Who Can We Trust?

Any family therapist will tell you that trust is at the foundation of all healthy and successful relationships.  A quick survey will reveal that this theory extends far beyond marriage and family.  Most folks also have trusted friends, but who do you trust when it comes to business?  Do you trust your doctor?  Your mechanic?  Your CPA?  Your bank?  How about our government?

Most Americans will answer "yes" to most of the trust questions above.  A person would be foolish to hire these people if they didn't trust them.  The lone exception to "yes" above is the question about our government.  Most Americans will be quick to tell you that they have little or no trust in our government.  Yet, we continue to hire these people and do business with them.  What's wrong with this picture?

It's an interesting conundrum (or "con" for short) that the American voters consistently hire the most trustworthy individual politicians on the ballot to represent us in our government, and yet the American people have little or no trust in the government as a whole.  Could it be that we have been so enamored by election promises and political charisma that we have been overlooking our reality?  Have we been conned into believing that we can truly trust either the right or the left to save our nation's government from an inevitable crash & burn?    

This is nothing new.  In 1985 columnist Charley Reese of the Orlando Sentinel stated: 

Don't you see how the con game is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. (italics added)

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O'Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes.

O'neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetos it, they can pass it over his veto. 

WAKE UP, AMERICA!!!  Political leadership has consistently swung like a pendulum, from right to left, over and back again throughout our nation's history.  While we have deemed individual politicians as trustworthy, our elected government employees have robbed us equally for decades as a whole.  Aside from basic equal rights reforms, what significant changes have our elected government employees  made over the past 50 years towards our nation's overall welfare and happiness?  Why is it that a “poor” family is able to enjoy a better standard of living today than if mom and dad both went to work for minimum wage?  

In 2003, Senator Robert Byrd was quoted as saying, "If the voters really understood what we were up to, they’d vote us out of office."  It is important to note that Senator Byrd did not specify any partisan affiliation in his statement. 

So who can we trust?

While we may trust one another personally, the American people certainly do not trust each other politically.  Although our nation is currently faced with unprecedented challenges, theatrical pride and arrogance from both major parties have have effectively divided our nation.   As long as the American people are focused on these divisive issues, we are not scrutinizing their activity or holding them accountable for their actions.  In short, we are giving our elected government employees free reign to rule over our lives. 

To secure their reign, our elected government employees continue to behave like 2 children in the same room that are each playing "house" separately rather than playing together.  Like classic co-dependents, we, the people, have enabled, condoned, and even joined in on this counterproductive "parallel playing." 

So who can we trust? 

In his 1985 article, Charley Reese went on to say:

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it's because they want them in Lebanon.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

So who can we trust?  

In 1776 Thomas Jefferson observed that "History has shown us that people will tend to remain complacent, often tolerating a lifetime of fractional ongoing governmental abuses, rather than taking the action needed to change the offending government, 

But when a government consistently violates the trust of the people by diluting, compromising, and challenging their rights, it is the right of the people to protect themselves from such hostilities. It is the duty of the people to move beyond their frustration at this point, and to take responsible action, de-authorizing the offending government and providing new safeguards for their future security."  (Paraphrased - Modern English Translation)

Can we trust ourselves to put aside our political differences for the sake of our nation?  Can we trust ourselves to move beyond our frustration, to take responsible action,  to de-authorize our offending government and provide new safeguards for our future security?  

If we can't trust ourselves, who can we trust?    

Brian Buckta

103 S. State St.

La Farge, WI  54639

(608) 625-6372 / cell (608) 606-2062

brianb@wigrantwriting.com

A Personal Note

Thank you very much for subscribing to Practical Patriotism.  While I am a professional writer, this is my first attempt at a blog.  I am hoping to make some changes to the blog in the next couple of weeks that will provide more resources and information towards pragmatic, practical solutions for our nation.

The initial publication of postings on Practical Patriotism are "beta draft" copies.  While the basic messages have remained unchanged, I have made readability edits to most of my postings to date.  I am hoping to use the finished copies of these postings to eventually publish a hard-copy book. 

Please feel free to forward Practical Patriot postings at your discretion.  At your request, I would also be pleased to provide any of the postings in e-mail format for your convenience in distribution.  Please feel free to contact me directly via the phone numbers or e-mail below.

Patriotically Yours,

Brian Buckta

Written Impressions

103 S. State St.

La Farge, WI  54639

(608) 625-6372 / cell (608) 606-2062

brianb@wigrantwriting.com

Turning Sacred Cows Into Steak

Ask any cattle rancher if they are emotionally attached to their herd.  Ask them if they have named their cattle, or if they consider their cattle as "pets."  Once they quit laughing at you, they will probably ask you what city you came from.  While ranchers generally  treat their cattle humanely, feed them well, and care for their health, they also fully understand that their herd is "what's for dinner" in America.  To a rancher, cattle are money on the hoof. 

Unfortunately, the average American is no where near as practical as a cattle rancher.  Many Americans have developed an emotional attachment to elements of our society and "pet programs" that have been separated from the rest of the herd as "sacred cows."  These sacred cows are generally very well fed and provided with the finest of everything, all at the expense of the American taxpayer.  Even though a portion of our nation may be "starving," it is unthinkable to even imagine that these sacred cows could be turned into "food for the hungry."

While many breeds of the American sacred cow have been developed, the most visible and prevalent breed is easily recognized as government-run social programs.  Our nation has allowed this breed to grow into enormous, overweight monstrosities feeding at the trough of the American taxpayer.  They have been milked beyond their usefulness long ago, and many of these sacred cows have become so obese that they are barely able to move.  They generally wallow in their own waste while they continue to feed on American taxpayer dollars.   

Although many of these sacred cows are in extremely poor health, they continue to live in spite of themselves.  Emotionally-charged special interest groups have been successful in averting any attempts to alter their diet, and any talk of euthanizing them is met with incredible noise and resistance.  While "culling the herd" would certainly be an efficient short-term solution, I believe a less drastic and more humane approach will provide a better and more acceptable long term solution.    

An initial comprehensive health assessment is a good place to start.  From that point, common-sense adjustments to the sacred cows' diet should be strictly enforced.  Rather than constantly feeding at the American taxpayer's trough, I submit that these sacred cows should be systematically put out to local pastures.  In this setting, these cows can graze on local fields, drink freely from the local streams, and be fed locally-grown grain as necessary.  

Before long many of these sacred cows will likely regain their health to the point that they will be able to rejoin the local rancher's herd.  This common-sense, practical approach will require Americans to relinquish our emotional attachment to our sacred cows.  This will require some very difficult initial sacrifices for many Americans who have developed a co-dependent relationship with these cattle. 

Is it wise to continue feeding these unhealthy cattle?  While it is certain that emotions will run high across the land, I submit that we will all be much better off when we put our emotions aside and allow our sacred cows to become "what's for dinner" in America.

Brian Buckta

103 S. State St.

La Farge, WI  54639

(608) 625-6372 / cell (608) 606-2062

brianb@wigrantwriting.com

The World Used to be Flat

In 1492 Columbus sailed "over the edge of the earth" in search of the West Indies.  Of course, we now know that he actually landed in America, and the rest is history.  The amazing thing is that Columbus, his ship and his crew actually survived their incredible, disastrous plummet off of the globe.  Everyone knew the world was flat.  Even after Columbus returned to Spain with treasures from the new world, folks were still certain that he simply hadn't sailed far enough to reach the edge.  They were still 100% convinced that the world was flat, it had always been flat, and it would always be flat.  In the minds of the American voter, American politics is a 2-party system, it has always been a 2-party system, and it will always be a 2-party system. 

In reality, our American 2-party political system was never a part of the original design.  On the contrary, our founding fathers were appalled by the idea.  Their original design assumed representation by leaders with enough moral character and integrity to put aside special interests and personal ambition for the good of the country.  To their dismay, 2 opposing major parties quickly emerged in American politics.  The Jefferson party promoted strong government and economic development, whereas the Hamilton party promoted limited government and the prosperity of the common man.

Other than the definition of the 2 major parties, not much has changed in the past 200 years.  Minor parties have emerged in American politics since the 18th century, only to be squelched by our nation's "winner-take-all" election laws.  Even if a minor party candidate receives 31% of the vote in a 3-way election, the voters who support this candidate will receive no representation whatsoever in the operation of their government. 

Although there are overwhelming odds against them, minor parties continue to emerge in American politics.  American voters rely on mainstream media for political information, and modern-day elections are consistently won by the candidates that spend the most on their campaign.  Minor parties cannot match the incredible resources of the major parties, and  the minor parties are generally discredited by the major parties as crazed, fanatics with little or no strength or ability to lead.  These conditions have effectively turned the 2 major parties into "playground bullies."  Might is right, and the little guy is in for a beating if he stands up to them.  

Thus, the two major parties have formed a monopoly in American politics.  This has resulted in an "American Power Club" with exclusive membership consisting of our elected government employees from both parties.  Theatrical elections continually pass the official leadership back and forth between the 2 dominating parties, while the "American Power Club" continues to gain strength and tyrannical control over our nation and our daily lives. 

The American Power Club has become masterful at manipulating the American people by effectively polarizing our nation to maintain their power.  Although our nation is faced with unprecedented challenges, theatrical pride and arrogance from both major parties have have effectively divided our nation.   As long as the American people are focused on these divisive issues, we are not scrutinizing their activity or holding them accountable for their actions.  In short, we are giving the American Power Club free reign to rule over our lives. 

To secure their reign, the American Power Club continues to behave like 2 children in the same room that are each playing "house" separately rather than playing together.  Like classic co-dependents, we, the people, have enabled, condoned, and even joined in on this counterproductive "parallel playing."  Are we so enamored by election promises and political charisma that we have been overlooking the obvious?  Have we bought into the idea that either the right or the left are the answer to saving us from an inevitable crash & burn?  

WAKE UP, AMERICA!!!  Political leadership has consistently swung like a pendulum, from right to left, over and back again throughout our nation's history.  The American Power Club has robbed us equally for decades.  Aside from basic equal rights reforms, what significant changes has the American Power Club made over the past 50 years towards our nation's overall welfare and happiness?  Why is it that a “poor” family is able to enjoy a better standard of living today than if mom and dad both went to work for minimum wage?  

In 2003, Senator Robert Byrd was quoted as saying, "If the voters really understood what we were up to, they’d vote us out of office."  It is important to note that Senator Byrd did not specify any partisan affiliation in his statement. 

So where do we go from here?  We, the people, must demand election law reform that will force the 2-party American Power Club to surrender their monopoly.  This will require an overwhelming, crystal-clear message from the majority of the American people.  Unity is our most powerful tool, and complacency is our greatest opponent.  We can count on tremendous resistance from our government towards any proposal to upset their 2-party apple-cart.  It is working far too well for them, and they have successfully hoodwinked the American people for far too long.  Still, the outlaw gang bullies of the wild west decided to leave town when all the townspeople showed up with baseball bats and farming tools in their hands. 

Albert Einstein said, “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” 

Is the world still flat?

Brian Buckta

103 S. State St.

La Farge, WI  54639

(608) 625-6372 / cell (608) 606-2062

brianb@wigrantwriting.com

Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor...

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free

The wretched refuse of your teeming shores

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

For many of our ancestors, this inscription on the Statue of Liberty in New York harbor brought comfort, encouragement, and a promise of a new life free of political or religious persecution.  America was the modern-day promised land to these immigrants, many of whom left a dismal home-land for the promise of a new and better life.  While the dreams of some immigrants were crushed in the East Coast sweat-shops and tenements, many others endured and overcame such tremendous oppression with an unstoppable pioneer spirit of survival and independence. 

Many of those pioneers headed west in further search of the American dream.  They conquered the wilderness, survived hostilities, plowed the land, raised families and built the cities we live in today.  They were tired, they were poor, they were homeless, and they were tempest-tossed.  In spite of these hardships, they remained focused on their dream and their mission to build a better life for their families.  They would either succeed or they would die trying.

I am very sad to report that the rugged pioneer spirit of survival and independence is nearly extinct in America today.  It has been largely replaced by a spirit of entitlement and socialistic equality.  Under the watch of the American people, we have allowed our nation to become a land of instant gratification rather than a land of opportunity.  Through many generations of government-run social assistance programs, many Americans today believe that our government is responsible for providing their daily sustenance. 

While there are many legitimate beneficiaries of our nation's social assistance programs, I believe they are far out-numbered by those who simply choose not to become productive members of a capitalist society.  Why should they?   Our nation's social assistance programs allow a “poor” family today to enjoy a better standard of living than if mom and dad both went to work for minimum wage.  

Regardless of citizen status, our nation has now extended an open invitation for everyone to participate in these social assistance programs.  This has attracted millions upon millions of illegal immigrants who have crossed our (largely unchallenged) borders to feed themselves on our incredible and unprecedented American generosity.  Under our watch, our government has become a "sugar daddy" for anyone in the world who claims they are disadvantaged or persecuted.  This has produced an out-of-control population of unproductive, non-contributing government dependents who believe they are entitled to an even share of the hard-earned contributions made by the American taxpayers. 

In fairness, America is still the "promised land" for many.  There are still refugee immigrants who enter our nation legally, with a promise of a new life free of political or religious persecution.  These are the true tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free that we welcome in New York Harbor.  These are the immigrants who are willing to endure hardships to earn their portion of the American dream.  Unfortunately, our government is in the process of redefining the American dream as a elusive shadow of the past.    

I submit that we no longer need to look any further than our own back yard to find tired and poor huddled masses, yearning to breathe free.  The American taxpayer has become tired of carrying the financial burden for government incompetence and inefficiency.  The American taxpayer is becoming increasingly poor in both wealth and hope.  Our nation is crowded with huddled masses yearning to breathe free of government intervention in the personal choices of their daily lives (that should be protected by the 10th amendment,) and our own shores are now teeming with refuse downtrodden by oppressive government bureaucracies and policies.  

While our government sends obscene amounts of taxpayer dollars overseas in foreign aid, there are millions of homeless people on our city streets who have somehow "slipped through the system."  Most of these homeless people are too proud to accept government assistance, and our hedonistic society conveniently ignores their plight.  We, the people, seem to be more worried about our lifestyles than our lives, or the lives of our outcast neighbors in need. 

Rather than uniting our nation in resolution of our vital issues, we have allowed ourselves to be continually tossed back and forth by a tempestuous, scandalous, government.  Rather than effectively managing our our elected government employees, we, the people have nearly allowed them to extinguish our lamp of liberty and permanently tarnish America's golden door.

History has shown us that people will tend to remain complacent, often tolerating a lifetime of fractional ongoing governmental abuses, rather than taking the action needed to change the offending government,  But when a government consistently violates the trust of the people by diluting, compromising, and challenging their rights, it is the right of the people to protect themselves from such hostilities. It is the duty of the people to move beyond their frustration at this point, and to take responsible action, de-authorizing the offending government and providing new safeguards for their future security.

Enough is enough.  I believe we have reached the point in our history where we must either stand up for our rights with strength in unity, or prepare to surrender.  We are out of time, and surrender is not an option in my mind.  To regain our American prosperity, I believe we must act quickly and purposedly to view our issues in the larger scope of humanity, agree to disagree on non-vital issues, accept corresponding victories and defeats, and proceed with a clear focus on the truly important principles of democracy and vital issues of magnitude that unite us.  Maybe then we can rebuild the international respect and honor our nation once earned and held, preserving our dignity, and refueling the lamp Miss Liberty holds high in New York Harbor.

Brian Buckta

Written Impressions

103 S. State St.

La Farge, WI  54639

(608) 625-6372 / cell (608) 606-2062

brianb@wigrantwriting.com

Instructions for Commenting

Hello Readers,

My apologies to those of you who have made unsuccessful attenpts at posting comments.  I did some menu-mashing, and I found the fix. (Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn evey once in a while).  Please re-post your comments if possible. 
To post a comment on Practical Patriotism:

1. Enter your comment in the box provided
2. In the "Comment As" box, select "anonymous" from the bottom of the drop-down list.
3. Your comment will be attributed to anonymous unless you "sign" your comment (as you would sign a letter).  For privacy, you may wish to use a screen-name. 
4. If you want to preview your comment, click on the "preview" button
5. Click on the "Post Comment" button to post your comment

Thanks Much!

Brian Buckta

Written Impressions

103 S. State St.

La Farge, WI  54639

(608) 625-6372 / cell (608) 606-2062

brianb@wigrantwriting.com

Common Ground

In his 1968 folk ballad titled "The Boxer," Paul Simon was almost prophetic in his observation that, "a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."  Through honest and sobering introspection, I recently learned that for decades I had been hearing battle cries for political domination rather than hearing the calm, confident voice that is calling for common-sense resolution, peace and unity in America.

We are inundated daily with political propaganda.  While some of these messages are clearly labelled, I submit that the lion's share of our nation's political propaganda is disguised as "news."  The "news" is generally presented by very likeable and believable reporters who present a degree of truth in their reports.  The problem isn't with what they say most of the time, but how they say it.  The "news" that these reporters present is usually very carefully packaged to generate specific emotions and sociological results with the listeners.  This "news" has the potential to be a very effective and dangerous weapon in the hands of an enemy who knows what we are hoping to hear. 

So, what is America hoping to hear or see when we listen to the "news?"  If you are a democrat, are you watching FOX?  If you are a republican, are you watching CNN?  Each side shamelessly attacks the other side with "evidence" of incompetence and injustice.  What are they hoping to gain? 

When we watch the "news" are we hoping that everything is fine and dandy, or are we subconsciously looking for the "evidence" that supports and strengthens our nation's divisive political ideologies?  Are we subconsciously hoping that our politicians are misrepresenting us, or maybe that the republicans or the democrats have been publicly embarrassed?  Could it be that we are being told exactly what we want to hear, and that we are being played like pawns on a chessboard? 

I challenge our readers to conduct the following "news" test.  Our mission in this exercise is to uncover the truly important principles of democracy and vital issues of magnitude that unite us, and to look for points of agreement on the truly important values that are vital to our nation's sustainability and our ultimate survival.  I submit that we will find these things if we can train ourselves to look for them: 

1. Put aside your individual political ideology.
2. If you are a republican, watch a CNN daily report.  If you are a democrat, watch a FOX daily report.
3. Watch these reports with COMPLETE OBJECTIVITY as best you can.  Rather than drawing instant conclusions, SEEK TO UNDERSTAND.
4. Purposely LOOK FOR COMMON GROUND!!!  To do this, you must be willing to ignore the tremendous amount of time and energy that the "news" expends in partisan feuding and political warfare strategies. 
5. Please let us know what you find.

I completed this exercise myself with today's noon report, and I found common ground on the following issues:

• The left and the right both want economic recovery and prosperity. 
• The left and the right both want strength and growth in American business.
• The left and the right both want a comfortable and pleasant standard of living for American families.
• The left and the right both want to provide vital services and resources for our elderly and disabled.
• The left and the right both want strong and effective national security.
• The left and the right both want healthy international relationships.
• The left and the right are both suffering from "government logic" (please see August 6 posting for a definition).

I also found that there are fundamental differences in the proposed solutions to these issues, and it seems that neither side is willing to look for a "third solution."  Political pride and arrogance on both sides of the aisle have have placed resolution in a stalemate.  Our elected government employees are behaving like 2 children in the same room that are each playing "house" separately rather than playing together.  Like classic co-dependents, we, the people, have enabled, condoned, and even joined in on this counterproductive "parallel playing."  We must demand that our elected government employees put aside their pride and arrogance, quit blaming each other, find common ground on vital issues of importance, and look for a "third solution." 

Again, If we can all just take a step back and analyze the cause and effect of our actions, we can easily see that we are all being played like pawns on a chessboard.  In this game of chess, we are precariously close to letting our opponent divide us, flank us, and leave us in checkmate.  Does it matter which side claims political victory if we allow ourselves to be crippled by division?  Are our political differences worth the cost of losing our self respect, our unity and our nation? 

What must we do to develop a practical, common ground governmental agenda that will strengthen and unite America?  I submit that it needs to start in the hearts, the minds and the actions of "We, the People."  

Brian Buckta

Written Impressions

103 S. State St.

La Farge, WI  54639

(608) 625-6372 / cell (608) 606-2062
brianb@wigrantwriting.com