Archive for the ‘Freedom of Speech’ Category

1776 vs. 2012 Part 2

1776 vs. 2012 Part 2

Hopefully you read part one, if not, please go here 1776 vs. 2012 Part 1. To recap, I am simply comparing the government’s role in our everyday life during the time of the revolution against the Crown and the role our government has today. We are going through the listed grievances in the Declaration of Independence.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

The reader must remember, we are comparing the Crown to our current federal government. While technology surely gives an obvious advantage causing some to think this point moot, the fact it, it is not. To compare this provision, we must see what the founders did to solve the problem. They, in part, created the House of Representatives. A legislative body close to the people and able to replaced every two years. The number of Representatives at that time “shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each state shall have at least one.” If we stuck to that formula today, our House of Representatives would be about 10,400 instead of the 435. It would be very easy to have constant and real contact with your representative. It would also make it much easier for a third, fourth, maybe even a fifth party to be established. This writing is mainly focused on principle, not policy, one of the few diversion I will make is here. Having 10,000 representatives may be overkill. I would be happy to scale that down a bit and maybe make the formula to be based only on those over the age of voting (currently 18), maybe even only actual citizens. (Did you know, the original Constitution did not specify “citizens” for the purposes of determining Representatives. The exact words were “Free persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years” and then excluded Indians who were not taxed and then 3/5th of all other people. – the oft mis-quoted saying our founders considered slaves only 3/5ths a person.)

Back to the point. At the time, the problem was the Crown made it very difficult for the bodies to physically meet to discuss the issues. While that is not a problem today, we can meet anytime and with technology, most any place is near “the depository of their public records.” What is similar today, our Representatives simply represent too many people. No matter how hard they tried, they simply cannot do an adequate job of understanding the concerns of the people they represent. They can only comprehend the “high level” of public sentiment. They know if their district is “against” this bill or “for” that bill. But, they do not get the advantage of talking with them and getting new ideas. I will grant, part of this problem lies at the feet of the people, too lazy to even register to vote, too lazy to follow what goes on in DC, but, in the end, we should demand a more accessible House, even if that accessibility is not used to full capacity.

He has dissolved Representative House repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

We certainly do not fear being invaded because of any dissolution of Congress. One small aspect similar to that time is the current practice of “recess appointments.” The original intent of these was to ensure a cabinet member could be appointed when Congress was out of session in case of death or other incapacitation. Now, it is used by our Presidents to appoint people who they know would not be confirmed by our Senate. If stretched enough, the Presidential use of “Czars” could be included in this.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

I almost glossed over this one. We all know DC cannot become a state, but, we have several other territories wanting to become states. Unfortunately, the skeptic in me thinks the main reason is for the welfare they will then be entitled. However, this section is also about immigration. While, at that time, the issue was not enough, we now have a problem of too many. Or at least too many illegal’s or “undocumented” or whatever other PC term one wishes to use. In either case, then or now, the solution is the same, the government should get off the can and pass/enforce real legislation to fix the problem.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

This is one few people realize is such a problem. There are many federal judge positions vacant because the Senate refuses to take up their nomination. In the actual time of now, the problem is not that big since both the Senate and the President are of the same party. However, for years now, it has been common practice for the Senate of the opposing party of the President to filibuster a judicial nomination. While neither party is immune from this, the most recent tryst was the Democratic Senate refusing to consider dozens of judges nominated by the Republican President George W. Bush. This is certainly an area of checks and balances, but we, as citizens should demand the Senate at least vote on the Presidential appointments rather than not even bringing the name to floor for a vote. Furthermore, we should demand no stupid filibuster to deny a vote once on the floor. A long debate may be warranted for the lifelong appointment, but at least have that debate. The second one above is not a “problem” today. A President cannot fire a judge or determine his salary.

Part three will be coming tomorrow, again, thanks for reading, and go out and blow colorful stuff up in the air as John Adams envisioned when he said of the signing of the Declaration of Independence,

“…it ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.”

1776 vs. 2012 Part 1

I am going to write a series of comparisons of the time a people decided to form their own government back in 1776 compared to the issues we face today in 2012.  Lest I be accused of trying to start another revolution to overthrow our government, let me be clear, we still have the ability to correct our situation at the ballot box.  But, I do caution, I do fear that will soon be lost.

 

Part 1

 

We all know the Declaration of Independence was drafted, written, and signed to declare the birth of a new nation.  At the time, the colonies operated much like their own country, being so far from the Crown of England, yet, still had to abide by rulings and such from the Crown.  I equate it to a 20 year old living at his parents’ house.  Sure, he is cable of being on his own, but, so long as he lives under their roof, they still maintain some level of  “the final word” on what he can and cannot do.

 

The Declaration was written and outlined for the world to see the specific reasons why the States of America should be, and from that point would be, their own free independent country.  I am going to list all of those listed grievances and compare them to today.  Not all compare of course, but, the astute reader will be amazed how much more we, as a people, have tolerated compared to the people of 1776.

 

Of course, the Declaration starts with the famous words, “When in the course of human events it becomes necessary….  We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness…”  We all know this.  Most all of us had to memorize this at some point of our government indoctrination education.  However, what we SHOULD have memorized are the listed reasons.  We did not memorize those, for doing so would teach us we have already long passed many of those items and realized it is time for another revolution.  Shall we?

 

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

 

We currently have enough, er, too may laws.  Compared to today, we could easily say our government refuses to remove laws.  If there is one thing our government is not shy about, it is passing laws for the “public good.”  The pendulum has certainly swung on this one.

 

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, has utterly neglected to attend to them.

