise of his rights under the election law, or annoys,
  injures or punishes him for the manner in which he exercises such right,
  is guilty of a misdemeanor.

 §  17-166.  Penalty.  Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under this
  article shall for a first offense be punished by  imprisonment  for  not
  more  than  one  year, or by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars
  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars,  or  by  both  such  fine   and
  imprisonment.  Any  person  who,  having been convicted of a misdemeanor
  under this article, shall thereafter be convicted of another misdemeanor
  under this article, shall be guilty of a felony.

 § 17-168. Crimes against the elective franchise not otherwise provided
  for.  Any  person  who  knowingly and wilfully violates any provision of
  this chapter, which violation is not specifically covered by any of  the
  previous sections of this article, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

§  17-170.  Destroying  or  delaying  election  returns.  A  messenger
  appointed by authority of law to receive and carry a report, certificate
  or certified copy of  any  statement  relating  to  the  result  of  any
  election,   who  wilfully  mutilates,  tears,  defaces,  obliterates  or
  destroys the same, or does any other act which prevents the delivery  of
  it  as  required by law; and a person who takes away from such messenger
  any such report, certificate or certified copy, with intent  to  prevent
  its  delivery,  or  who  wilfully  does  any injury or other act in this
  section specified, is guilty of a felony.

 NY State Election Statutes:

http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi?COMMONQUERY=LAWS

****  Update  ****

John Charlton of The Post & Email has provided some important facts.

“15,620 Missing Votes are disturbing

Let’s take a look at each race, considering simply the total votes counted, and comparing this to the total votes in the Congressional race on the same ballot:

For the State Supreme Court race:  39, 969 votes

For the NY-23 Special Election: . . . . 24, 349 votes

For County Coroner: . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 664 votes

District Attorney: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 541 votes

These are the races which all used the same 102 voting machines.  Since the entire county voted for each race you’d expect nearly identical numbers, if there were identical interest in the different races.  And while that nearly never happens, the Owen-Hoffman-Scozzafava race was surely the most followed in the national and local press.

That 15,620 more votes were cast in the State Supreme Court Race than in the Congressional Race, seems simply unbelievable. That means that nearly 40% of the voters who voted, cast no vote in the Congressional Race! Unbelievable!”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/election-irregularities-in-ny-23rd-too-great-to-be-ignored/

**** Correction by John Charlton, November 27, 2:30 PM ET ****

“4,200 Votes in the NY-23 race are questionable
Let’s take a look at each county-wide race, in St. Lawrence Country, considering simply the total votes counted, and comparing this to the total votes in the Congressional race on the same ballot:
For the NY-23 Special Election: . . . . . 24, 349 votes
For the State Supreme Court race:  39, 969 votes or potentially 19,986 votes*
District Attorney: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 541 votes
For County Coroner: . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 664 votes or potentially 14,832 votes*

These are the races which all used the same 102 voting machines.  Since the entire county voted for each race you’d expect nearly identical numbers, if there were identical interest in the different races.  And while that nearly never happens, the Owen-Hoffman-Scozzafava race was surely the most followed in the national and local press.”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/election-irregularities-in-ny-23rd-too-great-to-be-ignored/

What a great time tobe alive. We are having a pinnacle moment of humanity playing out before us now. Wow.

Most of our past could be written as a collective story. we have been immersed in the struggles of life as a culture. And collectively, those culture have not really understood the nature of this human experience. We have identified our self as a citizen, and played that role out, as the principle of who we are.

But, as such, we have collectively been asleep. And those who desire to idea of control, from a force point of view, have slowly gathered the reins of humanity.

The momentum had been towards more and more control by fewer and fewer peole. This has played out many times here on earth.

But this time, it’s different. We have collectively connected. The internet has connected us all. Wecan see live footage of a new event from the other side of the globe, recorded from somebody’s cell phone, on youtube in minutes.

As such, the incongruities of humanity are becoming exposed. We are best off becoming self aware. nothing we do will have more power to it than that. Know Thyself, Socrates said. Know your truth. Live your truth.

the rise of consciousness on the planet is happening at quicker and quicker rates. We are awakening the sleeping giants. Us. We will bring in a new chapter of humanity, focused on the most powerful thoughts imaginable. Love. Love has no opposite.

Love. Love yourself. Love others. See the perfection in life. Love allows all scenarios. Including your best dream of it.

get drunk with Love. With wreckless abandon.

You deserve it. As do I.

Living a Life we Love…

Wow

Now

Love
Les

When I moved over to France some 10 years ago, I wanted to take French citizenship as soon as I could. After divorcing my wife a few years later and enjoying a period of time where I met some very charming young French women, they convinced me that it was pointless. However more recently I’ve been thinking that it would simplify bureaucracy and could make things easier. I would always be English, though I prefer to talk about my Scottish ancestry

I’d like to hear from anybody that’s thinking about becoming a naturalised French citizen or has already taken the plunge!!!!

Eco-Drive Ladies Sports Watches are a quality, self-powering or “eco-driven” watch, drawing energy from natural sunlight or even lamp light so that the watch battery need not be replaced over the lifetime of the watch.

Watches that recharge themselves are one of more recent innovations. The Citizen watch company, who has been around since 1924 have in fact claimed the title of world’s largest watch maker, an achievement they have held since the year 1986. In the watch maker’s history they have come out with many fresh innovations and advances in watch technology. The company boasts a voice recognition watch, an innovative dive watch with an electronic depth sensor and the world’s thinnest LCD watch among it’s achievements.

The self powering watch is one of Citizen’s recent inventions, their “Eco” range covers all types of watches from sport watches to dress models, with a wide range of attractive designs to choose from. Eco-Drive women’s sports watches lie within the following categories:

Calibre 4700
Professional Diver
Gold-Tone
Two-Tone
Riva
Silhouette
Serano
Aviara

There are a few common questions people ask about Citizen Eco-drive watches which we will now take the time to answer:

I am not sure if my Eco-Drive is getting sufficient light? How can I tell?

The Eco-Drive watch draws watch at all times from natural sunlight, artificial fluorescent lamp light or an incandescent lamp. In the unlikely event an Eco Drive watch is low on power, the “Low Charge Warning Mode” will activate causing the second hand to jump two seconds at a time. Don’t worry, the watch will still keep the correct time when this happens.

How long will my Eco-Drive watch battery last in low-light conditions?

Depending on the particular model, a Citizen Eco-Drive watch will run from 45 days to 5 years. But this is not a concern unless your watch is placed in a location where there is no light at all available to it.

What Types of Light will Recharge My Eco-Drive Watch?

The Eco-Drive watch line is designed to use different types of both natural and artificial light sources to recharge itself. Fluorescent lamp light (within about 8 inches), an incandescent lamp (a regular light bulb no closer than 20 inches) and of course natural sunlight are all effective light sources that your Eco-Drive watch can use. The most effective of these being direct natural sunlight.

Are there Any Types of Light Sources That I Should Avoid?

Avoid using a halogen lamp. The heat generated can damage your Eco-Drive watch.

