Last Sharing and Testament (9 – 20)

After the original posting of this blog, I see that the very helpful folks at wordpress  decided I had made a mistake and corrected my enumeration beginning with Number 9 and replaced my numerals (9 – 20) with letters — Don’t know what I can do to correct this, but I’m trying …….. THANKS, WORDPRESS!  – – – – – – –  Well, looks like  I can’t correct it…. Don’t know what they will do when I get to number 27… (Maybe I found a solution)

This is the third of a continuation of the henceforward format of this blog.

    1. (9) In order to properly communicate with others, the meanings of words become of signal importance. That word “signal”, for example may be used as a noun, verb or adjective. In this case it is used as an adjective modifying “importance” to the effect that it means “outstanding” importance. Thus it would be worthwhile for us to examine the understanding of a few words in the context of some of today’s contentions (not intended to include all extended meanings).
    2. (10) Prejudice – an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, group, race or supposed characteristics.
    3. (11) Bigot – one who is obstinately and irrationally, often intolerantly, devoted to his own church, party, belief or opinion.
    4. (12) Racist – One who assumes that psychocultural traits and capacities are determined by biological race, and that races differ decisively from one another which is usually coupled with a belief in the inherent superiority of a particular race.
    5. (13) Testament – (Some may have wondered about the meaning and intent of that word) One definition is tangible proof, evidence. Another is an expression of conviction. Both will be exercised in what I have chosen to call a Last Sharing and & Testament.
    6. (14)We will now engage in an activity involving one or more of the preceding definitions. Those who have read some of these previous ramblings will have an idea where we are headed here.
    7. (15) Considering the definitions above, what would be your judgment of a person who made the following very public and emphatic statements of belief?
    8. (16) The white race should always be given the superior societal position above the black. Blacks should not be allowed to hold public office. They should not be allowed to serve on juries. They should not be allowed to intermarry with whites, and they should not be allowed to vote. They should be returned to the homeland of their ancestry, but that solution is impractical.
    9. (17) If you logically conclude that the statements in number 16 fit one or more of the definitions, you have just described Honest Abe, two years before he became president. The complete transcript of his remarks was really more revealing than the need for brevity will bear.
    10. (18) All of this is shared, not to promote any kind of emotional response, but to begin the task of demonstrating the failures (or worse, manipulations) of our education systems.
    11. (19) We do not need to tear down the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C., attack people who would protect the monument, parade in the streets, burn and loot buildings or block traffic.
    12. (20) A lot more sharing of truth is yet to come… not just in this domain … so, relax… take a deep breath… and remember… what “was”… was.  And press on to use truth to make what “is”… better.
Posted in controversy, education, history, opinion, politics, Slavery | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Last S & T – Bibliography + 1 – 8

Bibliography of Last Sharing and Testament

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language

Webster’s 1828 Online Dictionary

The Avalon Project – Lillian Goldman Library Yale Law School

Articles of Confederation of the United States of America

Constitution of the Confederate States of America

Constitution of the United States of America

Declaration of Independence of the United States of America

The Red Flag A History of Communism – David Priestland

The Principles of Communism – Fredrick Engels

The Federalist Papers – James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay

A History of the English Speaking People – (First Four Volumes) Winston Churchill

In the Shadow of the Sword – Tom Holland

Rules of Radicals – Saul Alinsky

The Living Lincoln The man and his times in his own words – Angle & Miers

James Madison – Lynne Cheney

Mien Kampf – Adolf Hitler

Democracy in America – Alexis de Tocqueville

The Truth About Muhammad – Robert Spencer

1000 Years for Revenge – Peter Lance

The Templars and the Assassins – James Wasserman

Crisis in Secondary Education – B. Frank Brown

Empire of the Summer Moon – S. C. Gwynne

Dreams from My Father – Barrack Obama

The Audacity of Hope – Barrack Obama

Founding Mothers – Cokie Roberts

Ratification – Pauline Maier

A Peoples History of the United States – Howard Zinn

The Years of Lyndon Johnson, Means of Ascent – Robert Caro

Aztec & Maya – Charles Phillips

Slavery by Another Name – Douglas A. Blackmon

The Road to Serfdom – Friedrich Hayck

Discovering God – Rodney Stark

From Colony to Superpower U.S. Foreign Relations Since 1776 – (edited by) George C. Herring

Information shared from any of these sources will not necessarily be so noted because this Last Sharing and Testament is not a book… It’s a blog. If information that did not come from some of these sources is shared, I will endeavor to indicate.

