A neat bit of Texas history as we get ready to give thanks for all of the rich bounty with have been blessed with by our creator. This look back comes from our Congressman, Judge John Carter.

Thanksgiving, like the Fourth of July, is a uniquely American holiday, one in which we put aside for a day our political differences and give thanks for the blessings we have received for our families and nation. But that shouldn’t stop us from taking a look at the history of Thanksgiving as it relates to Texas.

Most Americans are ignorant of the fact that Thanksgiving was celebrated in Texas 23 years before the first Pilgrim set foot by accident in Massachusetts in 1621.

Now we in Texas don’t mean that as an insult to our northern brethren. As Will Rogers said, we’re all ignorant – just about different things.

When and where Thanksgiving began always hinges on one of three arguments. Is the birthplace of Thanksgiving determined by the location of the first official feast of Thanksgiving by European colonists, or the first proclamation declaring an annual day of Thanksgiving, and is the recognition of a late Thursday in November a pre-condition for winning the contest?

If the answer is the former, Texas wins, and out with the turkeys. According to the Texas Almanac, El Paso celebrated the first Thanksgiving in North America. Spanish explorer Juan de Onate and his expedition of some 600 soldiers and colonists officially celebrated April 30, 1598 as a day of Thanksgiving on the site of what would become El Paso. They reportedly had ducks, geese, and fish.

Unfortunately, if we insist on the establishment of November as the month, we’re back to turkeys and some other state.

But Texans are certainly not the first to challenge the traditional misunderstanding that Massachusetts invented Thanksgiving. Those misdirected Pilgrims were supposed to be part of the Virginia Colony, which officially celebrated a day of Thanksgiving in 1610 in Jamestown following their survival of the infamous “Starving Time”, when the young Colony almost perished.

Now to argument number two – when did it become an official annual event? Here comes Connecticut, which proclaimed the first annual celebration in 1639.

And so the argument goes, through the centuries, with states celebrating a day of Thanksgiving towards the end of November or first week of December across the country.

Texas Governor George Wood proclaimed our official annual Thanksgiving Day in 1849 as the first Thursday in December.

President Abraham Lincoln (R-IL) in 1863 became our first President to officially proclaim a national day of Thanksgiving, establishing the last Thursday in November as the official day.

President Franklin Roosevelt (D-NY) moved the official day from the last to the fourth Thursday in November to give shoppers more time before Christmas. That was part of Roosevelt’s 1939 economic stimulus plans, since all the massive federal spending he had undertaken since 1933 had failed to end the Great Depression, and he was finally turning to the free market for help. History repeats.

But back to putting aside our political differences.

There’s nothing wrong with having some grilled duck alongside that traditional turkey this Thursday, or some great Tex-Mex too for that matter. That’s real diversity that I whole-heartedly endorse.

We have adopted our current Thanksgiving traditions over centuries of American history and folklore to come up with our current version and that’s fine.

There is just one thing about this holiday that cannot be altered or debated, even in good-natured regional jibing, regardless of where, when, or how we celebrate it.

Thanksgiving is our national holiday to thank the Lord God Almighty for the incredible blessings He has poured on us as a nation, and to recommit our country to being the kind of nation He would have us to be.

Happy Thanksgiving to all, and May God continue to bless each of you, Texas, and America.

For a little balance, here is the Thanksgiving proclamation delivered by Edward Rawson on June 20, 1676, on behalf of the governing council of Charlestown, Massachusetts, declaring June 29 a day of thanksgiving. It’s reprinted as original:

“The Holy God having by a long and Continual Series of his Afflictive dispensations in and by the present War with the Heathen Natives of this land, written and brought to pass bitter things against his own Covenant people in this wilderness, yet so that we evidently discern that in the midst of his judgements he hath remembered mercy, having remembered his Footstool in the day of his sore displeasure against us for our sins, with many singular Intimations of his Fatherly Compassion, and regard; reserving many of our Towns from Desolation Threatened, and attempted by the Enemy, and giving us especially of late with many of our Confederates many signal Advantages against them, without such Disadvantage to ourselves as formerly we have been sensible of, if it be the Lord’s mercy that we are not consumed, It certainly bespeaks our positive Thankfulness, when our Enemies are in any measure disappointed or destroyed; and fearing the Lord should take notice under so many Intimations of his returning mercy, we should be found an Insensible people, as not standing before Him with Thanksgiving, as well as lading him with our Complaints in the time of pressing Afflictions:

The Council has thought meet to appoint and set apart the 29th day of this instant June, as a day of Solemn Thanksgiving and praise to God for such his Goodness and Favour, many Particulars of which mercy might be Instanced, but we doubt not those who are sensible of God’s Afflictions, have been as diligent to espy him returning to us; and that the Lord may behold us as a People offering Praise and thereby glorifying Him; the Council doth commend it to the Respective Ministers, Elders and people of this Jurisdiction; Solemnly and seriously to keep the same Beseeching that being perswaded by the mercies of God we may all, even this whole people offer up our bodies and souls as a living and acceptable Service unto God by Jesus Christ.”

Here’s wishing everyone a wonderful Thanksgiving Day.

Marooned is a 1969 American science-fiction film directed by John Sturges and starring Gregory Peck, Richard Crenna, David Janssen, James Franciscus, and Gene Hackman.

The film was released less than four months after the Apollo 11 moon landing and was tied to the public fascination with the event. It won an Academy Award for Visual Effects.

It was based on the 1964 novel of the same name by Martin Caidin; however, while the original novel was based on the single-pilot Mercury program, the film depicted a space station program resembling Skylab (the space station seen in the film was based on an early proposal of the OWS based on several sketches during the Apollo Applications Program). Caidin rewrote the novel, incorporating appropriate material from the original version and updating it to follow the film.

Caidin acted as technical adviser.

Plot Summary
After spending several months in an orbiting lab, three astronauts prepare to return to earth only to find their rockets wont fire. After initially thinking they might have to abandon them in orbit, NASA decides to launch a daring rescue. Their plans are complicated by a Hurricane headed towards the launch site and a shrinking air supply in the astronauts capsule.