 

Nobarack08.wordpress.com

Create an Obama Birth Certificate

Question: Given that Mr. Bauer asked the court to take judicial notice his client produced that COLB, for what reason did he fail to produce for the court, the actual document?
Answer: Because he knew that COLB posted on his client’s blog is bogus.

2. Mr. Bauer wrote, “See, e.g., Factcheck.org, “Born in the U.S.A.: The truth about Obama’s birth certificate,” available at http://www.factcheck.org/elections 2008/born_in_the_usa.html (concluding that the birth certificate is genuine, and noting a contemporaneous birth announcement published in a Honolulu newspaper).”

These facts are true, too. But they also fail to establish, his client is Constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.

“Judicial notice” is a term found in the Federal Rules of Evidence. It applies to getting facts into the court record and, once those facts have been added to the record, assigns what weight this evidence will receive. (For a full explanation of judicial notice, see the Federal Rules of Evidence at http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm.)

Simply put, a judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

Mr. Bauer wanted the federal court to take judicial notice of these facts.

1. His client, Barack Obama “publicly produced a certified copy of a birth certificate showing that he was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu Hawaii.”

This fact is true. But it fails to establish, his client is Constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.

From the St Louis Tea Party.

“Your hard work all summer deserves some love from national celebrities and experts–from people who really know to turn on a crowd. We didn’t really go out and get these people as much as they came in and got us.

We have GIGANTIC names in

• Hard core SUPPORT THE TROOPS
• Brilliant analysis CAP AND TRADE DEBUNKING
• Internationally known CORRUPTION BUSTER
• St. Louis’s own Tea Party Line-up

So, are you READY FOR THE NAMES??????

Pat Dollard:  “Young Americans“

Pat Dollard has spent a huge chunk of his adult life living in combat zones.  His documentary movie “Young Americans” premieres on Thanksgiving Day.  He’s here in St. Louis to tell the Tea Party about the men and women on the front lines of the war on terror, the dedication and terror they face, and the Hollywood left who HATE DOLLARD for LOVING WARRIORS.  In his own words:

I had about 15 employees, a wife, a daughter, and no one believed I was going to lock horns with Al Qaeda, especially because my only motivations were to keep more American civilians from dying, and to honor those who were already risking their lives for that very reason. Who does such a thing? But go I did, and like Kurtz, when I got back from the first three months, I sold the house, sold the kids, sold the car. Well, not the car. I love my H2. But I got out of the Hollywood agenting game, at a cost of about $10,000,000.00 in future income. And I had no savings. But I had to go back, to finish the work, to finish the story. There was nothing in the civilian world that provided the same sense of purpose. There was never a time when I felt like my life had much of a purpose, other than making money and indulging myself. Except for parenting. But some of us find jobs to be done that demand we not be home. I did.

Pat Dollard’s ACTIVE action teams have been INSTRUMENTAL in St. Louis’s summer of resistance.  Let’s thank Pat for his work for the troops and his work for freedom.”

Read more:

http://stlouisteaparty.com/

I’ve been procrastinating the inevitable over the past few weeks. School assignments, home responsibilities, and fear all played their roles well to keep me from getting a free moment to put fingers to keyboard(pen to paper for you old-fashioned types.) Here goes…

I have spent plenty of time in failed states. Well, more than most Americans and Europeans.  Many friends and family members have asked my opinion on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq ad nauseum. I freely share it. There are lessons to be learned that I fail to see addressed in most public media outlets. You have probably read that we should learn from history. I’m going to spring a new one on you – learn from current events.  Remember this at all costs.  Our nation, society, culture, or whatever is making the same mistake I found prevalent among the people in Afghanistan and Iraq. We identify with a group instead of our country and we are rude.

Particularism shows its face in many places… religion, politics, and culture among others.  I once asked a professor of mine what his nationality was.  He proudly proclaimed, “I am Chaldean!” I scratched my head and asked, “Where on earth is that?” You middle-eastern history and bible buffs know it is in modern-day Iraq. Despite being Iraqi, his greatest national loyalty was to a country that no longer existed. Many Afghan soldiers I worked with were Uzbek, Hazara, Pashtun, or Tajik. Even though each is a citizen of Afghanistan, not a single one identified with a national identity.

Luckily, when you ask most Americans “what” they are, they’ll say American 9 times out of 10. I don’t know how long this will last. I feel as if the seams of our national quilt are being stretched to a breaking point. Rank political partisanship echoes from the halls of congress to city hall. Two prominent parties have made every issue a battle for power – not for making the US a better place to live. Every effort has been made to polarize politics and policy in our country and the results are disgusting. I won’t get into politics since this post has other motives.  Race is another point of contention. This is nothing new, but worth thinking about in this context. Diversity training has been peddled so much that it is backfiring. Busing is a big deal Raleigh, NC right now. The school district has been busing kids back and forth across town to diversify the schools. Parents are upset about the program, and this has driven a wedge between blacks, whites, and hispanics in the area. Quite opposite from the intent of the program. This splintering of our nation weakens us economically, militarily, and morally.

Even more disconcerting is an idea that was brought to my attention by Robert Heinlein. His character “The Boss” in his sci-fi adventure Friday proposes the idea: “a dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor   matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than is a riot.”  Yes! Bad manners. Cutting in line, yelling in the face of a stranger as they cut you off in traffic, littering, and a litany of other offensive behaviors. Do these sound familiar? Behaviors such as these are not capable of engendering the love and compassion required for a diverse nation to remain cohesive. They serve to drive us further down the road of factionalism. Remember, people are being killed by their neighbors tonight in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia simply for being born into the wrong family or just for being born.

Legislation and diversity training will not make our home a better place to live. Military might will not let us sleep more soundly. Building relationships of trust through kindness and service will create the bonds that carried this and many other nations through trail and despair.  It is the duty of a citizen to contribute to the strengthening of the society in which they live.

-Matt

One of the documents considered around the Malmo meeting of ministers is the Smarter, Faster, Better eGovernment, 8th Benchmark Measurement report by Capgemini etc for the European Commission. Its available on the Capgemini site.

I’ve not taken much notice of the previous seven for the very fact that they are focused on central government so much and, as in the case of this report, not all the services being benchmarked are delivered centrally in the UK. In fact, in the UK we need to remember that 80% of interactions with the public are delivered by local government (according to one academic report I read recently!)

In the context and content of the report, Capgemini place the control for e-government in the UK to the Cabinet Office – I wonder where the ODPM were in 2000 – 2006, then the DCLG, or for that matter the 300 plus local authorities?

One thing the report has finally started to pick up on is citizen satisfaction and the need for feedback channels. Unfortunately, they seem to have got the impression that this is somehow a strongpoint in the UK, whilst it’s still really only in its infancy.

I’m not sure what the value of such a report is, apart from shoring up the egos of those ministers in the top few, or highlighting the dismal failure of those less successful, but I’d like to see another report examining those countries whose citizens are most satisfied with service delivery across the channels – now that would be interesting!

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

I am forwarding this for your consideration.  Please be responsible with your own life as we work through the nightmare that has been handed down to us.  I always print hard copies of this type of information in case I need it later.