Reemphasizing, the main purpose of this effort is to encourage people to take a deep breath — allow emotions to coast in neutral —- be willing to accept truth that seems sometimes good and sometimes bad — realize the finality of what “was” … was — Then use that knowledge of the truth to help make what “is” … better.

Let’s begin the sharing with something that should be very simple and related to one of the contentions of current times.

  1. There was once a war in North America between twenty three states (eventually twenty six by the conclusion of the war) versus eleven states. The war lasted about four years.
  2. We have been taught to call this war the Civil War. It was not. It was no more a civil war than the one that officially began in 1776.
  3. A civil war is waged between two factions to determine which will control a single government. Robert E. Lee no more wanted to set up his government in Washington than George Washington wished to establish a government in London.
  4. A more appropriate term might be the War for Southern Independence.
  5. The twenty six United States won. That’s truthful history.
  6. This twisting of terminology may have had an insidious origin, or it may have just been a careless application of semantics. Other than possibly creating some kind of subliminal basis for a false narrative … Big Whoop… “no big deal”.
  7. However, there are other areas where our lack of knowledge of accurate understanding of words is very dangerous.
  8. We’ll deal with some examples of that later, but I do reserve the privilege of returning to the time period of this topic.
Posted in controversy, education, government, history, opinion, politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Last Sharing and Testament – Preamble

The ground I’m going to plow here in the next several days (if the Lord be so willing) is based on love… love of my children…. grands and great grands… and all other relatives … my friends (of all sizes, shapes and colors)… and my country.

Before some readers get their panties in a wad, a bit of personal stuff needs to be set straight.

Born in the 1930s.

Early elementary age, was aware of segregated society but didn’t know why. Gave it little thought.

About that time, saw an adult throw a stick of wood into the windshield of some black folks. Didn’t know why & was a little scared.

Early teen years, we built a ball field in a pasture. Some black kids showed up & we played. After a couple of times they didn’t show up any more. Didn’t know why, cause it had been ok with me.

Summer before senior year, had part time job working for a building contractor. Most of the men were black. Ok w/me. We unloaded cement sacks from box cars & shoveled sand and gravel into the mixer. Drank cold water from the lid of the cooler with the black guys. Ok with me. Just a minor thought, don’t recall an F bomb coming from any of them.

Fast forward to coaching career and the time of early integration. Some guys came from Lincoln during the “freedom of choice” period & all were good kids. The spring before total integration was going into effect, a plan of mine designed to lessen any kind of culture shock caused a problem. The black coach, who had become a friend, and I had our track teams work out together one time. That was ok. I later invited the athletes at Lincoln to go through a little off season routine. They did and that seemed ok.

But then I got too bold. Since (with me) spiritual things occupy a higher plateau than the natural things, I thought it would be a good idea if I invited members (black & white) of our track team to join me in visiting white and black churches on alternate Sunday’s. Some did and that… didn’t… seem ok. I will conclude this ramble by only sharing that (with all love, respect & understanding for the people involved), my judgment of the situation made it best that I seek other employment.

All of that has been said to say this: On future dates I intend to post a “Last Sharing and Testament” of information, the omission and obfuscation of which (it is my assessment) has brought us to the sad state of affairs we are now witnessing…… And I will not respond to any remarks about an old man in fear of losing his “white privilege”.