Taglines

–Three marooned astronauts. Only 55 minutes left to rescue them. While the whole world watches and waits…

–The Saga of Ironman One

Directed by
  John Sturges

Writers
  Martin Caidin - Novel
  Mayo Simon  – Writer

Producers
  Frank Capra Jr. … associate producer
  M.J. Frankovich … producer

Cast
  Gregory Peck … Charles Keith
  Richard Crenna … Jim Pruett
  David Janssen … Ted Dougherty
  James Franciscus … Clayton Stone
  Gene Hackman … Buzz Lloyd
  Lee Grant … Celia Pruett
  Nancy Kovack … Teresa Stone
  Mariette Hartley … Betty Lloyd
  Scott Brady … Public Affairs Officer
  Craig Huebing … Flight Director
  Frank Marth … Air Force System Director
  John Carter … Flight Surgeon

Special Effects Department
  Chuck Gaspar … special effects coordinator (uncredited)

Visual Effects Department
  Lawrence W. Butler … special visual effects
  Donald C. Glouner … special visual effects
  Robie Robinson … special visual effects

Gregory Peck and Gene Hackman

Trivia
Based on a novel by Martin Caidin, who would later write “Cyborg”, the basis for the TV series The Six Million Dollar Man.

Was the impetus behind the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz Test Project where American astronauts and Soviet cosmonauts docked in space.

Frank Capra began work on the film. Inspired by his work on the Martin-Marietta Corp.-commissioned faux documentary, “Rendezvous in Space” for the 1964 World’s Fair in New York, Capra (a chemical engineer by education) worked to make the picture for Columbia, but finally abandoned the project in preproduction in May 1966 when he couldn’t bring the budget down to the $3-million required by Columbia worldwide production chief M.J. Frankovich. The eventual budget for the finished film (directed by John Sturges) was $8 million. Capra never made another film.

There is no musical score for this film. Instead, each spacecraft has its own ambient soundtrack when it is shown in space. The Apollo shots feature a low hum; the XRV, a hollow ringing; the Nimbus Weather Satellite, a rapid series of beeps ascending in pitch; and the Russian Voshkhod, a constant pitch series of beeps. The only exceptions to this is are a very slight, muted bit of music played under the Apollo ambient soundtrack during Pruett’s final EVA, and a single tone (with some ambient effects that could be called music) during the opening credits.

Average Shot Length (ASL) = 8 seconds

The Film Ventures International re-edit of this film (retitled “Space Travelers”) was featured on an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000. This was also the only film featured on the show to have won an Academy Award.

The film’s release (prior to the launch of Apollo 13) about a space disaster led to a real-life crisis aboard Skylab 3 (c. July -September 1973) where a thruster leak developed on board the Apollo CSM. The depiction of a rescue vehicle (the lifting body in the film) was the basis of the Skylab Rescue space vehicle, based on a Block II Apollo Command Module (CSM #119) which was modified by North American Rockwell. Memos dating back to December 1970 (from NASA facilities at the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston, TX and Kennedy Space Center) confirm that a rescue spacecraft will be the next in line if the main Apollo CSM fails during flight. By November 1971, the modified CSM was phased in with evaluation and testing (prior to the final moon mission, Apollo 17, which launched in December 1972). The real-life thruster leak aboard Skylab 3 was neutralized and fixed where the rescue launch vehicle (piloted by NASA astronauts Vance Brand and Don Lind) was pulled from flight duty; the vehicle was on standby for Skylab 4 and the Apollo-Soyuz mission. Brand would fly on the Apollo-Soyuz mission and Lind on STS-51B in 1985. Since the final Apollo flight in 1975 (with Apollo-Soyuz), the modified command module, CSM #119, has been on display @ the Kennedy Space Center’s Visitors Complex. NASA engineers have studied the modified Skylab Rescue CSM for the Orion Spacecraft (part of Project Constellation), which will replace the Space Shuttle after its final flight in 2010.

In the film, the astronauts are seen using what appears to be the early concept of the Manned Maneuvering Unit – during the real-life Skylab missions, the Astronaut Maneuvering Unit (the AMU) was tested inside the space station and never tested in the vacuum of space. The first use of the MMU was during STS-41-B (the fourth flight of the Challenger) on February 7, 1984.

The space station using a spent Saturn S-IVB stage was based on early proposals during the Apollo Applications Program; at the time of filming, what came to fruition as Skylab was still under development. The only differences between the orbital workshop depicted in the film (which has a rocket motor attached) and the real Skylab was the incorporation of the Apollo Telescope Mount and two docking ports on the docking module, not to mention the absence of a rocket motor. The real Skylab was launched as a ‘dry’ workshop using a surplus Saturn V #SA-513 (originally earmarked for the canceled Apollo 18 mission). The three-man crew in the film spend 5 months living in space; the longest duration in the real Skylab was 84 days during the final mission, Skylab 4.

AMazon Specials!

The Texas Progressive Alliance is ready for the start of the World Series, and it presents to you its weekly highlight reel as we await the first pitch.

quizas of South Texas Chisme wonders about the US detaining a Mexican human rights activist.

WWJD on Carter Avenue? TXsharon wants to know if Chesapeake Energy or anyone in Fort Worth government has stopped to consider the answer to that question. Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS.

Bay Area Houston wonders if the Hispanic community will dump their endorsement of Gene Locke.

WhosPlayin lost a fight with the Lewisville ISD, whose board voted unanimously to define media as print and broadcast only and give itself permission to shut out bloggers. (includes video of meeting)

The Texas Cloverleaf picks up on the “Pay to Play” system, alive and while with Rick Perry and the TABC.

Problems for the Democrats in 2010? Harry Balczak at McBlogger uncovers something that says that’s what we’re exactly heading toward.

Dembones at Eye On Williamson Posts on TX-31 Rep. John Carter’s latest hypocrisy Carter’s income disclosure problem spoils GOP tactic.

Progressive Coalition candidates for Houston city council (and a Socialist running for mayor) are the subject of PDiddie’s post at Brains and Eggs.

Neil at Texas Liberal suggested that voters in Houston consider Progressive Coalition candidates running for Houston City Council. It is hard to see how voting for Democrats year-after-year in city elections has been of great benefit to the people of Houston.

Over at Texas Kaos, libbyshaw provides a public service by providing a Republican hypocrisy score card. Check out her Texas GOP Hall of Hypocrites. You can’t tell the hyprocrites without a scorecard. Wait, you can almost. If there is an “R” beside their names, the odds are better than even….

Off the Kuff notes that a settlement has been reached in a lawsuit between Democrats and the Harris County Tax Assessor’s office over allegations of voter suppression.

Last week I introduced a bill to remove House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel over his outrageous ethics and tax violations, according to CBS News New York,
NBC’s Today Show, and many other television outlets across the country.