The court cases that I include below fortify the fact that U.S. citizens are “resident aliens” within their states of the Union that compose the Republic. I am also convinced that a foreign U.S. citizen of D.C. accepts citizenship in the corporate structure that operates within his state of the Union such as the 1857 “State of Iowa” that operates within the borders of the 1846 state called Iowa.

To lawfully achieve total freedom under common law, U.S. citizens have to wake up to the fact that they are citizens of “a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations” such as Red China and they are definitely not Citizens in the Republic consisting of the United States meaning “the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution”. Under English common law you are a citizen of the country in which you were born for life (in my case Iowa) and you can never ever expatriate from your country in which you were born and you have no choice in the matter. Under the government’s Roman Civil law you can freely expatriate from your country of Michigan and voluntarily choose to become a citizen of any foreign jurisdiction if that jurisdiction will accept you as its citizen. The common law exists in the states while the Supreme Court has stated in Erie Railroad v. Thompkins that there is no federal general common law. The Supreme Court has also opined as follows:

The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends, or it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. HOOVEN & ALLISON CO. v. EVATT, 324 U.S. 652 (1945) ; and

“The people of the United States resident within any State are subject to two governments: one State, and the other National; . . . . . The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government. He owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and within their respective spheres must pay the penalties which each exacts for disobedience to its laws. ” U S v. CRUIKSHANK, 92 U.S. 542

This means the U.S. citizen has “voluntarily submitted himself” into being a foreign U.S. citizen and “subject” to two governments under Roman civil law. The Declaration of Independence says “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” U.S. citizens born in the states voluntarily provide consent for their just powers and don’t even realize their subject status by their citizenship in D.C.

There are two of nearly everything and this really confuses people. The Iowa Supreme Court has stated that there are no common law crimes within “The State of Iowa”. The courts of the corporate “State of Iowa” will give the common law no standing, all while the Iowa Supreme Court has also opined respecting Iowa, to wit:

We have previously acknowledged that although not expressly declared by our statutes or constitution to be part of Iowa law, “the common law has always been . . . in force in Iowa.” Iowa Civil Liberties Union v. Critelli, 244 N.W.2d 564 (Iowa 1976) In the Supreme Court of Iowa No. 125 / 05-0485 (Certified Question of Law)

This opinion was a certified question of law presented to the Iowa Supreme Court by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

All of this is why I have formally declared allegiance to my country of Iowa (not the corporate State of Iowa) and I have renounced my U.S. citizenship in the foreign jurisdiction where there are no rights but only privileges the same as if one voluntarily joins the Army.

George Gordon explains that if a person is feeling depressed and goes to the insane asylum and tells the nice lady at the desk about it and checks himself into the institution, and after a couple of weeks on Prozac he’s feeling better, he cannot check himself out without the institution’s permission. Under federal law, the only way a U.S. citizen can remove himself from the insane asylum after checking himself in is by expatriation in accordance with its codified rules and regulations. You can expatriate from the jurisdiction of United States by declaring allegiance to a foreign country. The United States is a foreign corporation with respect to Iowa and Michigan. My formal declaration of allegiance to the country of Iowa, with explicit declaration of expatriation from the admiralty jurisdiction of the United States, falls smack under United States Code Section 1481 (a) (2), as the jurisdiction of the United States is foreign to the common law jurisdiction of Iowa. We were born to U.S. citizens and a birth certificate was obtained for us and we were registered as U.S. citizens. We were then the State’s child and we could be removed from our parents at any time under equitable proceedings for the best interest of the child. We were never taught by State certified teachers that if we wanted to be free as our ancestors we needed to take appropriate action to achieve the status as free men under common law in the Republic when we reached 21 and now 18 years of age. If we had taken appropriate action we would be “non-taxpayers” as Citizens of the state of the Union in which we were born and we would be capital [C] Citizens of the (several) United States as designated in the Constitution and not small [c] citizens.

Fifty dollar bills are legal tender in the jurisdiction of the United States and in its 1857 sub-corporation named “The State of Iowa” with its capitol in Des Moines. Fifty dollar gold coins are lawful money under Article I, Section 10 of the federal Constitution within the common law jurisdiction of the 1846 state called Iowa whose capitol is in Iowa City. The capitol in Iowa City sits empty because basically all the free people in the Republic have expatriated to the jurisdiction of the United States and under the Fourteenth Amendment are citizens of its sub division “State of Iowa” and subject to the jurisdiction of its statutes. As subjects most people elect representatives to pass such things as seat belt laws and driver license statutes for their insurance companies that insure them. Free men practice strict liability under the common law, and don’t affect any public interest whatsoever. When a free man of the Republic is drug into court it will be presumed that he is a subject with a social security number thereby affecting a public interest and needs to be regulated under public policy. This presumption needs to be properly destroyed if we want to be free. I believe that the “state of Iowa” was created with its 1846 Constitution and is the Republic while the 1857 “State of Iowa” is a federal State for passing law on U.S. citizens like Puerto Rico is the proper name of a part of the United States. I’m sure a U.S. citizen and a resident of the “State of Iowa” under the Fourteenth Amendment could just move to Puerto Rico and become a Fourteenth Amendment citizen of Puerto Rico with the same U.S. privileges there, and have the same form 1040 tax obligations there, or vice versa.

U.S. citizens that are residents of the State of Iowa are subject to statutes that are in derogation of the common law while free men in the Republic are not. Statutes in derogation of the common law law are advisory with respect to free men. Iowa Code Section 4.2 states: “The rule of the common law, that statutes in derogation thereof are to be strictly construed, has no application to this Code. Its provisions and all proceedings under it shall be liberally construed with a view to promote its objects and assist the parties in obtaining justice.” This means that an Iowa statute must bend when dealing with a free man if the free man knows how not to consent to be prosecuted under one of these statutes.

There is definitely a dual system between the states united under the Constitution and the United States that is analogous to a mini-United Nations and headquartered in D.C. The U.S. income tax system is a voluntary system and it is voluntary because it is predicated upon “citizenship”.

“The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers and not to non taxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for non-taxpayers and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither the subject nor the object of the revenue laws.” Stewart v. Chinese Chamber of Commerce, 168 F.2d 709, 712.

Again, you can see the dual system. U.S. citizens residing in the State of Michigan or State of Iowa are taxpayers. This is why in an interview Harry Reid stated that he did not understand the phraseology when talking about the voluntary income tax system and was then asked if he meant that “taxpayers” don’t have to pay their income taxes. To most ignorant people Harry Reid looked like a blubbering idiot when he did not come right out and specifically let the cat out of the bag. The Supreme Court has opined that the 16th Amendment added no new taxing powers, but I contend that the Fourteenth Amendment did add new taxing powers for those people within the states and wishing to be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” so they can receive U.S. socialized security or food stamps or “free?” State education for their children.

Being completely free and residing in the Creator who endows men with certain unalienable rights, and not residing in the State for security, is a very scary thing for most people! It wasn’t always so scary when neighbors took care of neighbors in need, but with U.S. citizenship everyone thinks the government should pick up the task. And the problem is you can’t be partially free in the Democracy that the founding fathers never had a good word for, nor put Democracy in the Constitution. Being partially free is like a woman being partially pregnant. Old Ben Franklyn indicated, “He who would give up liberty for a little security deserves neither.