Posted in Christianity, constitution, controversy, education, God, government, history, liberty, opinion, religion, Slavery | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Right to Healthcare

Take us back some 400 years to a time when the world was just beginning to move away from the acceptance of a “right” that had existed since the beginning of recorded history. That period of time covered at least 6000 years. The practice could be called a “right” because there were no laws against it.

The “right” was, by the strength of arms, one man could require the fruits of another man’s labor. It is probable that some who were not involved with either end of that evil situation were always sensible of its injustice, but that is just the way things were. That particular injustice is no longer considered to be a “right”, and has come to be recognized as a crime throughout the world.

Today, a more insidious form of that practice is, by the strength of arms, being accepted as a “right” through the belief in a certain type of political philosophy.

For example, in the case of the “right” to healthcare, one must assume that he is entitled to the effort, knowledge, skill, time (all to be considered labor, if you will) and products of the persons who provide those services and or goods.

If the providers are to be compensated at all, then such compensation must again be taken from others who have used their own labor to acquire that means of compensation.

So, what we see here, is the expectation that a person has the “right” to the labors of others.

In our country, private individuals cannot use force to compel others to submit their labor or property so that goods or services will be provided. That would be a crime punishable by law. The US government can use that force… and does.

Just as in the case of the original historical unjust and evil practice, there are certain perceptions that must prevail in order to allow it to be perpetuated.

  1. A sizable group of folks must imagine themselves to be the ones who are to receive the benefits of the labor of other people.
  2. Another large group of people must believe that they will not be negatively affected by the practice. This latter perception is true especially if the situation can be, somehow, couched in terms that seem to be benevolent and sympathetic toward those who are to receive the benefits.

In the case of our current situation, the danger lies in the fact that submission to the philosophy of this new right means that the ultimate decisions would be made by some central authority. That authority would determine who is to be the recipient of the labor, who is to provide the labor, who is to provide the compensation and its amount.

Some will say, “If you are really a Christian you will not object to helping others”. One retort might be, “Yes, but Jesus did not exhort us to give our alms to Caesar (the government), from which he may take a portion for himself and help others of his choosing”.

Posted in controversy, government, Healthcare, liberty, opinion, politics, Slavery | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump vs. The Media

Are you really, really angry because Pres. Trump chastises the media’s right of freedom of the press?… Should articles of impeachment be initiated because he is violating the U.S. Constitution?

Well… try this on for size:

Executive Order – Arrest and Imprisonment of Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors

Major-General John A. Drx,

Commanding at New York:

Whereas there has been wickedly and traitorously printed and published this morning in the New York World and New York Journal of Commerce, newspapers printed and published in the city of New York, a false and spurious proclamation purporting to be signed by the President and to be countersigned by the Secretary of State, which publication is of a treasonable nature, designed to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and to the rebels now at war against the Government and their aiders and abettors, you are therefore hereby commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison in any fort or military prison in your command the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the aforesaid newspapers, and all such persons as, after public notice has been given of the falsehood of said publication, print and publish the same with intent to give aid and comfort to the enemy; and you will hold the persons so arrested in close custody until they can be brought to trial before a military commission for their offense. You will also take possession by military force of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce, and hold the same until further orders, and prohibit any further publication therefrom.


If  you believe this to be bogus, look it up at American Presidency Project  –  Messages and Papers of the President

This document can probably also be located at the Avalon Project, Yale Law School.

By the way, those wicked reporters and editors mentioned above were only a small number of the media people who ran afoul of the Lincoln administration.

Posted in constitution, controversy, education, government, history, liberty, opinion, politics, Presidential Priorities | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Constitutional Destruction – Brick By Brick

History has shown us there will always be people who lust for control of others and desire to shape events to their own will. In the USA, they find the door open when lack of understanding of the US Constitution is coupled with a real or perceived crisis. Even in recent times, it was reported that the expression, “Never let a good crisis go to waste”, has been the basis for expansion of governmental control.

One of the historical examples that can arguably be cited as gross disregard for the words of the US Constitution is the creation of the state of West Virginia.

Let’s begin with the words of Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution:

“New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union, but no State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State … without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States Concerned as well as of the Congress”.