As expected, the Democrats refused to pass it, as reported by FOX News.

Now the left wing of the Democratic Party will come after me in force in retaliation.

Over just this last year, we have seen the horror of gross election fraud by ACORN; the outrageous tax evasions of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Charlie Rangel; Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trashing of the rules of the House; the Obama Administration’s theft by conversion of the franchises of thousands of independent car dealers and the equities of GM and Chrysler stock and bondholders; the appointment of unconstitutional Czars to run an Obama shadow government; and too many other corruptions of justice to mention.

We are finally seeing unfiltered the absolute contempt of the left for any law, rule, or process that dares stand in the way of imposing their Marxist agenda on a once-free America.

I am resolved to fight these tyrants to the death and restore our Republic.

After my third bill this year exposing the hypocrisy of Charlie Rangel paying no interest or penalties for years of tax evasion, that far left is now resolved to come after me personally for taking on this fight.  And I am going to need the help of every true conservative in the country if we hope to prevail against the kind of campaign funds tsunami the Democrats will unleash against me.

If you are familiar with this fight, I ask for your financial help right now – this week – to show the Democrats they cannot gang up to steal this congressional seat in vengeance, and to silence my call to restore the Rule of Law.   For those that can, make the maximum donation allowed by federal law ONLINE RIGHT NOW. We’re going to need every penny.

As one of the six elected Republican leaders in the House, I have chosen this specific ground to defend on the nation’s political battlefield very carefully.   As a Texas State Judge for over 20 years before coming to Congress, I chose protecting and preserving the Rule of Law for my targeted mission as Secretary of the House Republican Conference.

That mission includes defending every aspect of the Rule – full enforcement of our laws, equal protection and treatment of all citizens, standing by Jefferson’s Rules of the House, blocking federal funds from organizations involved in criminal activity like ACORN, making the Obama Administration and the Federal Reserve account for every nickel of “stimulus” money, defrocking the unconstitutional “Czars”, and many other violations of our long-standing laws, rules, and legal process.

Since January, it has been my weekly duty to speak on the House Floor on CSPAN
about the outrage of Charlie Rangel and Tim Geithner engaging in blatant tax evasion without penalty or interest, and it seems with each passing week, a new affront to our legal heritage.

Here we have the Secretary of the Treasury – the very Obama Administration official who oversees the IRS – failing to pay withholding taxes on his income from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for years, even after signing statements that he owed the money, and RECEIVING checks from the IMF specifically to pay his federal tax bill!

All while Charlie Rangel, the Chairman of House Ways and Means – the very committee that oversees the IRS – failed to report or pay taxes on rental income from his Caribbean resort property for over a decade. And that is now just the tip of the iceberg on the tax and ethical problems that have now surfaced.

Read the New York Post: The Case Against Charlie Rangel

You or I would have paid tens of thousands of dollars in interest and penalties had we committed these tax evasions.  In the Geithner case, I believe a regular taxpayer would also be convicted of criminal wrongdoing.

To date, Secretary Geithner and Chairman Rangel have paid not one nickel in penalties.   Chairman Rangel hasn’t even paid interest on ten years of back taxes.

Mr. Rangel’s case was referred to the House Ethics Committee 16 months ago, on July 31, 2008.  Since then, his case has been expanded twice due to new allegations of wrongdoing, and last month Rangel admitted to underreporting his assets on federal disclosure forms by nearly a MILLION DOLLARS.

The Ethics Committee has taken no action on the existing charges, and now has all the new charges to contend with.

Mr. Geithner confessed his tax evasion in Senate confirmation hearings, and was then approved by his fellow Democrats as the new head of the U.S. Treasury Department – and boss of the IRS itself!

In January, I introduced the “Rangel Rule”, HR 735 that would give all U.S. taxpayers the same treatment as Mr. Rangel.  If you get caught owing back taxes, simply pay the taxes owed, write “Rangel Rule” on the top of the return, and you would be exempt from all interest and penalties.

Speaker Pelosi will not allow the bill to be considered.

In February, I introduced a Privileged Resolution – special legislation dealing with House ethics – that would have removed Mr. Rangel as Chairman of House Ways and Means until his investigation was concluded.

Speaker Pelosi’s Democrats followed her orders to block a vote on the bill, by instead voting to “table” the resolution without actually voting on the bill itself.

Last week I introduced a second Privileged Resolution to remove Rangel as Chairman of Ways and Means pending completion of his investigation, based on the new admissions of his hiding nearly a million dollars on his federal financial disclosure reports.

Now with vulnerable House Democrats facing an outraged public from nearly a year of liberal excesses, this latest bill received very different treatment.  This time, Democrats voted to “refer” my resolution to the same Ethics Committee that is still bogged down on the other charges against Mr. Rangel.  Also this time, two Democrats voted with us – a real sign that many others are giving serious consideration as to whether they are still willing to go on the record in shielding a confessed tax evader from justice.

So the Democratic machine is now targeting me.  A New York reporter stopped me outside the House Chamber last week to warn me, “you know they’re coming after you now.”

I knew they would before I started this fight.  Look at what has happened to every red-blooded American who has stood out in criticizing the leftist Democratic machine.  From the non-stop mockery on network television of Governor Sarah Palin, to the attacks against just plain citizens like Joe the Plumber for simply questioning Obama, to the mass nationwide attack against Congressman Joe Wilson for his outburst during Obama’s verbal tirade in the House against Republicans and Tea Party supporters, these socialists have perfected the art of singling out conservative leaders and massing resources to destroy them politically.

After Joe Wilson called out “You lie!” to Obama, Democrats from all over the country poured over a million dollars into his opponent’s campaign – overnight.  Thankfully conservatives responded in kind, and Joe is now back in shape to hold his seat.

But these same forces are now jumping on me for defending the rule of law. Within days, I could be looking at a five-to-one disadvantage in my campaign, as the Michael Moore’s of the world pile on the bucks to shut me up.

I’m not going to shut up.  Without the Rule of Law, there can be no free market.  Without the free market, there can be no free America. Without a free America, the world’s great beacon of individual liberty will be extinguished, and the followers of Marx, Lenin, Mao, and Obama will have won a thousand-year reign of tyranny unless the Savior intervenes.

I need every one of you who can to help build my campaign chest up to a level that will ward off this pending deluge right now.   This can’t wait.  If you can, please send $100 immediately to:
John Carter for Congress

The Democrats are planning their assault right now, and will be looking at what we have in the bank in determining where to attack.  There are some of you who are capable of sending the maximum amount allowed under the law.  I am humbly asking you to do that right now.

Most of you can’t do that much, so do what you can.  Your $100 donation will go a long way to building us past that $1 million mark we need to tell the Democrats that America does care about this issue.

If you can’t send $100, then please consider $50 or $25 – or making a regular monthly commitment that will allow you to support our fight with an affordable scheduled donation.

We can’t afford to lose this fight.  Many other conservative House Members are looking at my effort, and the upcoming race for my seat in Congress.  They expressed concern that I was taking on the most powerful Democrats in Washington, and would bring that political threshing machine coming after me.  Some have even hesitated to come to the floor to speak on this issue, from fear of being singled out also.

If we allow the Democrats to pour on the dollars against my seat without a response, their fears will be realized, and we’ll have fewer Members willing to stand up and fight in the future.

Throughout history, a few patriots willing to stand and fight in spite of seemingly impossible odds have turned the tide of history from despotism to liberty.  From Leonidas at Thermopylae, to William Wallace at Stirling Bridge, to Travis, Crockett, and Bowie at the Alamo, a handful of heroes time and again have won the victory for all.  But they didn’t do it alone – Leonidas had his 300, Wallace had his Scots, and the Alamo had its immortal 180.

I need you.  I don’t mind taking the role of Travis if I have to, but with your help, I would rather play Sam Houston and still be around after the fight.

May God bless you all, and may He continue to bless America,

John R. Carter
Member, U.S. House of Representatives
Texas 31
Secretary, House Republican Conference

PS: The 2010 election cycle may be our best chance in a generation to put this country back on a course to preserve the freedoms and liberties that are under assault as never before in our history.  We can’t allow the left to use nationwide resources against my seat without a powerful counterattack by conservatives with campaign funds. Please join this fight with a donation for $25, $50, $100, $500, or the maximum $2400 per person right now at John Carter for Congress – we need to show these funds coming in this week to be able to stop them in their tracks.

In this gripping thriller, a US Senator crosses the line and opens herself and her family up to being methodically entrapped by an Al Qaeda cell.

A fatwa, in the Islamic  faith is a religious opinion concerning Islamic law  issued by an Islamic scholar. In Sunni Islam any fatwa is non-binding, whereas in Shia Islam  it could be binding, depending on the status of the scholar. Western media frequently uses the term incorrectly to specifically mean an Islamic law pronouncing a death sentence upon someone who is considered an infidel or a blasphemer, whereas the term’s correct definition is significantly broader. Fatwā cover social and political issues and jihad.  If a fatwā does not break new ground, then it is simply called a ruling.

History

In the early days of Islam, fatwa were pronounced by distinguished scholars to provide guidance to other scholars, judges and citizens on how subtle points of Islamic law should be understood, interpreted or applied. There were strict rules on who is eligible to issue a valid fatwa and who could not, as well as on the conditions the fatwa must satisfy to be valid.

According to the usul al-figh  (principles of jurisprudence), the fatwa must meet the following conditions in order to be valid:

The fatwa is in line with relevant legal proofs, deduced from Qur’anic verses and ahadith; provided the hadith was not later abrogated by Muhammad.
is issued by a person (or a board) having due knowledge and sincerity of heart

It is free from individual opportunism, and not depending on political servitude

It is adequate with the needs of the contemporary world.

Today, with the existence of modern independent States, each with its own legislative system, and/or its own body of  Ulemas, each country develops and applies its own rules, based on its own interpretation of religious prescriptions. Many Muslim countries  (such as Egypt  and Tunisia) have an official Mufti position; a distinguished expert in the Sharia  is appointed to this position by the civil authorities of the country. But his fatawas are binding on no one: neither the State which appoints him, nor any citizen

For Immediate Release: September 30, 2009
From the office of Representative John R. Carter (R-TX)

The New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Buffalo News and numerous other publications have also called for Rangel to step down as Chairman of Ways and Means.

When?  When, Tycoon Charlie, will you get your lying black ass off of the House Ways and Means Committee?  Get going, ya’ lying goddamned liar!  Go mind ya’ goddamned bidness, wherever it is. 

House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) admitted failure to report nearly a million dollars in assets on federal disclosure forms, the lack of any action by the House Democratic Caucus on the new ethics violations or the continuing 15-month investigation of multiple ethics and tax violation charges against the man who oversees the Internal Revenue Service demands Rangel be removed.

Comparing lying Tycoon Charlie to a bank robber heading up the Banking Committee, as did Congressman John Carter, R-TX, is flattery in comparison to the manifest fraud, hypocrisy and corruption promulgated by the Madame Speaker in defending and protecting, the disgraced Harlem Congressman.

Representative Carter has previously requested Rangel’s removal under provisions of a Privileged Resolution to force his removal.

“The reputation and integrity of this body has suffered serious damage by the actions of the Chairman, and the inaction of the Speaker to meet her promise to make this the most honest and ethical House in history…”

Madame Speaker and her kowtow Democrat eunuchs have blocked previous attempts to have Tycoon Charlie removed as Chairman of the committee that oversees the IRS–the tax agency defrauded by Congressman Rangel. 

The Ethics Committee began investigation of Rangel on July 31, 2008. Pelosi publicly stated that the investigation would be complete before the end of 2008, but with the probe now well into its second year, the investigation has already been expanded twice to include new charges of tax and ethics violations by the Chairman.

Evidence be damned, Rangel insists his bidness is his goddamn bidness.  Pelosi and liberal Committee eunuchs (democrats) agree.  Even liberal newspapers disagree.  It just goes to show you that you cannot believe anything you hear, half of what you see and nothing of what you read in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Buffalo News or most other variants of dinosaur media.  Hmmm, the Wall Street Journal fell in with that band of thieves?  So it goes.

You might think that passing a bill through Congress is a really difficult and honorable task that involves late night debates, hours spent analyzing proposals and reading legislation, policy wonks splitting hairs over detailed issues, and a healthy dose of respectful opposition and transparency. Oh boy, would you be wrong. In this Congress, it’s rahm rahm rahm, Chicago-style.

According to recent reports, Congressional leaders are censoring congressional mailings to avoid the appearance of two sides to the health care debate. And what is being censored? Democrats should be called “the majority,” and the “public option” cannot under any circumstances be called “government-run.” Not being able to say the “public option” is government-run is like being told you cannot call the Earth a planet. It’s simply incompatible with common sense, and the facts.
So for education purposes, here is an updated lesson on how a bill becomes a law in Washington.

Introduce a Bill, But Not the One You Really Plan on Passing: On Friday, June 26, 2009, the House of Representatives voted on final passage of the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Bill, a major piece of global warming legislation this year that will have a huge effect on the economy and the price Americans pay for energy. Both sides of this debate spent months arguing over the details. And then, at 3:09 am on June 26, the morning of the vote, the majority added over 300 pages to the bill. As of the final vote, not one member had a clear idea what was contained in that amendment.
Do Not, Under Any Circumstances, Read the Bill: Reading the bill will only confuse the process and, according to Congressman John Conyers (D-MI), it will also take upwards of two days and two staffers, so it is not worth it. At the National Press Club this week, Congressman Conyers said: “I love these members that get up and say, ‘read the bill.’ What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages, and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”

Further, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said “If every member pledged to not vote for [the health care bill] if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes.” Hoyer continued: “I’m laughing because a) I don’t know how long this bill is going to be, but it’s going to be a very long bill.”

Make the Bill Very Long and Very Complicated: The best way to achieve the previous objective of not reading the bill is to take the length of War & Peace, double it, and then use that as a starting point. The current House version of health care legislation is over 1,000 pages long. The stimulus bill was over 1,500 pages long. The Cap and Trade bill was over 1,000 pages long, and remember, had 300 pages added at the last minute. No sneaky spending hidden in there, you can trust ‘em.

Bypass Your Committee: If the moderate voices of Congress wish to debate a bill in committee and propose alternative ideas, bypass the committee entirely. House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) knows this rule well, and has suggested there is “no alternative” to bypassing the committee if Blue Dog Democrats don’t accept the terms of the deal he sets on health care reform this week. Yes, there is clearly no alternative.

Keep the American People in the Dark: When President Barack Obama took office, he promised on his transition website he would “not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House Web site for five days.” He failed to live to this promise on his very first piece of legislation. In fact, the website the White House unveiled to detail “transparent” stimulus spending was so bad, and lacked so little detail, that a cottage industry of private websites popped up to fill the void.
Censor the Opposition: If nobody reads the opposition, did it really exist? Of course not. In an attempt to keep the American people in the dark, you must not let them hear opposing views, especially during a week where the President sets aside one hour of primetime network television time to address his side. Congressman Kevin Brady (R-TX) tried recently to send a chart detailing the expansion of government under the current plan, and the House Franking Commission told him no, even though it did not challenge the chart’s accuracy or purpose. Congressman John Carter (R-TX) tried to call the public plan “government-run” and was promptly told to cease saying such obvious things. It’s much easier to pass a bill when you can write the talking points for both sides.

When the CBO Says Bad Things, Bring the Director in for a “Chat”: Last week, Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Elmendorf was summoned to the White House after his office released an analysis showing that the President’s health care plan would increase the deficit and not produce the savings it promised. This move was absolutely unprecedented, as Congressman Tom Price (R-GA) points out: “[This] reeks of the type of Chicago-style politics that Americans were warned about. The CBO was created to be independent and nonpartisan. To spoil that with political dealings in the West Wing only adds to American cynicism about the President’s misguided health care plan.”

So there you have the 2009 guide to passing a bill through Congress. There will certainly be changes to these rules, but we can’t promise you’ll be told of them.

RWD

MIÉRCOLES 23 DE SEPTIEMBRE 22:00 HRS

WARNER CHANNEL

James Stenson/NBC

Faltan muy pocos episodios para que llegue el final de esta serie y cómo su nombre lo dice este capítulo es el “Principio del Fin” ya que desde este capítulo veremos pasar por la Sala de Emergencias a una gran cantidad de doctores que fueron parte muy importante en la serie y sabremos que es lo que ha pasado con sus vidas. Esta vez  es el turno del Dr. John Carter quien además de visitarlos tiene que arreglar varias cosas que quedaron pendientes desde que se fue a África.

Dr. Carter (Noah Wyle) sorprende al staff con una visita sorpresa, pero las cosas han cambiado mucho desde que se fue. Gates trata a un novio que llega con problemas respiratorios ocasionados por la búsqueda de hongos alucinógenos; Banfield trata de persuadir a su esposo para que tengan otro hijo.

LORD, who may abide in Your tabernacle? Who may dwell in Your holy hill? He who walks uprightly, and works righteousness, and speaks the truth in his heart… He who does not put out his money at usury, nor does he take a bribe against the innocent. He who does these things shall never be moved. (Psalm 15, vv. 1 & 5)

Anyone who wanted to could sit and listen. Usually no one did, and the dining hall was usually deserted at that hour; but some people passing through sat down, commenting later that he sounded inspired at times. This worked well until they got him into a facility better suited to his needs.

The U.S. House of Representatives has a similar policy for “free speech” among some of its members, whom the current leadership, it appears, deems mad. In the evenings, after completion of the scheduled House business, dissident (mostly Republican) members concerned over such blasé

issues as ethics and corruption can voice their opinions to an empty House. This hypocritical sham called Special Orders speeches shows that the House supposedly obeys the speech and debate clause of the Constitution. Obviously, scheduling embarrassing speeches when no one is listening accords nil with either the spirit or purpose of the clause.

But because the majority has parliamentary power to limit debate, Special Orders speeches function as a free speech safety valve. Opposing congressmen can at least speak after hours to an empty House and to the American people, a few of whom watch C-SPAN. It may be the best time to watch, one of the few times one may hear the other side.

Congressman John Carter, R-TX, is one such dissident voice, who can be heard often in C-SPAN’s coverage of Special Orders speeches. Calling the House of Representatives a “house of hypocrisy” for the last 12 weeks, the trial judge turned congressman has raised a number of issues concerning ethics and free speech.

Representative Carter has called for members of the House to remove Congressman Charlie Rangel, D-NY, as chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee while he is under investigation for tax evasion and failure to comply with House disclosure requirements. House Democrats voted along party lines against this resolution. Congressman Carter also called into question the IRS’s preferential treatment of tax cheats Rangel and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. The IRS failed to assess interest and penalties against them as it would in most such cases. Rangel’s committee and Geithner’s Treasury Department oversee the IRS.

Representative Carter has also challenged the constitutionality of practices that suppress speech and debate in the House. The story of Democrat suppression of conservative speech in the House begins as soon as the new congress sat in 2009.

House rules, written by Thomas Jefferson, require a bill to be posted for three days to allow time for reading and debate before passing. But the House can waive this in special cases. The reader will be familiar with this because of the outcry against representatives who voted for the Stimulus and Cap and Trade bills without reading them. The actual reason for failure to read these bills was suspension of Jefferson’s 3-day rule.

Under George W. Bush’s presidency, the House suspended this rule once in 2001 to pass the Patriot Act in the wake of the 9-11 attacks. They justified this because it was a national security emergency.

House Democrats, according to Rep. Carter, have suspended this rule for the passage of no less than eight bills. An article on his website lists these bills as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization (SCHIP), the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, the AIG Bonus Tax Act, the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009, and the American Clean Energy and Security Act/National Cap-and-Trade Energy Tax.

But there’s more: On July 13, 2009, Democrats voted to shut down the House rather than allow a handful of Republicans to make Special Orders speeches after hours. What were they going to say that was so threatening? They planned to condemn the Democrats’ rush to legislate and their lack of transparency about the bills they were passing, particularly in light of the suspension of the 3-day rule. Bringing up the subject at this time threatened to slow the Democrat dash to pass Healthcare Reform, which ultimately was delayed beyond the August recess. The Republicans responded by threatening, if it happened again, to move the Special Orders speeches outdoors on the Capitol grounds.

But there’s more: Later in July, the House Franking Commission wrote Rep. Carter, forbidding him to use a chart to communicate with his constituents about healthcare reform and forbidding him to refer to “government-run healthcare”, suggesting “public-option” instead. Evidently “government-run” draws more negative poll responses than “public-option”.

The Franking Commission is allowed to regulate clearly political speech, such as “vote Republican on Tuesday,” but it is outlandish for the commission to tell congressmen the words they should choose to communicate the issues with voters back home.

The commission’s letter amounted to attempted enforcement of Pelosi-speak. Those who have nothing to gain by agreeing to such terminology ought, by all means, to reject it. We shouldn’t let the other side frame the debate.

It’s clear from all of the above that Pelosi and the House leadership are creating an atmosphere that suffocates free speech and debate, ignoring the speech and debate clause of the Constitution. This restrictive atmosphere stifles investigation of corruption in the majority party, and has helped Democrats ram through some of the most irresponsible legislation in decades.

Watch the Special Orders speeches on C-SPAN, if you want to know what’s really going on in the country.he country.

by Representative John Carter (R-TX)

“It is becoming increasingly apparent that the only way this House will restore the Rule of Law is for the American people to overthrow it,” says Carter. “It is time for a revolution at the polls in November 2010.”

by Rep. John Carter (R-TX)

Carter says it is increasingly apparent the only way to preserve the integrity of the House during this session of Congress will be for individual Democratic House Members to vote against their own leadership to restore regular order and the Rules of the House.

by Rep. John Carter (R-TX)

“If that is what the President and Speaker Pelosi contemplate, they are in for a rude surprise,” says Carter. “The objections to their attempt to takeover the healthcare industry is not coming from the Republican Party, it’s coming from the American people. If they ignore that and try to ram a bill through Congress with just liberal Democrat votes, we’re going to see a real political revolution in 2010 – and that may be the best way to handle this issue in the long run.”

OPINION: August 24, 2009

U.S. Rep. John Carter (TX31)
Secretary, House Republican Conference

By Josh Tyler – CinemaBlend.com

Disney’s John Carter of Mars adaptation is filling up. THR says Samantha Morton, Dominic West, and Polly Walker have been added to the cast. Already on board in starring role are Taylor Kitsch as John Carter, Lynn

Samantha Morton

Collins as the beautiful Deja Thoris, and Willem DaFoe as the hideous Martian monster sidekick Tars Tarkas.

Morton will play Sola, the daughter of Tars Tarkas. Walker plays Saroja, a character I don’t remember from the books at all but who is decribed as a “a merciless, tyrannical Thark.” Tharks are one of Barsoom’s (another name for Mars) two intelligent species. Dominic West, as usual, is the bad guy. In this case he’s a Zodangan (a tribe of Tharks) prince bent on setting himself up as the ruler of Mars.

Polly Walker

Don’t let all the strange names turn you off, it’ll all come out in the wash. The story is actually fairly simple. John Carter is a Civil War soldier magically transported to Mars. Mars, or Barsoom as its natives call it, is not a lifeless wasteland but a world populated with two species of creatures. One looks human and doesn’t like to wear clothes. The other is green, warlike, and occasionally troublesome. Adventure, romance, and all that stuff ensues.

Dominic West

I’ve been launching a major new fantasy RPG over the last month, so please forgive the lack of posts of late. I shall endeavor to get back into the swing of things presently. Having said that, it is perhaps appropriate that this post goes back to the very beginning of one of Paperback Flash’s favorite sub-genres: Sword & Planet.

Like many fantasy sub-genres (see “science fantasy,” “heroic fantasy,” & etc.), “sword & planet” has suffered from numerous naming conventions over the years. Although volumes like Percy Gregg’s dreary and pedantic Across the Zodiac (1880) and Edwin Lester Arnold’s Lieutenant Gullivar Jones: His Vacation (1905) introduced some of the broad themes that would go on to define the sub-genre, the defining seminal work that crystallized everything into its Platonic form was undoubtedly A Princess of Mars, by Edgar Rice Burroughs.

Originally published as a 1912 All-Story serial entitled Under the Moons of Mars, the tale featured the Martain adventures of a Confederate Civil War veteran named John Carter mysteriously transported to a Mars peopled by decadent societies of honor-bound swordsmen, roving tribes of four-armed green-skinned noble savages, armadas of airships and a veritable parade (in later volumes) of incomparable princesses in constant need of rescue from the machinations of nefarious evil-doers. It’s fast-paced, exciting stuff painted vividly with a keen eye for cultural detail and a deft hand at crafting compelling action scenes.

It’s no surprise that A Princess of Mars is one of the most influential science fiction tales in the history of American Literature. With little concrete science to speak of and swordplay and barbarism running as major themes in almost every chapter, A Princess of Mars and its sequels were precursors of the sword & sorcery movement that would emerge from the pulp work of writers like C. L. Moore, Clark Ashton Smith, and Robert E. Howard. Howard himself joined the teeming ranks of Burroughs pastichers with his own Almuric (1939), which views ERB’s archetypal story through a characteristically brutal lens.

By the time Howard got to the trough it had been fairly well picked over by other writers working in the Burroughs “tradition,” folks like Ralph Milne Farley, Ray Cummings, and Otis Adelbert Kline. These authors used many of Burroughs’s conceits to chart adventures of their own (usually on other planets such as Venus and Mercury) featuring swordplay and revolution on distant worlds. But, really, it all comes back to the pattern established in the outset of A Princess of Mars.

Roughly stated, the pattern is this:

1 ) Hero with swordfighting skill is mysteriously transported from Earth to Mars.
2 ) Hero is surprised at his ability to leap great distances and his relative strength thanks to the lower gravity of his new planet.
3 ) Hero encounters a dangerous monster.
4 ) Hero encounters a seemingly evil outsider culture, but then becomes adopted by that culture for his prowess at arms.
5 ) Hero meets incomparably beautiful princess. He falls instantly in love.
6 ) Princess gets kidnapped.
7 ) Hero rescues princess.
8 ) On the eve of Hero and Princess’ wedding, the Hero is mysteriously whisked back to Earth, where he shakes his fist at the sky and swears to get back to Mars.
9 ) The end.

Perhaps it’s the raw simplicity of the plot that struck a nerve that would create an entire genre out of rewriting this one book, but I think Burroughs himself deserves a lot of credit for crafting a very exciting narrative while slowly revealing intriguing cultural details about worlds we can see through our telescopes, and even sometimes with the naked eye. There’s a certain caché when you set a tale on Mars, as opposed to some random planet whose name you pulled out of your ass. Almuric or Kaldar, World of Antares or Scorpio might be good names, but they can’t compete with the mythic power of Mars. A dying planet with a dying culture. A place of dead seabeds and crumbling canals. As we look up in the night sky or view the planet itself from robotic rovers, there’s a romanticism to Mars that pure fantasy can’t touch.

Despite its freshness and inventive power, A Princess of Mars shows signs of both its antiquity and the fact that it was Edgar Rice Burroughs’s very first fiction effort. Told in first-person narrative, John Carter can’t stop telling you about how he is physically incapable of feeling fear, and often jumps into danger without even realizing how brave he is being. He just doesn’t know any better. After a while it starts to get old, and I’m pleased to report that Carter’s onanism trails off as the series continues.

The other main problem: Coincidence. Or, rather, Edgar Rice Burrough’s near-addiction to it. Carter criss-crosses paths with his love, Dejah Thoris time and time again in a way that stretches credulity. In one epic scene, Carter is piloting a flier in an exciting climactic battle. He gets shot up, and the flier goes wildly off course, flying at random away from the battle to crash several miles away…. right at the feet of Carter’s old buddy Tars Tarkas, who has arrived just in time to turn the tide!

If you sit and wonder how all of the random events that led to Carter crashing also conspired to get Tars Tarkas there at the dramatically appropriate moment, you’re going to end up letting the little flaws in A Princess of Mars ruin what’s really an outstanding novel. The appropriate response to the random crash scene is to go with the flow. You’ll most likely skip right past the coincidence to exclaim “Hooray! Tars Tarkas is back!”

Because Tars Tarkas is an awesome character, and the book is a hell of a lot of fun when you let it carry you along.

The good news is that the series gets even better (perhaps even much better) in the sequel, The Gods of Mars, in which John Carter mysteriously returns to Mars (randomly within spitting distance of Tars Tarkas, naturally). The bad news is that the entertaining pattern established here will be repeated again and again and again in the century of science fiction to come, and is still being copied to this day.

No other genre I know of is composed of as slavish regurgitation of the plot points of a single story as the sword & planet genre is composed of the parts of A Princess of Mars. It is one of the most important science fiction stories of the 20th century, and a necessary addition to any science fiction and fantasy library.

Plus, it’s damn fun.

José Marcolini, um fazendeiro de Querência, Mato Grosso, tem uma documento do governo brasileiro que lhe dá permissão de desmatar 12.500 acres(50 mil quilômetros quadrados) de floresta virgem, segundo o New York Times, em artigo de Elisabeth Rosenthal.

Se desmatar, poderá vender a terra por US$1,300.00/acre, enquanto um grupo ambientalista brasileiro lhe oferece US$12,00/acre, por ano, para manter a floresta intacta.

“Para resistir à pressão, cercado de campos de soja, eu terei que ser pago – e muito”, ele disse.

Mato Grosso já fez jus ao seu nome, mas esse estado se tornou o epicentro do desmatamento, e lidera a produção de soja, milho e gado no Brasil.

Para cientistas, políticos e ambientalistas, a única forma de evitar que o desmatamento, que é responsável por 20% das emissões de dióxido de carbono no mundo, e 70% no Brasil, é pagando.

“As pessoas cortam árvores por uma razão econômica, e é preciso dar-lhes uma alternativa financeira”, diz Yvo DeBoer, secretário de mudanças climáticas da ONU. Os incentivos poderão incluir preços vantajosos para carne e soja que se produzem em área não-desmatada.

Em 1964, Pedro Alvez Guimaraez, hoje com 73 anos, se embrenhou na mata, desmatou e criou gado. Ele lamenta a morte da floresta, mas diz que sem isso não haveria hoje escola para os netos, nem viria a eletricidade.

Fala-se em substituir a floresta com palmeiras oleaginosas, mas essas não se comparam com a floresta no combate ao CO2. Faz-se assim na Indonésia, que junto ao Brasil e à Nigéria, lidera o ranking dos países dematadores.

No ano passado foi criado no Brasil o Fundo Amazônico, com a Noruega se propondo a investir US$1 bilhão, mas num território tão vasto, é difícil implementar a política do não-desmatamento.

Apenas no Mato Grosso foram desmatados 1.800 Km2 nos últimos cinco meses de 2007.

“Com tanto dinheiro para se ganhar, não haverá lei para manter esta floresta de pé”, diz um fazendeiro americano, John Carter, que se estabeleceu no Mato Grosso há 15 anos. “Mato Grosso deveria mudar o seu nome para Soja Grossa”.

O secretário de agricultura de Mato Grosso, Neldo Egon Weirich, se orgulha de seu estado ter se transformado numa potência econômica, ao invés de continuar a ser uma zona de malária. “Temos que fazer alguma coisa para o meio-ambiente, mas não podemos parar de produzir”.

John Carter fundou uma associação de fazendeiros- Aliança da Terra – para promover boas práticas ambientais e se comprometer a serem monitorados por satélite para não desmatarem mais suas terras. Eles negociam com grande agro-negócios, como Archer Daniels Midland e McDonalds, para comprarem apenas de fazendas certificadas.

A ONU está engajada em recompensar quem não desmata, e a cobrar de quem desmata demais. Mas é muito difícil estabelecer um preço para quem não desmata.

O fazendeiro Marcolini não deverá aceitar a oferta que lhe fizeram, mas, disse ele, “se fosse numa região mais remota da Amazônia, eu aceitaria a oferta de olhos fechados”.

Folks, this video includes Barack Obama saying he is for a “single payer system.”  He also says that the government run “public option” will eliminate private insurance.  The video also shows Jan Schakowsky bragging about tearing down the health insurance system–you may remember my post on that earlier this year…

Watch the explosive video here:

Click here to read all my posts on health care.

UPDATE:  August 4, 2009:

The White House goes to the web to attack the Drudge Report.

Apparently the above video just cherry picked certain statements…but its pretty damning that he said that it will eliminate private insurance…

They’re in damage control here, folks.

Also, I think it is wrong that they are attacking the Drudge Report…calling it “misinformation.”

Oh, and, Happy Birthday, Barry!

It looks like comedian Jeff Foxworthy has a new punchline to add to his “you just might be a redneck” routine. It goes like this:

If you believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya, (altogether now) you just might be a redneck!

Apparently 23% of Americans polled by Research 2000 are either unsure of the President’s citizenship or outright deny that he is a citizen. The geographic breakdown of the numbers is sadly predictable:

          Yes   No   Not sure
Dem       93    4    3
Rep       42   28   30
Ind       83    8    9

Northeast 93    4    3
South     47   23   30
Midwest   90    6    4
West      87    7    6

A whopping 53% of Southerners polled are not convinced that Barack Obama was born in the United States.

It took until 1865 and a civil war that almost wrecked our country for Southerners to figure out that slavery was not “ok”. It then took another 100 years or so before the government forced the imbeciles in charge of things to give equal rights to blacks. And now here we are in 2009 and the South once again shows its profound ignorance.

This does not come as a complete surprise to me. When I visited Atlanta a decade or so ago I turned on the hotel television to be greeted by an advertisement to tour a nearby plantation and get a taste of Southern culture. When in Germany, a tour of Auschwitz is meant to be a lesson in man’s inhumanity to man. In Georgia, the South’s past of dehumanizing Africans was celebrated as a culture for which we should be nostalgic.

As a black man, when I hear that great cacophony popularly called rap “music”, I cringe with embarrassment. Quite often, pure garbage passes as “culture”. I can only hope that the 47% of Southerners who think, are equally mortified by their brain dead brethren. It’s high time the South embraced intelligence and joined the company of educated men and women who can tell foolishness from fact.

In the following fantastic commentary, HBO’s Bill Maher says, “In America there is no idea so patently absurd that it can’t catch on”. He goes on to say that foolishness like the Birther movement gains traction by “dummies talking to other dummies”. According to Maher, we ignore this nonsense at our own peril. It grows like a weed, fed on ignorance and a dash of racism.

Above all, who do I hold accountable for the spread of this nonsense? Eleven names come to mind. Eleven Congressmen who don’t have the guts to call their constituents nutjobs when the label fits. I’m talking about the author and co-sponsors of the so called “birther bill”, H.R. 1503. This is a hall of shame that should be on the front of every paper in America, eleven elected officials who should never see elected office again.

Rep Posey, Bill [FL-15]
Rep Blackburn, Marsha [TN-7]
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5]
Rep Campbell, John [CA-48]
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31]
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7]
Rep Gohmert, Louie [TX-1]
Rep Goodlatte, Bob [VA-6]
Rep Marchant, Kenny [TX-24]
Rep Neugebauer, Randy [TX-19]
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2]

We have two wars, a crushing deficit, record unemployment and more than enough legitimate grounds for debate about the Obama administration’s policies, to spend even a minute on this insanity, second only in absurdity to the “Hollywood studio moonwalk” conspiracy. And once again, we can count on the South to lead the way in xenophobic, if not outright racist diversions.

I’m sure there are Southerners who will read this piece and accuse me of being disrespectful. I’m sorry, but respect is earned through enlightenment, not ignorance. At least 53% of you are an embarrassment to our nation. You’ll get respect when you get a clue.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

John Carter, a baseball writer, wrote an insightful, honest comment in response to my Inspiratus interview with visual artist Marty Coleman. He is a friend of Marty’s from their high school days and he writes of being proud of Marty’s success in the world of art.  John also speaks of his own quest to understand success in his own life.

John’s thoughts really got me thinking.  I believe that his are questions that we all face:  What is success?  Who or what defines success?  According to any number of prevailing definitions, am I successful? If I feel that I am not, how do I find or achieve success?

As I pondered these questions recently, I found myself being led to re-read two books that have had a huge impact on me.

The first book is Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell.

The second is A New Earth:  Awakening to Your Life’s Purpose by Eckhart Tolle.

These books are very different from one another, but both are radical and thought-provoking.  Their authors are each thinking out of the box.

Outliers comes from the outside and looks in.  A New Earth begins on the inside and requires self-examination.

Outliers examines the conditions, backgrounds and opportunities that contributed to the seemingly meteoric rise of certain famous, highly accomplished groups and individuals.   It also chronicles the steady — or radical — improvement in quality of life for certain not-so-famous groups and individuals.

In Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell gives the reader a view into the lives of Bill Gates, Joe Flom (senior partner in a legendary law firm in New York City), Canadian hockey players, and Marita, a 12-year old Bronx girl who beats enormous odds to get a good education — to name just a few.

A New Earth defines success as identifying and following one’s life purpose.  Eckhart Tolle asks the reader to go inside her own consciousness and examine her pre-conceived notions and beliefs about what constitutes success.  He does this through a deep examination of the ego (what some folks term “mortal mind”) and how it acts as a barrier to one’s individual growth.

Eckhart Tolle’s A New Earth is a book that begins by identifying the inner, intuitive processes in individual consciousness.  It provides transforming, spiritual thought-tools to rise above and overcome that which holds one back from realizing her potential.

Both authors lead their readers to enlightening and often surprising conclusions, as well as give new definitions for how we may define ourselves and identify our life’s purpose.

I highly recommend these two fascinating books.  Both authors have accomplished transforming, out-of-the-box thinking.  Gladwell and Tolle have each radically busted through the status quo assumptions that pervade our society today and its long-held beliefs about what constitutes success and how one “gets there.”

These books inspire me to think and act… out of the box!  I hope they do the same for you.