Because people look back at the freedom our ancestors had while still enjoying constitutionally secured rights in their state, and want to also live in freedom but are now “voluntarily” subject to the jurisdiction that was foreign respecting our ancestors, the United States now has 5 1/2 times the prison rate compared to the next closest sovereignty in the family of nations, The Peoples Republic of China.

A foreign U.S. citizen doing any business within a state is deemed to be in interstate commerce and thereby subject to the commerce clause in the Constitution.

I am convinced that to be free we need to first achieve our status as sovereigns in our states, abstain from interstate commerce over which the United States has delegated authority, and then as free men we have to appropriately break that foreign jurisdiction in its court system that is operating here in lieu of exercising jurisdiction at law. This foreign jurisdiction is the antithesis of the common law of the states. Even if we have the status of free men, judges and magistrates will continue to operate upon presumption that we are subject to their statutory law. The judges operate under this law, to wit: “Whenever the Code creates a “presumption” with respect to a fact, or provides that a fact is “presumed,” the trier of fact must find the existence of the fact unless and until evidence is introduced that supports a finding of its nonexistence.”

I believe that we, as sovereign free people, need to vey timely and properly challenge the jurisdiction of these courts without ever pleading into their foreign jurisdiction with a “not guilty” plea, nor ever allowing the judge to plead us into his foreign jurisdiction as if we are his subjects, and we need to properly submit evidence to the trier of fact that shows our status as free men to break the presumption that we are subject to his statutes within the jurisdiction under which he operates.

Howard Freeman used to pose the following question to the judges while equity has no cognizance of criminal matters, “This court has two criminal jurisdictions. One is a common law jurisdiction and the other is a condition of contract under the criminal aspects of an admiraly jurisdiction. Under which jurisdiction is this court planning to try this case?”

A soldier in the Army is in admiralty jurisdiction by his enlistment contract and if he doesn’t peel potatoes when the sarg say so, it is criminal.

The Bible says: “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” I always tell the grandkids, “Ignorance can be cured, but stupidity is forever.” And boy have I overcome a bunch of ignorance in about the last 10 months after spending some time in jail and putting information from George Gordon, Bill Thorton, and others together in my head.

Merle

Doug Hoffman, who narrowly lost the congressional race in NY District 23 to Bill Owens, has declared that the election is over and there will be no recount. This comes after numerous errors were committed election night, Nancy Pelosi certifying Bill Owens the winner, before he was certified by the state of New York, in time to vote for the Health Care Bill, and known software bugs or tampering with of the controversial Sequoia voting machines.

Doug Hoffman, on one level this was your decision to make. However, we are in different times. This is not the country your parents knew.

We have entered a new world, a post Nazi takeover, Orwellian world where being polite or naively playing the gentleman card as Nevile Chamberlain did with the Germans, will result in catastrophe. On a higher level, Mr. Hoffman, this is the decision of New York residents and ultimately the American people. Regardless of your actions or your next move, this serious breach of the public trust, must be investigated. As I and others have stated, Barack Obama, the Obama camp and Obama thugs, including, but not limited to ACORN and SEIU, stole the Democratic primaries and caucuses through election fraud and intimidation. With warnings issued early in 2008 about voting machines and possible control of them by Chavez’s Venezuela or muslim countries, and now the evidence from the NY District 23 election, God only knows the extent that voting machines altered vote counts in 2008. We must protect our elections going forward.

We must have an investigation. 

Dear Friends,
Today, Tuesday, November 24, 2009, it is with a heavy heart that we declare this election over.  We will formally end this election and not ask for a recount.  This was a difficult choice to make because so many people have put their faith, hope and aspirations into our campaign.
 Yes, there seem to have been many vote counting problems, missed vote counts and, as was recently reported by the Gouvernour Times, software problems in the computerized voting machines. Despite these incidents, I do not believe the voters of NY-23, or New Yorkers in general, would be well-served by a disruptive and costly recount that would most likely not change the election outcome.
 I know many are disappointed and even angry. To those I say now is not the time to look back, but to focus on the future and ensure that next year we win back this district decidedly. Know this decision was not an easy one. I did not want to let down those who worked so hard, donated so much and shared their enthusiasm for retaking our country with common-sense conservative values.
And rest assured, our energies are now directed toward 2010. This election, in which a third party candidate narrowly lost, showed that principles do matter.  Special interests do have an Achilles’ heel, the American people. Main-street conservatism’s voice is now echoing through the government chambers and boardrooms that shape America. By most measures, this campaign was a success and I have you all to thank for this. And all of us have to thank the Conservative Party of New York State for nominating a candidacy like ours.
We take away lessons from this year’s campaign that will make us stronger and more competitive in the future. Next time we will be better prepared. Many people forget that our campaign only began in earnest three months ago. Most campaigns of this stature take at least a year to prepare. In three months, we almost toppled an entrenched political system and successfully defied the conventional thinking of the elite political punditry. Citizen government is making a comeback in America.
I thank everyone who participated in this campaign and urge each one of you to stand with me in the future. We have a calling that we must answer. My opponent in this race quickly abandoned the promises he made to his voters. Within the first hour of being sworn in by Nancy Pelosi, Bill Owens broke 4 campaign promises — so much for change in Washington. We must resoundingly defeat him next year and, with your help, I promise to help restore our nation’s faith in elected officials when we win.
But there is more to do than just win back NY-23 in 2010. We must work to help other like-minded citizen candidates win across the country.  We need to make time to help other candidates who are working for the principles we hold dear — other fiscal, common-sense conservatives.  Together we can successfully take back our great nation, one legislator and one member at a time. We need more than one common-sense conservative voice in the echo chamber of liberal, spend thrift cacophony if we are to redirect our great country.
I would also like to commend those election commission officials who worked tirelessly and may have taken offense to an unfortunate and poorly worded fundraising email that was sent out toward the end of our campaign.  As we tried to make sense of the false vote counts and stories of software viruses in the voting machines, we never intended to imply the election commissioners had somehow acted improperly. This was never our intention and, on the contrary, the election commissioners went above and beyond to uphold their duty to ensure a fair election took place. I owe them a debt of gratitude for all they have done.
So where to now? Full speed ahead to 2010. This gives us time to carefully articulate and communicate thoughtful positions on issues that impact the great people of our district and ensure that our campaign promises are NOT broken.  Best of all, it allows me to work hand-in-hand with the many supporters who shared their ideas, their concerns and their dreams with me.
We need to continue to stand united because we cannot spend our way out of recession or tax our way to prosperity. We must continue to fight to protect our liberties and protect those who are yet to be born.  We must protect our country against terrorists and protect the sanctity of marriage. We must fix our corrupt tax code, our immigration policy and our educational system.  Most of all, we must defend the free enterprise system that made America the greatest and most prosperous country in the world.  Although I’m conceding an election today, I do it with the certainty that we will win back this seat a year from now.  I am certain of this because our mission is too big, the country’s problems too dire and the American people are too smart.
Thank you for all you have done and will continue to do. “We the people” are retaking America.