Please reread that Quotation.

Timeline for West Virginia:

West Virginia became a state during the conflict between the Union and the Confederacy.

  • March 11, 1861… Seven states had seceded from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America.
  • April 12, 1861… Hostilities began.
  • May 24, 1861… Virginia voted to secede and then joined the Confederate States of America.
  • June 11, 1861… Representatives of 50 of the 160 Virginia counties met, calling themselves the Restored State of Virginia, and remained loyal to the Union.
  • October 24, 1861… The voters of the 50 counties declared themselves to be the legitimate state of Virginia.
  • June 20, 1863… The US Congress approved statehood for the area as the state of West Virginia.

During the Congressional debate to approve the new state, the measure was not without opposition.

Representative James Blaine of Maine noted the obvious fact that the government of West Virginia was granting itself approval to be formed within the jurisdiction of Virginia.

Representative Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania confessed that there was no constitutional process by which the state could be admitted, but only by the absolute powers of war.

Even after West Virginia was admitted, Senator Davis of Kentucky stated, “I hold that there is legally and constitutionally no such state in existence as the state of West Virginia…”

Here we have had an exercise in mental gymnastics.

  • The US government went to war to prove that Virginia was still a state in the US.
  • The US government then recognized the Restored State of Virginia as the real Virginia, thus authorizing itself permission to become the new state of West Virginia.
  • Thereafter, the war continued in order to prove that the government in Richmond was still that of the state of Virginia with no right to secede.

If that reasoning seems illogical, we could just agree with Thaddeus Stevens that superior military force had taken precedence over the US Constitution, and the members of Congress were free to violate their oath of office.

Did any of your history teachers ever touch on this little episode?

Posted in constitution, controversy, education, government, history, liberty, opinion, politics | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Comey: The Manchuri… OOPS!… The Chappaquadian Candidate

There was once a US government official who lived in Chappaqua, NY. She had a problem.

Disregarding a directive from her boss, she conducted professional and personal communications through an email server located in her home. As it became public knowledge, she staunchly defended the practice and denigrated those who objected.

When ordered to produce all work related email, she claimed to have done so, but she had taken the liberty to delete the information that she had determined to be personal in nature.

The FBI initiated an inquiry (that’s the definition of “investigation”, in case you were wondering) into the “matter”.

Upon concluding the inquiry, FBI Director James Comey confirmed that numerous offenses had been committed. He proclaimed that the official had been “extremely careless”, and, to everyone’s surprise, he announced that no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges because he could not prove “intent”. Thus, essentially due to the difficulty of proving intent, the exoneration was effected.


Upon a simple examination of US Code 18, Section 2071 (a copy is provided below), under which the inquiry was made, several points are notable.

  1. The word “or” precedes the only appearance of the word “intent” in the entirety of Section 2071. Therefore, proving intent is only one of the alternatives for prosecution found in subsection (a). No other alternative needs be dependent upon it, and it has nothing to do with documents already in the custody of a person, which is obviously the case in question. That situation is addressed in subsection (b).
  2. A brief summary of subsection (b) of Section 2071 is all that is exigent. Therein you will see that a person who is in custody of such records “shall be (not may be) fined or imprisoned or both if they willfully and unlawfully conceal, remove, mutilate, obliterate, falsifies, or destroys any such records.
  3. Since custody was obvious, and the infractions had already been confirmed, there remained only two valid paths for Director Comey to exculpate the subject. One was to find that the official’s infractions were performed against her will. The second was to discover that the actions were actually not against the law. Either of those would have been a tough sell.

What Director Comey did do, while banking on an uninformed public and a complicit Washington establishment, was to misdirect attention by the insertion of the irrelevant “intent” and the inapplicable expression “extremely careless”.

Should anyone be unfamiliar with the tale of The Manchurian Candidate, a hero type character was used in a scheme designed to deceive the people and take control of our government.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation


Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.


Whoever having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Posted in controversy, government, opinion, politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment