How do we express and accept love?

Words are but an expression of the nature of humanity. Words are but a tool towards the honest or the deceitfulness of the human condition.

I can say a very passionate phrase, one man can see it as a very romantic thing, another can see it as offensive, a women may see it as joyful, and a boy can be driven to tears. It is all in the intention of the message, and its interpretation, not necessarily its content.

Some speak through music, others speak through words, and some through painting. But all these things I describe are that expression, of thought and idea, of emotion. There is not such thing as words, or painting, or music, there is only intention

A chef can convey poetry through his craft, a painter expresses love with his brush, but the intention behind it is the same. It is the translation of their passion so others may share it

Touch, taste, smell, sound. These things are all a language of themselves

It is the boundaries of communication that we limit each other. If a chef conveys his love to all through epicurean delights, that is readily accepted. But if a chef expresses his love for everyone through words, then he is open for heartache.

So he hides his passion for life, he hides his expression for love for all, be hind the sweet deliciousness of his craft I can say, "I love you" and you might be offended, I could sing about my love for you, and you might find it romantic, I can touch you to show you my love and you would be surprised, I could paint my love for you, and you would be inspired.

Short of touch, words are the most painful, but we focus so much on the nature of speech, I think we often neglect understanding and using other forms of communication

Why isn't a recipe as inspiring as a sonata? Can a rose smell as sweet as a sunset? It is not that these things are not inspiring, it is that we do not pay enough attention to the world around us to be moved in all ways.

It is society that limits how we express love. It is religion that dampers its passion. But It is the individual that accepts what other men say, as fact, instead of seeking the responsibility of truth of love. Love will always find a away, except if man hardens his heart.

Love is not the experience that life has to give, love is the experience we are willing to give to life.

Priazzo Falso Deep Dish Recipe: A Big Slice Of Heaven

Pizza Hut unveiled a pizza that was flavorful and filling. 4 years later none of their restaurants were serving them anymore. Over the years, I have experimented diligently to find a reasonable facsimile there of. I believe I have found it.

I made it one night for dinner to unveil it, and everyone was impressed. Some had never had a Priazzo, some had it years ago, and everyone said it was the best pizza they ever had (those included people from Philadelphia, Boston, New York, and Chicago).

I named the recipe Priazzo Falso, Falso being Italian for imitation. I have included a type list of Priazzo ingredients for reproduction of favorites. I have also improved on the sauces and dough, so my version may even surpass the original in flavor and texture.

FYI: There is an intermediate layer of dough in the Priazzo Torte that I count toward the total layers. It is also important to note that layering is strictly important. Separating the cheese layers with meat before adding the wet ingredients (i.e. peppers, mushrooms, or what have you) will improve texture.

Try to use roasted vegetables too. It prevents hydration of dry ingredients that can occur. For added flavor try fire roasting any vegetable that will be used.

Also, an improvement to the sauce is to make a big batch and let it cook for six hrs or more. GOOD SAUCE TAKES TIME, and if stored properly, last for months.

I prefer the 6 Cheese Medium blend on average. I include various cheese blends that I deemed successful. I do a Greek style Priazzo I call Romioi. Its filler mixture has Feta cheese, Gyro meat (a kind of meat roasted on a vertical rotisserie typically lamb or beef marinated in garlic, onion, marjoram, rosemary, salt and black pepper), tabouli (finely chopped parsley, mint, tomato, scallion, lemon juice, black pepper, cinnamon, and allspice), and olives. It uses a special green sauce consisting of green tomatoes, tzatziki (made of strained yogurt, seeded and finely diced cucumbers, garlic, salt, vinegar, dill, and parsley), and olive oil sauce.

It is very enjoyable both cold and hot. The name is derived from the Turkish word Rumelia or Rumeli, meaning the land of Romioi (the land of Greeks)

Also, I use a heatsink, you will want to experiment with the technique without one. Maybe try pre-baking the vegetables and meat and then layering them while still warm, adding the cold cheese in-between the layers.

Priazzo
Types of Priazzo

Priazzo (classic 2-decker - 1 inner layer of fillings)
Priazzo Torte (3-5 decker - 3 inner layers of fillings)

Deutsche (sliced knockwurst and sauerkraut)
Roma (pepperoni, beef, onions, mushrooms, Italian sausage)
Milano (pepperoni, beef, Italian sausage, bacon bits)
Verona (sliced meatballs, onions, green peppers)
Florentine (five cheeses, regular Cheddar, Mozzarella, Ricotta, Romano, and Parmesan - combined with turkey ham and spinach)
Napoli (four cheeses: mozzarella, cheddar, Romano, and parmesan - topped off with a layer of freshly sliced tomatoes)
Portofino (Italian sausage links, onions, green peppers)
Romioi (Gyro meat, Feta cheese, tabouli, olives, spinach, onion, mushroom, with Tzatziki and Olive oil sauce)

Various Cheese Blends

Classic 3-Blend (Mozzarella, Regular Cheddar, Monterrey Jack)
Mild 3-Blend (Mozzarella, American, Loraine Swiss)
Medium 6-Blend (Mozzarella, Monterey Jack, Cheddar, Provolone, Parmesan, Romano)
Sharp 4-Blend (Sharp Cheddar, Edam, Romano, Parmesan)

Priazzo Equipment for Priazzo:

2 Chefs Planet #598 Deep Dish Pizza Pan 2 Piece Set - Rustica (traditional Italian) Pan w/ Trimming Lid

2 AmNow #HS-999 Baking Heat sinks 40 pins 9" (22.9 cm) Point to Point. For 14" - 16" pizzas

Pizza Sauce for Priazzo

4 (6 oz) cans tomato paste
1/2 cup Italian Chianti or any other red wine heated to 100 degrees
1/2 cup water
4 Tblsp grated Parmesan cheese
2 tsp minced garlic
1 Tblsp honey
1 Tblsp anchovy paste (optional)
1 Tblsp onion powder
2 tsp dried oregano
1/2 tsp dried marjoram
1/2 tsp dried basil
1/4 tsp ground black pepper
1/8 tsp cayenne pepper
1/8 tsp red pepper flakes
Salt to taste

Mix all ingredients and let sit at least 30 minutes and up to 1 day before using, stirring occasionally, and refrigerated if allowed to sit more than 1 hour. Makes enough sauce for two 12"-14" Priazzo

Italian Herb Mix for Priazzo Crust

2 tsp Dried Oregano
1 tsp Dried Basil
1 tsp Dried Rosemary
1 tsp Dried Thyme
1 tsp Dried Sage
2 tsp Dried Parsley or Cilantro

Store mixture in air-tight container until used

Cheese Mix for Priazzo

3 3/4 cups shredded Mozzarella
1 cup shredded Monterey Jack
3/4 cup shredded Cheddar
1 cup shredded Provolone
3/4 cup tablespoons grated Parmesan
3/4 cup grated Romano

Store mixture in air-tight container until used

Priazzo Crust

2 pkt Dry yeast
1 2/3 cups Warm water
2 tsp Sugar
2 1/2 cups Cold water
3 Tblsp Corn oil
2 Tblsp Sugar
1/3 tsp Garlic salt
1 1/2 tsp Salt
1/4 cup Dry Italian Herb Mix
6 1/2 cup All-purpose flour
2 cups Corn Meal

Soak corn meal in separate bowl 20 minutes in 1 cup of warm water prior to use.
Soak Italian Herb Mix in 1/8 cup of water prior to use
Sprinkle yeast over warm water and stir in the sugar. Let stand about 5 minutes or until very bubbly.
Combine the remaining ingredients with about half of the flour, beating to a smooth batter.
Combine yeast mixture, cornmeal mixture and the Italian Herb mixture.

Beat in the yeast mixture. Then with a sturdy spoon work in remaining flour until you can toss it lightly on a floured surface and knead it until it feels elastic in texture.

The kneading may require about 3/4 cup additional flour, which you will be coating your hand with as you knead the dough. Don't let the dough become too stiff.

Place it in a large plastic food bag or bowl. Be sure to spray inside with a cooking spray or wipe the inside of it with oil and place the ball of kneaded dough to rise until doubled in bulk. Be sure the plastic bag or bowl is large enough that it will permit the dough to double. You can place the bag or bowl of dough on a warm, sunny spot on the table or kitchen counter which helps it to rise.

When dough has doubled, punch it down and shape it. Form the dough into a ball about six to eight inches wide.
Using both hands, one on top of the other, press from the center outwards on it to start stretching it out, turning the dough a bit on each push. You can also pick up the dough and squeeze the edges of it while turning it like a steering wheel. This allows the weight of the dough to stretch it.

Once the dough is about 1/2" thick all the way around, use a rolling pin to flatten it out to about 1/4" thick. Run the pin over once or twice, flip the dough over and give it a quarter turn and roll it again to make it even. Roll it till there is approximately 1/4 inch over lapping the pizza pan edge

Take a fork and put puncture holes all over the dough. This keeps it from bubbling up while cooking. Transfer dough to the Deep Dish Pizza Pan that has been greased and dusted in cornmeal. Press over the bottom and up the sides of the pan.

In a frying pan, brown any meat and vegetables you will be using in the Priazzo.

Start stacking the ingredients starting with a layer of meat, sauce, then vegetable, then cheese, then meat, etc. Midway you can add a thin layer of crust half the size of the outside crust, being sure to coat it lightly with oil to limit moisture absorption. Proceed to continue the layering process until you reach the top of the pie. Cover each pie with dough that has also been punctured all over with a fork; crimp edges to seal.

Add the sauce and topping ingredients, spreading each ingredient evenly over the dough. Let this rise about 20 minutes in a warm place and then bake at 325 degrees, about 45 to 75 minutes, putting one Priazzo at a time on center rack of the preheated oven.

The United States and the economic gains of foreign Despotism

“If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions.” Thomas Jefferson

I want to first say that I realize that many people may say that I'm unpatriotic, un-American, for the statements I am about to say. I want to assure you that I am saying these things wit the utmost love for our country, and for the deepest respect for the foundation that our forefathers have established for our freedom and democracy. I am saying these things so that my fellow citizens will become more attentive of what is going on with our government.

We have all heard the bravado over the years. Treaties being signed for the good of man. Our troops being called to arms for the defense of democracy, protection for the oppressed people, but the reason often given for was for “freedom”, “stability”, “containing the Soviet Union” and so on. For the people of the region that had their popular leaders overthrown and replaced with corrupt rulers, this was surely not freedom. During the "Cold War", Communism was an often used excuse around the world, even if it was not the case. As Noam Chomsky details, it was often a convenient excuse, but the underlying threat was often that nations might be able to use their own resources and be an example for others to follow.

This causes me to ask some rather poignant questions. Has American Policy really followed the political rhetoric we are being told here at home? Has U.S foreign policy been based on the moral choices between democracy and authoritarianism? Does the US have a history of supporting Democratic movements? Do we, as Americans, really know what the democratic process is? Do you have to be a Democratic Nation to participate in the Democratic process?

The main ethics in which the democratic process is based are:

1) The belief in the integrity of the individual to make personal choices.

2) To bring a basic equality to all citizens

3) Rights of all people to allow equal participation in civil and political matters.

4) To allow all citizens to have a participation in the decision making in all aspects of government, Either by electing officials, not re-electing incumbents, or holding those that break the trust of the citizen accountable, through impeachment and/or imprisonment.

If you review the record of foreign policy decisions in the 20th century reveals that the United States has had a very poor record of supporting the democratic process. The United States has been willing to break treaties, overthrow Democratically elected governments and establish a dictatorship

Augusto José Ramón Pinochet Ugarte was a Chilean army general turned dictator. By title, the President of the Government Junta of Chile from 1973 to 1981 and President of Chile from 1974 until the return of democratic rule in 1990. His government implemented harsh measures against its political opponents, which included violations of human rights and for which he faced several unsuccessful criminal processes until his death in 2006.

Suharto was an Indonesian military leader, and the second President of Indonesia, holding the office from 1967 to 1998. He was a dictator well known for only a facade of Democracy, supported by the United States

Nicaragua: In the 1970’s the media and the U.S. State Department assured us that the SANDINISTA (FSLN) revolutionaries in Nicaragua were not communists. Somoza with mountains of evidence, which provided indisputable proof that his enemy was not an internal one, but an external one funded by nations that were considered "Communist", but we did not help this ally.

The list continues:

Abacha, General Sani ----------------------------Nigeria

Amin, Idi ------------------------------------------Uganda

Banzer, Colonel Hugo ---------------------------Bolivia

Batista, Fulgencio --------------------------------Cuba

Bolkiah, Sir Hassanal ----------------------------Brunei

Botha, P.W. ---------------------------------------South Africa

Branco, General Humberto ---------------------Brazil

Cedras, Raoul -------------------------------------Haiti

Cerezo, Vinicio -----------------------------------Guatemala

Chiang Kai-Shek ---------------------------------Taiwan

Cordova, Roberto Suazo ------------------------Honduras

Christiani, Alfredo -------------------------------El Salvador

Diem, Ngo Dihn ---------------------------------Vietnam

Doe, General Samuel ----------------------------Liberia

Duvalier, Francois --------------------------------Haiti
Duvalier, Jean Claude-----------------------------Haiti

Fahd bin'Abdul-'Aziz, King ---------------------Saudi Arabia

Franco, General Francisco -----------------------Spain

Hitler, Adolf ---------------------------------------Germany

Hassan II-------------------------------------------Morocco

Marcos, Ferdinand -------------------------------Philippines

Martinez, General Maximiliano Hernandez ---El Salvador

Mobutu Sese Seko -------------------------------Zaire

Noriega, General Manuel ------------------------Panama

Ozal, Turgut --------------------------------------Turkey

Pahlevi, Shah Mohammed Reza ---------------Iran

Papadopoulos, George --------------------------Greece

Park Chung Hee ---------------------------------South Korea

Pinochet, General Augusto ---------------------Chile

Pol Pot---------------------------------------------Cambodia

Rabuka, General Sitiveni ------------------------Fiji

Montt, General Efrain Rios ---------------------Guatemala

Salassie, Halie ------------------------------------Ethiopia

Salazar, Antonio de Oliveira --------------------Portugal

Somoza, Anastasio Jr. --------------------------Nicaragua

Somoza, Anastasio, Sr. -------------------------Nicaragua

Smith, Ian ----------------------------------------Rhodesia

Stroessner, Alfredo -----------------------------Paraguay

Suharto, General ---------------------------------Indonesia

Trujillo, Rafael Leonidas -----------------------Dominican Republic

Videla, General Jorge Rafael ------------------Argentina

Zia Ul-Haq, Mohammed ----------------------Pakistan

Here is a list of International Treaties the United States agreed upon by words but not action:

1. Ottawa Treaty (the land-mine ban)

2. Treaty on the Rights of the Child (only holdouts are the U.S. and Somalia)

3. Protocol to enforce the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention (vote was 178-1, the US the only holdout)

4. United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

5. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

6. Convention on Biological Diversity

7. International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families

8. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

9. International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings

10. International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism.

11. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees

12. Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes Against Humanity

13. Forced Labor Convention

14. Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention

15. Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention

16. Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age to Marriage and Registration of Marriages

17. Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

18. Convention on the International Right of Correction

19. International Criminal Court

20. Kyoto Accords (greenhouse gas reductions)

21. UN Convention on Biological Diversity (regulating genetic engineering)

22. UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

23. Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty [prohibiting programs like "Stars Wars"]

24. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal

25. Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes

26. International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries

27. International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid

28. Convention concerning Minimum Age for Admission to Employment

29. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

30. Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers (prohibiting sale of arms to human rights violators & aggressors)

31. Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

32. Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, and Other Related Materials

33. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (bans toxic waste dumping, etc.)

34. UN Moon Treaty [declaring the moon part of the Common Heritage of Mankind]

35. Framework Convention on Tobacco Control

36. UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

37. Protocol to enforce the Convention Against Torture

38. United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime

Let us not forget the treaties that were signed with the Native people of our great country, and these are just a few examples. What does this say about the "moral" stand point we are told on the defense of Democracy?

So what is the single most important factor to US foreign Policy?

It seems to be whether a countries markets, labor, and resources can be made available to foreign business. Sometimes this means supporting wealthy landowners against peasants. Sometimes this means supporting atrocious dictators, to get the desired results.

In the case of Vietnam, it seems that the United States was trying to garner support from the business owners and the cities, as well as the wealthy land owners, to start a "class" war against the peasantry.

The United States had also put into place the South Vietnamese leader Ngo Dinh Diem culminating nine years of autocratic and nepotistic family rule in South Vietnam. We supported interference with the Democratic process in Vietnam because we knew that the leader that we supported would not have won a popular election.

It is important to remember that the primary objective was to establish a setting where American style capitalism could be established, not the defense of the democratic process.

I believe that Historian Jonathan Neale said it best: "These state capitalist countries were a threat not so much because they called themselves 'socialist', but because they were competing capitalist powers and their markets were largely closed to American business."

So, where does this leave the American citizen in the 21st century?

This makes the citizen, himself, responsible for government policies in the Democratic process. Because we do not police our own representative, because We do not chose not impeach those who have power over us, and because we accept the known untruths presented. Ultimately, we accept the idea that politicians are dishonest because that is they way they are, but that does not alleviate our personal for what they do.

Maybe it is time for the United States citizenry to actually use our Constitution, the highest series of laws in our land, make our politician responsible for their words, their policies, and their actions. Is not a political promise, documented on Television, a oral contract with the citizenry and the politician and party? Isn't someone making policies that go against the populations belief systems and the Democratic process equivalent to a traitor to the United States?

This is what the Constitution says about United States Law and Treaties with foreign nations:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution

We have seen the effect of allowing our government to break agreements with foreign nations, it has allowed the framework for the careful abolition of our personal rights. I would like to finish with a quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"Advertisements contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper."

By Daniel Slack

Justice, Revenge and the Death Penalty, who is the fuel and what is the fire?

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government." Thomas Jefferson

I would like to start by saying that it is not that I am not against the death penalty. I believe that rapists, murderers, child molesters, and any sort of heinous physical crime should be dealt with equal force.

Recently, I have started to question why I believe the way I do about things. I began to recognize that my ideas about execution are not motivated behind the concept of justice, but by the emotional need for revenge. This led to a recognition my own hypocrisy, believing in the forgiveness and mercy of GOD, but putting myself before him in offering it to others.

Justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, fairness and equity.

Revenge consists primarily of retaliation against a person in response to a real or perceived wrong doing.

When considering the two above definitions, I wonder what is the purpose of the prison system in the United States. When I was young, I was taught that the prison system was supposed to be a means for criminals to repay society for some "debt". When they are released, the "debt" was paid.

How is the best way to repay society for a perceived debt that occurs? I believe that the best way to repay the "debt" that is owed is to make them a more productive member of society. By teaching first time or even career criminals, the skills to be successful in modern day society, they can truly repay it.

How do we stop people from turning into career criminals? By giving them an alternative path and a better career. By teaching them to be a productive member of society, they would become a much better citizen, and a much better person.

Unfortunately, Criminal Law does not seem to distinguish the fact that society is being repaid. In fact, many states put criminals to work, not as a means of rehabilitation, but a means of exploitation. As Americans, we do not realize that the Criminal Justice System has become a means of enslaving anyone who gets trapped with in it. Slavery is alive and well, it simply took on a new hi-tech face with smooth public relations promoting it and a government mandate. You cannot change a lump of coal into a diamond with a hammer and you cannot change a criminal by exploiting him criminally.

We all live in a capitalistic society and money tends to be a high priority in both business and government. One of the greatest expenses of any organization is the cost of manpower on a daily basis. What labor force can America come up with that could provide manpower at a very small cost? I believe that would be the government sponsored prison labor force.

Though slave labor is illegal and not needed in the 21st century, a slave trade has developed in America's Prison System! American citizens, with there rights stripped away, are the raw material and must be funneled into the system. How can this happen?

By promoting the idea of "once a criminal, always a criminal" and by characterizing average American citizens in the media as violent. Using title like gang bangers, drug dealers, cop killers, and even the mentally ill.

Authorities are increasingly using the criminal justice system as a substitute for health services by sending young people with mental health problems to prison.

Some 283,800 inmates are identified as having a mental illness. This represents 16% of the inmate populations of state and local jails. Jails have effectively become America’s new mental institutions; they house a larger volume of mentally ill people than all other programs combined. These inmates rarely receive the treatment that they need. Unfortunately, as a result of incarceration, they no longer have the right to proper medical and psychiatric care, as would be dictated by a citizen in governmental custody.

Let's not leave out laws that are victimless crimes, traffic citations and violations of laws concerning public decency, and include public drunkenness, illicit drug use, vagrancy and public nudity. These are the catalysts that are used to propel citizens into the 21st century slave trade.

You may ask yourself what organization would utilize the prison system as a labor force. One such company is The Federal Prison Industries, Inc. They operate 86 factories in 48 federal prisons around the country. Some of the products manufactured by this labor force are :

California prisons make Logos for Lexus;
Hawaii makes Spaulding Golf Balls;
Maryland processes hot dogs;
New Mexico makes hotel reservations;
South Carolina, electronic cables;
Oregon, Prison Blues;
Washington, Eddie Bauer and office furniture;

The list goes on and on. Unicor is currently gearing up for work on large orders from the Department of Defense, Germany, Veterans Administration Hospital, and GSA (General Services Administration). The Textile Factory (Leavenworth Penitentiary, Kansas) has received orders for postal inserts: $5,230,000 worth from the Postal Service and $1,486,425 worth from a subcontractor of Unicor. Furniture is working on a contract for D & Q Furniture totaling $2.1 million and Print is producing $1.4 million of work for GSA.

What the inmate out of this? Prisoners now manufacture everything from blue jeans, to auto parts, to electronics and furniture. Honda has paid inmates $2 an hour for doing the same work an auto worker would get paid $20 to $30 an hour to do. Konica has used prisoners to repair copiers for less than 50 cents an hour. Toys R Us used prisoners to restock shelves, and Microsoft to pack and ship software. Clothing made in California and Oregon prisons competes so successfully with apparel made in Latin America and Asia that it is exported to other countries. How can we expect criminals to appreciate the reward of good, honest, labor by exploiting them, without the right as a citizen of even the mandated minimum wage, decent medical, and psychiatric care?

More importantly, this brings up a question of the purpose for our legal system. I once believed that we are innocent until proven guilty, but now it seems that our prisons have become a government mandated indentured labor force. It has become an economic powerhouse that federal and states make money from.

You might ask, "What does this have to do with the death penalty?" My answer is simple. If our legal system is now designed to keep the flow of indentured servants in the prison system, do we, as citizens, actually have a chance at getting a fair trial or receiving the justice for the innocent as well?

"I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice." Abraham Lincoln

Daniel Slack

Taking God out of Government is like letting the fox into the hen house.

11 score and 12 years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. How did our forefathers create the framework that started the basis for our form government? Why is it so important that we fight for such an extreme separation of church and state? More importantly, when our founding fathers constructed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, did they consider the rights of those who did not have faith in any almighty god?

All to often, we see the founding principles of our great nation under attack. People are taking the Ten Commandments out of the Judicial centers. Even mentioning the concept of creationism in public schools is considered a "radical" educational approach. What is the underlying current that has so many people in an uproar? What is wrong with religious views being manifested in government?

I believe it is one thing, RESPONSIBILITY. Our great nation was founded on religious principles not unique to Christianity, AND the right to worship (or not worship) any god, whom we see fit. The scientists and evolutionists, Christians, Jews and Muslims, atheists and agnostic, are ALL free to have their own beliefs.

In the fervor for separation of church and state, we are losing sight of why the founding fathers found it necessary in the first place. The issue of the separation of church and state centered on monarchs who ruled in the secular sphere but encroached on the Church's rule of the spiritual sphere, and the church's attempt at political influence in the affairs of man. This unresolved contradiction in ultimate control of the Church vs. Monarchy led to power struggles and crises of leadership. It even went so far as to have political leaders create churches of their own to reclaim some of the power over the people that the church held.

Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

Our founding fathers held various beliefs about G-D and man that were debated on, but they did recognize the need for a higher moral standard to act as a guideline to base our nations founding principles on. In truth, there are more than 10 Commandments that were given "officially" in the bible. I never fully understood why we only focus on the 10, but I am about to do some whittlin'.

Of the 10 "official" commandments, 5 have to do with the relationship between G-D and man, and the other 5 have to do with the relationship man has with himself. It is these last five that I feel are most important in regards to our government:

Honor your father and your mother
You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
You shall not covet your neighbour’s house; you shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.

I believe that his is the baseline for our founding principles. By saying that they are religious is muddling a very crucial issue. Saying they are religious is disrespecting the founders of our great country.

Our forefathers, themselves, had problems with keeping within the ideals of these principles. It is said that Thomas Jefferson and Sally Heming had a romantic relationship. Alexander Hamilton died from a bullet during a duel with Aaron Burr. In regards to these, and many other instances, did our founding fathers believe themselves above accountability to these ideals? Did, at anytime, they think that because they wrote the frame work of the constitution that they were above being accountable to the constitution? I cannot answer that question, but my opinion is that they did not.

In this day and age, I feel that once individuals become judges, win a seats in the House of Representatives, or even the Presidency, they act as if they are above the law. That the law is for the common man, and they may have become "royalty" by voter mandate.

I am not saying that we should teach that there is or is not a god in public schools. I am saying that we do need to teach only factual, proven, information, like the theory of evolution is still just a theory, that 2+2 does equal 4, and the founding principles of our government are based on a belief of a higher moral authority that our founding fathers had. Those principles a government should protect and enforce. It is those principles that we should hold our leaders accountable to today.

We work with a political system where dishonesty and secrecy has dishonored our founding fathers. We work in a society where truth no longer seems to matter, but what ever has the greatest publicity does. We work in a democracy where the politician does not seem to be accountable to the average citizen, but only to powerful multinational, multimedia, conglomerates. How would are politicians hold up to the 5 basic principles afore mentioned? How can we Americans hold our "representatives" accountable for misrepresentation?

Ultimately, my question is what is wrong with the 10 commandments in the court room, school house, or congress? My hope is that someone would look upon them one day, be reminded what this great nation stands for, and maybe change his mind before proceeding.

And you do not need to be a Christian to believe that.

Saving Social Security and Lowering National Debt, Two Birds with one stone.

Everyone is talking about the down turn that our economy is having, and because of the mismanagement of funds that seems to be occurring right under our nose. I have a suggestion that may kill two birds with one stone, bringing down the national debt and improving social security. I am an undecided voter and am curious what the candidates response is to this statement.

A few months ago I read an article on line about the decline of the solvency of Social Security, about how the federal government agencies are borrowing from Social Security (http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=847). I did a little research and found that this practice has been going on for decades. After listening to all the candidates, I have not heard of any of them recommending that laws being passed forcing various entities paying back what was borrowed.

Why is that? At one time, Social Security had a surplus of funding to help the disabled and the retired. It has been whittled down to the meager reserves that we have today. Moreover, it seems none of the borrowed is being paid back.

When I borrow money from a bank or credit card, and I do not pay the debt back, I have the misfortune of having to deal with debt collectors and the courts. Why should it be any different for government agencies. Should not the people in charge be held in the same accountability? Should not these people that make the decisions to not pay an intergovernmental debt be held legally accountable for decisions that would normally be considered illegal in the private sector?

How much of the National Debt is due to various aspects of the government owing each other money? According to the Congressional Budget Office (http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=3948&type=0), in 2003, $2.7 trillion is debt that government owes itself. Problem is, no candidate is talking about it. I do not know if that number includes debt that has been owed from decades past, or how much of that is owed to Social Security.

What I do know is that if the Federal Government was responsible with the surplus Social Security once had, and carefully invested it over the years, our Gross National Product, Poverty Level, and many other economic indicators would be looking a lot better right now. More over, we must remember, the standard of living for the least capable in our society reflects on the poverty level of our country over all. Social Security should have been looked at as a last resort funding source for government agency programs, instead of an open money belt for questionable spending practices.

This leads to another interesting question. Why is the federal government giving money to research products and services that become holdings for corporations. I always here about how this drug company is being sponsored by the government to find a cure for some disease, or our government is paying for research to improve the spacecraft technology. Why do they not just say that the government is investing in a private company that is researching these technological developments?

I think that if the government was looked on as an investor, then it would mean that it would expect a return. If a private company has private investors then the leadership would have to be responsible for the proper use of that funding, AND any profits would have to be dispersed accordingly.

Where as, if the government gives a grant to a company, then it does not expect a return. I feel the government should not give grants to “For Profit” companies, but give “investment capital” and expect a return for that investment.

Any profits made in this fashion can not only reduce the nation debt, but maybe even make the politicians more accountable for what is being spent as well.

And that is my opinion.

Of Pride and Prejudice, really a question of race?

"The concentrating [of powers] in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. It will be no alleviation that these powers will be exercised by a plurality of hands, and not by a single one." Thomas Jefferson

I believe that we, as Americans, are desensitized to the question of what racism really is.

Prejudice is an adverse opinion or leaning formed before sufficient knowledge is acquired. Everyone from the new born in the hospital to the old man in the rest home is prejudiced against something. It is a personal belief caused by the lack of hard data that is experienced.

I am prejudiced against chitterlings (chittlins'). I am prejudiced against women who eat chitterlings because kissing a women who cooks and eats pig intestines turns my stomach (besides the smell of them being prepared too!). Maybe one day I will actually try chitterlings and like them. At that point I will no longer have that prejudice.

Prejudice need not be based upon any racial motivation at all. People can be prejudiced against economic (like the poor), social (like skate boarders), or chronological (like the elderly) classes, also.

It is a natural safety instinct to mistrust things that we do not understand. Judging things on purely shallow criteria has kept humanity alive for millenia.

Unfortunately, our society has evolved in such away that we allow are leaders to start defining our own prejudices. Instead of waiting to see if anyone is offended by a remark or action, I often see leaders (media and political alike) telling people what to be offended about, with individuals blindly agreeing. Is this not trying to spread bigoted beliefs and furthering the machine that makes money and power by the use of the keywords like "racism", "prejudice", and "bigotry"?

Which brings up another word Bigot.

A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, without regard to what the facts really are. In fact, these types of people will try to change or manipulate the facts to justify their position. It is the bigoted people who take words and thoughts out of context, snippets and sound bytes, and present them in a fashion to further the prejudices of others.

Ultimately, they want to manipulate you into becoming bigoted yourself through the use of misinformation and manipulation. That is why it is important to find the facts out for yourself, not through hearsay, and I include most media coverage in this category.

Please remember that the people we put into power are not saints, or perfect, they are just people with opinions we agree with, and not fully sometimes either. These public people become popularized and idolized in the public view at the cost of their personal privacy and lives.

Dr. Martin Luther King was a great speaker, a great human rights activist (not just black rights), but also a liar and a philanderer. Walter White was a powerful Caucasian "Black" civil rights leader. He caused scandal by not only admitting that he had 5/32's African blood in his lineage, but also infidelity in his first marriage. Even Caesar Chavez had a political legacy of personal scandal. Some of his family disowned him because of his stance on the hiring of illegal immigrants and wanting to limit immigration.

I am a man of color, I am Caucasian of Russian Decent, and I am Navajo (Dineh'), . What I see is a bunch of people using the accusations of racism to justify being bigoted themselves!

What ever happened to free speech? In America, we are allowed to pursue life, liberty (including free speech) and the pursuit of happiness as long as it does not hurt some one else.

Everyone is prejudiced against something. When your prejudices supersedes truth is when you become a bigot.
Everyone is allowed an opinion. When your opinion hurts others, by not being based on personal experience, and breaks the Golden Rule is when you draw the line, and you need not be a Christian to agree with that.

"All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. " Thomas Jefferson

Fiscally Responsible Economics in a Responsibility Free Government?

I would like to know about why what I view as the real political/economic issues facing this nation are not being looked into. I am an undecided voter and curious what the candidates response is to my statements. In regards to the recent economic turn of events in this country, unfortunately, I believe the issue regarding economics and this country is not being addressed properly.

I believe that privatization of federal responsibilities is leading this country down the path of bankruptcy. Case in point, there are several military bases that are selling away or privatizing the management of the family housing that was once free to our service personnel to private contractors who are buying up the property to rent out to the same families that need them. instead of focusing on the mistakes of the war in Iraq, why are we not focusing on the mistakes being made here, now against our troops? Why is it cheaper to sell or give management rights of developed property the government already owns so that housing mismanagement in the military can be privately mishandled, look at Warner Robbins AFB for example? It leaves politicians and the Pentagon alike to be able to pass the responsibility buck to a private poorly managed firms.

Why is the security of our military installations being given to the same companies that protect our shopping malls? They can't even protect a $20 watch, so why do we give them our national security? Is the future of our military doomed to become corporate mercenaries working outside the bounds of the law by political mandate, take Blackwater Worldwide for example.

Blackwater Worldwide is a private military company that our government uses. If anything goes wrong, they are not even held accountable under the laws of the Geneva Convention. Our government can further pass the buck on human rights issues. These companies are not even being allowed to be charged for their crimes against civilians, in the name of my country. Our troops are dying for this?

Another issue I have is the fact the the required switch to HDTV comes on the predawning of the 802.22 standard which is specifications for a RWAN (Regional Wide Area Network). The future television may have the ability to not only relay your viewing habits wirelessly to whoever is going to monitor this information, but now, when I watch someone eat a hamburger on a show that I am already paying the cable company to see, I will receive a "pop up" ad relaying the closest, most delicious burgers, in my immediate area. Cable, they get paid to run the ads, we pay them to watch the ads, why is cable so expensive.

Not only that, but the inverter box or TV purchase will artificially inflate the purchasing power of America statistics. Of course there will be a boom, because if you do not participate, you will not be able to watch TV? In the words of Justice William O. Douglas,

"Big Brother in the form of an increasingly powerful government and in an increasingly powerful private sector will pile the records high with reasons why privacy should give way to national security, to law and order [...] and the like,"

which I believe is some of those reasons have the hidden agenda of profit.

I could go on and on about issues like these when it comes to our Governments economic policies. But the final problem I see is a result of the need to drive the dollar down?

I would like to know how many of our politicians actually made sizable investments in Europe, either in their stock and bond market or in the Euro itself. Every penny the dollar drops is money in another economy's pocket. I bought some Euros back when they were $.80 each, now my vacation money has almost doubled.

Free Trade? By definition it means trade that has minimum oversite by the ruling authority. All that really is doing is making our government poorer, and less likely to pay off its debts. Think about it, with out a tariff or tax, anything that is made outside the country can be brought in either legally or illegally under a different brand. Things made in countries that we do not have any trade with can now import their products to Chile, Argentina, or even China, and they ship them in.

To top it all off, it drives away the ability of the USA to have a viable economic base, considering it is now cheaper to grow an apple in Chile and ship it to my country than to go next door to the Local Apple Orchard and buy one there.

Why should the US tax payer be responsible for poorly managed Corporations? In the ideal economic model, a company that breaks even or makes a profit should be respected for responsible leadership. Instead, we have decently managed businesses closing shop because they did not make "enough" profit per year, and poorly managed companies receiving federal money to keep their poor business models from collapsing. We should not reward businesses with tax incentives for loss, those incentives should be bonuses for companies that are efficiently managed who employ United States Workers.

How is it that a business loses money even after shifting their man power to other countries that pay up to 60% less per worker? If a business collapses let it die, a more efficient company will gladly take its place.

Also, should a foreign investment groups be in control of our powerful New York Stock Exchange? NYSE and the Federal Trade Commission thinks so. One of the buffers that has kept this country economically successful is its local control. If we introduce foreign entities to that control then now we are not only dealing with the "Local American" political problems, but now the chance to have foreign groups officially be able to dictate our economic future, with or without our approval. What next? Is the NYSE going to be moved to Dubai next to Halliburton?

I believe that all financial records of all Public officials not only should be made public, but maybe, it should be a serious offense if they make money abroad because of poor business leadership here at home. It makes me wonder not so much about what foreign lobbyist's paying our politicians but where the politicians are putting their money in the first place.

In closing, I would like to quote from "King for a Day" from one of my favorite music groups XTC,

"Everyones creeping up to the money god. Putting terms where they need not to be. On stepping stones of human hearts and souls. Into the land of nothing for free."

Ok, maybe I did change a word or two, but that is how I now sing it.