Doug Hoffman, this is bigger than you or the election in NY. We are at a crucial point in the history of this country. The actions we take now will determine the security and pursuit of life, liberty and happiness that our descendants and ultimately the entire world will enjoy.

Mr. Hoffman, you have chosen to end the election. I urge you to not end the cause.

Wells

The Citizen dive watch is amongst the best regarded, established dive watch available today. Far be it from creating expensive diving watches that are unobtainable to the average scuba diver, a Citizen diving watch is both sturdy enough to resist the rigors of a seawater environment, yet affordable enough to serve as either a primary or back-up watch. This is possibly why the Citizen watchmaker has such a loyal following amongst not just scuba divers, but swimmers, water skiers, wake surfers, wind surfers, jet skiers, sailors and surfers.

Citizen was originally established under the name “Shokosha Watch Research Institute” back in 1918. The trading name “Citizen“, arose from a pocket watch of the same title which was traded on the market in 1924. During the last 75 years, Citizen extended its business to eventually attain global recognition. The last twenty-five year period in particular, saw the company experience its most impressive growth, leading to the commanding position maintained today as one of the biggest watchmakers on the planet.

Citizen is best recognized for its “EcoDrive” solar system. Citizen “Eco” watches possess an environmentally friendly technology that captures ambient light sources to significantly increase watch’s power level. Using solar panels, the Citizen watch can top up the battery even under fluorescent and other kinds of non-natural light sources.

Eco-Drive watches also contain a smart power saving mode that activates when the power generating mechanism stops gathering energy due to lack of light energy input. In this power saving state, the power save effects vary from model to model, the watch halts the second hand at the 12 o’clock point. If the watch is stored in darkness for any more than three days, the other hands as well as the calendar also cease to move to reduce battery drain entirely. In all power save states, the inner time is maintained, so that when more light is obtained by the dial, the watch will restart regular operation with the correct time.

In fact, when you purchase a new Citizen eco watch, you can anticipate that the watch battery will remain “topped up” by the natural light in your environment, meaning you may not ever be required to change the battery. On the other hand, Citizen do recommend a regular service which will assure your analog watch operates reliably over the long haul. It is also recommended that that gaskets (in watches that have them), be replaced every two or three years so as to preserve their water tolerant qualities.

There are a number of time-pieces within Citizen’s “diver watch” range. The majority can tolerate water pressure equivalent to 200 m below sea level. Others like the Mens Diver Watch 1000 meter NH6931-06E Automatic Professional (priced at $1000 plus) exceed these depths by a long shot, but for virtually all scuba dives, 200m is certainly adequate.

Citizen watches across the board are marked either as “Diver’s 200M (air diver’s 200m)” or “Water resistant 20 bar (200m))” – (or to the depth rating of the given watch). The difference between the two depth rating systems are that Diver’s 200M (Air diver’s 200m) are subjected to a series of severe water resistant trials prior to delivery from the factories, whereas WR200 (Water resistant 20 bar) watches are created for consumers who are often in contact with water in their daily lives. These watches are not upheld to the same standard tests as the Diver’s 200M, so are not assured to stand up when subjected to the tougher conditions of scuba dives.

The most popular Citizen product series in the dive category are Promaster Carbon, Aqualand, Professional Diver and Perpetual Calendar. All modern day Citizen dive watches have the Citizen EcoDrive light powering system. A full coverage of each of Citizen’s diving watch range can be found on our website.

Have you ever been to a restaurant and accidentally ordered in a thematic way? This happened when I visited The Citizen (730 Queen St. East) with my dear friend Arcee. It seems everything we picked from the menu involved meat and eggs.

Citizen is one of those great Leslieville restaurants — good food, nice ambiance and a place to really enjoy your meal. Their menu is divided up into humourously named sections such as: “Mom, I’m hungry” (starters), “The last supper” (mains) and “Robin & Tonto” (side dishes).

The egg and meat love-in started with three ounces of Ontario Steak Tartar with Garnish ($13). In this case, the garnish was raw egg yolk. We mixed it in with the raw meat and it became a very rich and decadent first course.

I read several reviews calling Citizen’s Classic Caesar Salad ($13) one of the very best in they city so I knew I had to give it a try. It came with double-smoked bacon, crostini, and surprise, surprise, a poached egg. The full romaine leaves were perfectly dressed and I found it hard not to fight off my friend for more than my share of the bacon. Greedy, I know. We also tried the Merguez Sausage with Maple Mustard ($5), but at this point I was feeling a bit of meat overload.

Did I say something about too much meat? Well, rewind that because the minute the Weiner Schnitzel with Fried Egg, Lemon & Capers ($23) was set in front of us, I was ready to launch back in. Thankfully Arcee and I shared all dishes because I’m not sure the picture at the top properly displays just how big this portion was. The plate was basically the size of a tray. We also ordered Mashed Potato ($5) but could barely stuff the fluffy, buttery spoonfuls in our mouth. Our meal basically consisted of raw meat and eggs, lettuce with meat and eggs, more meat, and finally, meat and eggs. And yes, I agree, a cholesterol test may be in order.

Note: It’s just been announced that Citizen owner Rod Bowers sold the restaurant to Celebrity chef Lynn Crawford, interior designer Cherie Stinson (both of Food Network Canada’s Restaurant Makeover fame) and Stinson’s husband, Joey Skeir. They plan to open their new “chef-driven” restaurant in March 2010.

The Citizen / 730 Queen St. East, Toronto
416 465 0100 / Mon-Wed & Sun 5 pm-10 pm; Thu-Sat 5 pm-11 pm

Originally posted by Justin on Friday, November 6, 2009.

A few years ago I lived with a large and variable group of roommates totalling between two and twelve people, all of whom are now lifelong friends. It sounds silly to have twelve roommates, I know, but that’s the nature of the military sometimes-very little private space.

Anyway, the nature of the boys I lived with being what it was, we spent a whole lot of time trecking around the Big Sur coastal mountain region just south of Carmel, California. It was a fun little group to be a part of. Lots of hiking and backpacking and other outdoor activities. It was always neat to be a part of such a neat social clique.

My friends and I did everything together. That’s another thing about being in the military. You are usually on the same exact schedule as everybody else. We went to classes together, ate together, slept together, showered together, got haircuts together…we did everything together.

It was always fun…until it wasn’t anymore.

I distinctly remember the event that blemished the fun I used to have in the mountains with my dearest friends. It was a Tuesday, and we had gathered at our daily supper ritual. Tuesday nights were typically when the most enthusiastic of our clique began planning the details of the next weekend’s activity. I typically avoided these discussions and spent my time devouring a pile of sliced cucumbers, but this particular week I listened carefully, because I was trying to find a point in the conversation where I could notify the group I wouldn’t be coming along. I didn’t have a particular reason. I just didn’t feel like going anywhere that weekend. I would probably just stay home and walk around post, or bounce from room to room hanging out with barracks rats.

I finally found a chance to say it during a lag in the planning. “You know, I think I’ll probably just kick around here this weekend. I’m not going.” By the time I had finished getting that off of my chest, I found myself facing about five confused and incredulous faces.

“What do you mean you’re not going? …You signed up.”

What followed was a lot of dickering and negotiating but this “you signed up” argument kept resurfacing and became a formidable beast to fight back. I’ll spare you the blow-by-blow of this argument because its not important. Let me just skip to the end of it all so we can move on. I wound up going on that hike. I’d signed up.

In my best recollection this was the first time I heard the term, “you signed up.” It was used often in the following months to challenge dissenters who didn’t feel like coming on the hike, and I hated it when it got me into hikes and shopping trips and things that I didn’t necessarily feel like doing at the time. But it became such a regularly used challenge, that even I used it to demand compliance from pals, despite my disdain for it.

A few weeks ago, I ran across this quote from the writing of Mikhail Bakunin, who was a Russian Army officer and large Collectivist-Anarchist. This quote tossed me back into memories of an era of being “signed up” with a particular social group of friends who conducted weekly outdoor activities with its members, whether they felt like it or not.

A tacit contract! That is to say a wordless, and consequently a thoughtless and will-less contract: a revolting nonsense! … For it assumes that while I was in a state of not being able to will, to think, to speak, I bound myself and all my descendants – only by virtue of having let myself be victimized without raising any protest – into perpetual slavery.

Bakunin is railing against the “tacit consent” aspect of social contract theory. The social contract is what theoretically establishes a government or other framework for social organization (like my gang of pals) and tacit consent refers to being affiliated with a government or social organization without ever actually having to sign your name to its founding “contract”, if there is such a thing that even exists (how many citizenship contracts have you signed?). Tacit consent often means that since you enjoy the benefits of being in that group, you are obligated to follow its rules, just like everybody else in that group.

If I’m drawing this analogy right, I can stop with the political theory lesson and move back to my metaphor, and apply Bakunin’s criticism.

Being part of this group of pals was like being tacitly incorporated into a social contract. I benefitted greatly from being a part of it. To this day my dearest friends are from this same clique, including my new partner here at S.C.C., Matt. At the same time I was expected to go along with it and make things fun for everybody else by showing up and playing along. The tricky bit was trying to jive my sudden dissention about this hike with my tacit consent or “signing up” identified by my buddies.

This was Bakunin’s problem too. He’s upset that this whole tacit consent business is just a coersive technique to demand compliance with a majority action. He uses some nasty words on tacit consent (that’s why the elipses) in this quote, but that seems to be the hallmark of an Anarchist writer. The whole coercive aspect of a tacit social contract is a little easier to see in my little story than it might be to notice in a familiar modern state, but I think it’s the same in both arenas.

But here’s the trickier bit. He’s right. My participation at that point was “wordless”, pretty “thoughtless” and “will-less”. It wasn’t until I demonstrated my own will that I met with any confrontation, and while the consequences of this confrontation are minor in a group of friends, it could lead to some larger issues at the scale of national citizenship.

Now the next thing you might expect me to say would be that I should have broken away from this group immediately, lest I be made subject to their coercive methods again and again. At least that’s the road I’ve been leading you down, but that’s not what I am here to say. I loved those guys. I loved being a part of our group. Ordinarily, I liked the activities we did together. It was just this one time I didn’t want to participate, and I did anyway. And it felt rotten. I felt rotten for saying I didn’t want to go, and they made me feel rotten for saying so. I felt rotten going on the trip and was happy when it was over.

What’s the solution here? We are all part of some sort of social state. How does the effect of tacit consent become coersion so quickly?

The duty of a citizen is to actively participate in a social state, so there is no avoiding this. I think there are two lessons here.

(1) Since it is the duty of a citizen to actively participate in order in improve the state, perhaps I should have made a larger effort at shaping the future weekend’s activities. Perhaps directed the effort towards something I would have found preferable to one more weekend in the woods. Making the jump to the modern state, a citizen should be a little more proactive is shaping the direction of his organization. I think this means more than voting or contributing campaign money. It means reading and getting smart on what’s happening, communicating with civic leaders, teaching the next generation the trails of civic participation, and more.

(2) It was probably not wrong for that group to have expectations from me. I had up until that point happily participated in all activities and had not raised a complaint. I hadn’t ever had a reason to complain. What was probably wrong were the coercive tactics we regularly used to demand compliance. In a society, this kind of compulsory cooperation cannot be right. Participation in a society should be deliberate and willful, and should not be assumed merely by participation.

So I’ve been thinking about my role as a friend in this group. What were my responsibilities? What were the group’s responsibilities? What were the roles and obligations, if any? Starting with a look at a clique of friends, and a little help from an anarchist, I think I’ve got one more sense of what it means to be a citizen. A thoughtful, willful, participating citizen.

-Justin

Originally posted by Justin on Friday, October 23, 2009.

[First of all, I'd like to introduce a terrific friend of mine who has joined me here as a collaborator and contributor. Matt is not only a good man, but he was indeed my best man five years ago and we've had a friendship that has lasted many years. He has joined me in order to add to this project and contribute to the annunciation of the Soldier-Citizen-Sapien ethic. I would also like to offer an enthusiastic greetings to Matt's family and friends who are reading this (and me) for the first time. I look forward to any part of the discussion you care to add.]

Now on with it…

There has been quite a bit of debate, well, just about everywhere on the resolution of the global financial crisis and subsequent recession. In the U.S. there has been debate at least as early as the 2008 presidential campaign about how to deal with the recession, and get back on track towards growth.

Now sitting from my perch of stable employment, it was easy for this question to come to me, although it might not be altogether fair of me to do so:

Why is everybody so eager to rush back into growth?

The big financial bubble had just collapsed. Why were we in such a hurry to charge that imaginary capital back up and create a new one? The only debate that was going on was how to get back on a track towards growth, but nobody I saw was really debating why getting back on track was desirable in the first place.

Is it just assumed that growth is what we want to be doing? Need to be doing?

So I did what any self-respecting concerned citizen would do. I went to my local library and Googled it. Turns out that if you Google anything with the word “rush” in it, all you get is a lot of news and blog pages about Rush Limbaugh with not a single sponsored link.

So I went back home and ripped a page out of my old market-capitalism 101 book. Here’s what I found out…

It turns out that the whole point of capitalism is to use capital (like cash, factories, raw materials, etc.) and make more capital out of it. We do this by making and selling stuff for profit, and then turning the profit into capital. Simple. Turn capital into more capital. Turn stuff into more stuff. More and more and more stuff (Here’s a little story about stuff).

But the simplest and most versatile type of capital is still cash. Capital is cash, and capitalism is about stacking up cash and using it to make more cash.

Cash. It’s a financial asset.

Wait a tick. Didn’t we just have a financial bubble? Like…a cash bubble?

Okay, let me catch you up on what happened in two sentences for those who aren’t tracking the financial bubble yet. Bankers (and pseudo-bankers, and not-bankers) used good capitalist goals to create more cash (just capital) out of cash…but it was imaginary cash. But then somebody told everybody else that the cash was imaginary, and everybody started freaking out.

But it was just good capitalism right? Right???

Here’s the thing about capitalism. It’s awesome. There is not an economist around who can tell you about a faster way to create a whole ton of goods and wealth to go around. Capitalism works so good.

Market-capitalism is awesome too. Any economist will tell you that a market is the most efficient way to trade and allocate goods among people. Costs are low (sometimes lower than they ought to be but…not now) and anybody can participate in a free market. Being able to participate in a free market makes everybody more free. Because if they couldn’t participate in a free market freely, that would be the definition of being less free. See how definitions are rad like that?

But if there is one thing I learned at the library on all those Rush sites is that bubbles suck, and imaginary capital sucks. I’m also smart enough to know that all you can do with imaginary capital is make more imaginary capital or imaginary stuff. And America can’t feed the kids with imaginary stuff. And we have to feed the kids.

So now we want to get back to growth, right? We want to get back on track and make more stuff, right? Do we want more imaginary stuff? It is theorized that this has happened before. Turn a tech bubble in 2001 into a housing bubble in the middle bush years and a housing bubble into a financial bubble in 2008.

Pop.

Pop.

Pop.

So we want to make real stuff, not imaginary stuff.

I suppose we could do that, but a thought just crept into my head (no it didn’t, this question hit me at the library).

Why do we want to to begin making more real stuff? Haven’t we got enough stuff?

I’m going to work on this question another time. This has gotten a touch lengthier than I wanted it to be. But you can anticipate I’ll be back with “bubble back II” soon.

-Justin

Originally posted by Justin on Friday, September 11, 2009.

The intentions of this blog being what they are, it would be absolutely negligent of me not to remark on the tragedy eight years ago.

The 9/11 attacks are a substantial historical benchmark in the United States and in many other parts of the world. They have had social, cultural, and political implications everywhere in part because of the nature of the attacks themselves, but also because some of the world-changing events that have followed.

So we say “Never Forget” in remembrance of 9/11, but what are we pledged never to forget?

3,017 people died or are presumed dead in the 9/11 attacks themselves. We will never forget them.

More than 4,000 troops have been killed in “War on Terror” operations in Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11. We should never forget them either.

Other actions in the “War on Terror”, either by troops or terrorists, have cost an estimated 62,006 people their lives as well. If the “War on Terror” is a direct response to the 9/11 attacks, perhaps we should not forget them either.

I’ve tried to filter my thoughts about 9/11 through the three personae I attempt to use in this blog in remembrance of all of these that have lost their lives as a result, and as an exercise in developing my own thoughts about the attributes of each character.

The Soldier is ashamed of 9/11. It is the Soldier’s duty to protect the people from attackers who would harm the innocent. The soldier would trade his life for any of the civilians who died at the World Trade Center. Many Soldiers died at the Pentagon in the act of serving their country on duty. The Soldier’s loyalty is to his comrades-in-arms and the people he protects. The Soldier never forgets because he refuses to let any more harm come to the people he is pledged to defend.

The Citizen demands answers for the attacks on 9/11. It is the Citizen’s duty to ensure that the government is prepared to provide for the defense the country, and to demand that a proper course of action be taken to prevent an attack from happening again. The 9/11 commission investigated and made a report documenting the events of 9/11 and making recommendations for ensuring the future defense of the United States. The Citizen watches his leadership and does his part to contribute to the well-being of the nation, any way he can. The Citizen never forgets because his memory will serve as the motivation to demand answers from his leaders and ensure that they perform their task of defending the state.

The Human Being weeps for those who were killed in the attacks, and for every person who was killed on their behalf in retribution. The Human Being weeps for the humiliations and torture performed in prisons and detention centers in the name of justice or in the name of self-preservation or defense. The Human Being’s duty is compassion for his fellow man and taking care to preserve their rights to life and freedom, as the Human Being enjoys naturally. The Human Being never forgets, because the death of another man should be the thing that affects him the most, and the torture of another man, or restriction of his natural rights is suffering almost unbearable to observe.

I won’t forget 9/11.

9/11 is one of the reasons I do what I do, and one of the reasons I write here in this diary.

-Justin

Originally posted by Justin on Friday, June 12, 2009.

I don’t have a whole lot of commentary for this one but I think it’s necessary to bear witness to the reindeer games going on this week in the New York state Senate. The thrust of it is that two renegade state senators have flipped the majority body upside down and bogged down the last scheduled week of the session with drama and intrigue. This last week of the session also happens to be the most important week in the legislature as the body reputedly does 30-40% of it’s work during this important week. In addition to this, NY Governor David Patterson has set a state gay marriage vote in the lap of the legislature, to be voted on, yea or nay, before the session is over. But instead of earning their paychecks this week, this is what has happened…

On Monday, June 8, 2009, Democrat Senators Pedro Espada Jr. (Bronx) and Hiram Monserrate (Queens) participate in a leadership vote for the state Senate, joining with the Republican minority to form a brand new majority and naming Sen. Espada the new Senate president. They say they are not switching parties but merely voting for leadership reform. Watching this happen the Democrats try to adjourn to shut the leadership vote down, but fail. Blind-sided and probably embarrassed, the “former” Democratic majority split, leaving the Senate floor, locking the doors and shutting off the lights. Then they went to their lawyers to see if a judge couldn’t give them their majority back. Here is a blow-by-blow of the Senate proceedings on Monday.

Governor Patterson comes out against the Senate and their shenanigans telling them to “act like adults” and calling the whole process “ridiculous” and “despicable” and saying they they had humiliated government “even by Albany standards” which is evidently a thing people say here in the Empire State. While he initially decided to recognize the former Senate majority leader, Malcolm Smith, he said later on Wednesday that he wanted the Senators to get back in the chamber, take a vote, and he would go with whoever they decided. He admits that he has no legal power to make things happen in this dispute. Based on communications between Governor Patterson and the state legislature, I detect that he doesn’t get along too well with them, but he’s no favorite of theirs either. He has been bopping them on the heads about the budget all year (and ever since he’s been governor for that matter).

As of yesterday, the NY Senate has been holding sessions with 30 Republicans and the 2 Democrat defectors (dems from the former majority don’t even show up), although Monserrate seems to be on the fence about his decision still. The new majority has had trouble keeping him in the chamber and it is uncertain whether he is really committed to this new coalition.

What I find spectacular is that every article you can find about this fiasco is sure to mention the iffy reputations of the two defecting Democrats. It is often announced that Senator Espada has had trouble keeping his hands out of charity funds in order to finance his political campaigns and Monserrate was arrested last year for slashing his girlfriend in the face with a broken glass. So, not exactly the classiest of characters participating in this coup, but I wonder if these two are representative of the rest of the folks working the Senate in Albany. Governor Patterson’s “even by Albany standards” quote seems very appropriate.

It is also remarkable that Espada, as the newly elected Senate President, is next in line for Governor Patterson’s job if anything bad should happen to him. Patterson himself seems to break the mold of a NY politician, relatively clean compared to Elliot Spitzer, his predecessor, who resigned in the wake of a call-girl scandal, and Pedro Espada Jr., the embezzling turncoat Senator who could be the governor in a heartbeat.

My larger question is: what the heck is going on in state governments? I mean, this is typically the resource pool for the manpower we get at the national leadership level, right? Not too long ago the President himself was a state senator (who himself attributes his election to the Illinois Senate to a scandal and some luck).

Perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised. I’m an outsider to NY politics so this all seems very amusing, but when I reflect on the state where I was born, we elected the Terminator in a contest that also included celebrity Gary Coleman and about a thousand other candidates in a news-making circus election season. But I also have to reflect on Governor Rick Perry’s antics from Texas with his recent comments about state secession and the like.

What in the world is going on?

-Justin

Originally posted by Justin on Friday, June 5, 2009. There are multiple places where the Keeling Curve is indicated, but the links have gone missing. See: “Keeling Curve.”

Let me get this strait…

We cap carbon emissions as a desirable level. Then we issue tradable pollution permits. How this is done is an important step which I can address in a footnote but I’m going to move on.

The tradable permits have a price. That price determines whether it is going to be worthwhile to stop polluting or reduce emissions. If it costs less to buy a permit than reduce my emissions (technology, lost revenue), I’m buying that permit! If it costs more to buy a permit than user cleaner technology, then I’m going to clean up my plant or reduce output to control my emissions.

All this settles out to a sexy little efficient scenario where all the people who can easily reduce emissions will do so and those who can’t won’t do it. The costs of reducing emissions will the lowest it can be and the annual carbon emissions level will be set at…whatever… [edit: whatever congress/EPA feels like it should be set at]

So everybody’s good right?

Wrong. Everybody feels good. We are cutting emissions! Sure we are-in some places. In other places plants are just buying the permits so they can drive on. They pass the expense on to their customers and the bills go up in neighborhoods where the plant can’t cost-effectively lower the pollution output.

Meanwhile, while everybody has got their fuzzies from carbon control legislature, a constant flow of carbon-dioxide is going into the air albeit measured and “capped.” Perhaps it is assumed that every year we get a new atmosphere with a baseline amount of carbon-dioxide, and we can add to it a certain amount each year and then switch it out for a new one next year.

This is the Keeling Curve. It measures carbon-dioxide content of the atmosphere at Mauna Loa, HI in parts per million.

Notice something? That’s right, it goes up. More and more carbon-dioxide is put into the atmosphere every year. If you believe in the greenhouse affect and the theory of global climate change, this is a bad thing.

Okay, straw man effectively knocked out. Let me make a real argument. What if I told you the carbon-dioxide was necessary for plant life on Earth. It’s literally plant food. Plants do not exist without carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere. Well heck, put more of the stuff in the atmosphere. All that will happen is more plants will grow or they will grow bigger of faster.

Okay. Fine.

This is the Keeling Curve. Notice something? That’s right, it goes up. Which means more carbon-dioxide is going into the atmosphere. Some is getting taken out, but there is still a net increase in the amount of carbon-dioxide going up there. Carbon is going up at the rate of a smoke stack but is getting sucked back out at the pace of leaf growth. I’ve watched leaves grow. It takes a long time. Please don’t be so amused by the “cap” that you forget to ask where what’s left over is going to go.

We can argue that the biosphere will catch up…leaf growth is still growth, right? Finding the balance is the key. When we can emit as much carbon as will grow in foliage each year, there should be a balance, right? Right?

Well. What does your equilibrium state look like? (I prefer not to use loaded language, so I’ll go ahead and use images) The point is there has to be an eventual end-state to all of this extra plant food.

Something ought to be done that doesn’t just result in a steady flow of carbon each year to add to the world’s problems. The answer is reaching a carbon output level that is EXACTLY parallel to the natural amount of carbon that is naturally released into the atmosphere. That is to say: rotting detritus and chemical exchange on the surface of water. This means a switch to ZERO emission energy generation like wind and solar energy. If I must go on, I’ll do it in another segment.

For now, suffice it to say that I’m not really cap-and-trade kind of guy. Nice thought, but long-run ineffective.

I still owe you that footnote. Here goes. The question is whether the government issues permits free or auctions. I’m not going to triple-check my info for a foot-note but it looks like recent cap-and-trade legislation is talking about a mix of free permits and auctioned permits. 15% will be auctioned if memory serves.

If the government issues permits free, then NOBODY cuts emissions. They’ve got permits now for whatever they pollute. In addition to this, now they’ve got something to sell-for FREE. Environmental groups will probably be the only market for these permits which can be sold when better technology comes about to clean up pollution (which it should and will-it always does). The price will be low if not zero for these permits when they are sold.

Now auctioning off the permits actually has the desired affect of accomplishing exactly what I’ve described above. It actually does cause incentive to change technologies or find another way to lower emissions, because you’ve got to PAY to pollute. I think I also made it clear why that’s a lame idea.

Anyway, perhaps they’re thinking of a smooth middle ground. Meet up half way. Because as anyone who has passed third grade math will tell you, 15% is totally a good half-way point.

Anyhow, toodles. Sorry so long.

-Justin

Originally posted by Justin on Tuesday, May 19, 2009.

Mr. President,

I write to you in frustration at your hesitation to take action against the Department of Defense “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy. As I write this letter, many like me are demonstrating their support online for 1LT Daniel Choi who is the most recent and perhaps most notorious service member being separated from the service because of the statements he made regarding his sexuality.

Daniel Choi is a friend of mine, but not the first to be separated under the DADT policy. SGT Bleu Copas, who I attended language school with, was also separated under DADT. Both of these men are dedicated soldiers, capable linguists and outstanding Americans. Their expulsion from the U.S. Army is regrettable and shameful.

You have stated yourself that “equality is a moral imperative,” and have declared the repeal of DADT to be a measure of equality for gay Americans. Recently, your White House agenda page referring to this issue has diluted its language to remind us that the task of repeal must be done in a sensible way. I ask how it is possible to wait for a sensible way to resolve an issue that is a “moral imperative.”

While I understand a little about the nature of the barriers you face in successfully gaining repeal of DADT, I am frustrated that your apparent support for this “moral imperative” has been little more than a note of solidarity to 2LT Sandy Tsao and similar utterances I have noticed in the news. I wonder how you honestly intend to use the “bully pulpit” you pledged to use to call for repeal of DADT. I have noticed no bullying behavior and have seen you behind no pulpits calling explicitly for repeal.

My wife and I both voted for you last year, and we do not regret that decision. I am not a single-issue voter although your actions in addressing this issue will be a part of my future decision making. I feel that your inaction on this issue, and failure to address it in a public way, as you pledged, degrades your credibility and your promise to me. Perhaps my greatest frustration is that you cannot or will not act on a seemingly easy issue from the vantage of a very high moral ground; and why not?

I beg you to take some action towards fulfillment of this very powerful pledge of yours for equality. To send some signal that you are interested in affecting a real change and not just sympathetic to the poor policy’s victims, rejecting the position that you lack any real control over the policy mechanism. If you were extremely bold, you might find a way to block or hinder the discharge of Daniel Choi, despite the DADT policy. Please don’t just send an apology note.

In closing, I would like to repeat some words that I am sure you are already familiar with. While you hesitate in making a difference with regards to DADT, and you let the system remain undisturbed, let the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. remind you that “we will have repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” I pray that you or I will not have to repent for your continued inaction against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”.

With absolute greatest respect,

-Justin