 

In this case, there is no “he” there is “it” and that “it” is the Senate of the United States.  The current House, the same house frequently accused of “doing nothing” has passed dozens of bills which have yet to even be debated in the Senate.  I often say elections have consequences.  As much as I abhor the healthcare law, the simple truth is, the President said he would pass it if elected, the American people voted for him, and a House and Senate of Democrats, many of whom said the same thing.  Right or wrong, the American voters got what they wanted.  However, the same should be true for 2010 when the American people made a historic vote and replaced enough Democrats in the House to give the control to the Republican Party.  As such, THAT election has the same consequence as the one of 2008.  We should be demanding the Senate start voting on the bills passed by the House.  Let the Senators make it known exactly where they stand on those bills so the people can decide in November if we wish to keep 1/3 of those Senators.

 

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

 

I could compare this today with so many different angles, and in the conclusion of this series, I very well may reference this a time or three.  For this segment, I will focus on the first part of it.  Why do we have a Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, and a whole host of other government regulatory agencies?  In part, to absolve Congress from being held accountable for the laws and regulations put into effect by those agencies.  We, as a people, have been forced to relinquish our right of Representation in the Legislature.  When the EPA issues a regulation, there is no one we, as a people, can vote out of office and replace.  We are near helpless to these unelected government officials.  By most any definition, if these agencies were just a single person, we would label that person a tyrant.  Is living by the demands of a body of people or a single tyrant any different when the rules are the same?

 

Part 2 will be published tomorrow.  Thank you for reading, feel free to leave comments and let the debate ensue.  The only “rules” for posting, obviously, keep it clean, secondly, keep the debate related to the topics of this post.  Do not “fast forward” to other parts of the Declaration, I am going to cover the entire Declaration by the end of the series.

 

 

The SOPA Myth

Anything that Google, Wiki, GoDaddy, and WordPress is against must be bad, right?  So it seems to be in the world of the pending SOPA legislation.  The sad part is, I have seen very few people actually speak facts regarding the “controversial” bill.  I put that in quotes because I do not understand why there is controversy?

Before I can support a bill to be passed at the federal level, I first check that the subject matter is even anything they should be doing.  In most cases, I conclude they are debating bills that they, Constitutionally, should not even be considering.  Armed with my Constitution, (something I bet only half the people in DC have in their desk drawer) I conclude for two reason the subject matter to be Constitutional.  First, Article 1 Section 8 includes, “Congress shall have the power to…promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”  the section ends with the statement they may pass laws to enforce this.  Of course, at the time of the Constitution, they had no clue about CD’s, movies and such, but of course, over time writings and discoveries became to include books, movies, music, etc.

Secondly, Congress often abuses this part, but, in this case, this is certainly interstate commerace as the web certainly sells products over state lines.

With that out of the way, we can get to the meat of the issue and the bill.  Before we do that, we must agree on a couple of fundamentals.  Sadly, these are not universal, as some people not only engage in this behavior, they see nothing wrong with it.  We must agree downloading music without paying the price set by the rights holder is wrong. (It is illegal, regardless of contrary opinions)  The same is true for movies, software, etc.

This bill is intended to put a stop to these actions.  I Google’d “SOPA bad” and had a very hard time finding many facts of the bill, just opinion saying it will not work.  Okay, so the opinion is it will not work.  If it will not work, why the opposition?  One common complaint I have heard is the bill will give the government the power to shut down sites if they contain material the government finds offensive.  Let me discredit that myth right away.  From the bill, on page 2, Sec 2. “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impose a prior restraint on free speech or the press protected under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.”  In other words, people like me who bash Obama, the Congress, and the government in general are as safe as we are right now.

Another fear being said is that bill is so broad the government could shut down sites like Google or Facebook if they contain even a single link to an illegal download.  First, that is not true, but, let’s pretend it is.  Current drug laws could be used to confiscate an entire mall if someone is caught selling a dime bag of weed in the parking lot. (I do not know what a dime bag is, but I’ve seen it in a copyrighted movie once)  How many malls have you seen confiscated by the feds? I can assure you, many a drug deal goes down on mall property, I asked my drug dealer.

Currently the government has blocked all on-line gambling sites such as PartyPoker.  I was against that bill for I did not see where in the Constitution Congress could regulate gambling.  However, that legislation was similar to this.  How many abuses of that power have you seen?  The feds have not shut down St. Catherines Parish advertising their Sunday bingo sessions, though, technically, they are advertising gambling.

The government should have the power to stop illegal activity.  We deserve, and expect, our local government to put a chop shop out of business when it is proven they are doing illegal things.  They do the same thing with meth houses and their attempts bringing down the mob continue.  Why are people against the government stopping illegal downloading of copyrighted material?

As stated earlier, I have actually read the bill, you can also: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr3261ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr3261ih.pdf

From the bill:

DEDICATED TO THEFT OF U.S. PROP2
ERTY.—An ‘‘Internet site is dedicated to theft of
3 U.S. property’’ if—
4 (A) it is an Internet site, or a portion
5 thereof, that is a U.S.-directed site and is used
6 by users within the United States; and
7 (B) either—
8 (i) the U.S.-directed site is primarily
9 designed or operated for the purpose of,
10 has only limited purpose or use other than,
11 or is marketed by its operator or another
12 acting in concert with that operator for use
13 in, offering goods or services in a manner
14 that engages in, enables, or facilitates—
15 (I) a violation of section 501 of
16 title 17, United States Code;
17 (II) a violation of section 1201 of
18 title 17, United States Code; or
19 (III) the sale, distribution, or
20 promotion of goods, services, or mate21
rials bearing a counterfeit mark, as
22 that term is defined in section 34(d)
23 of the Lanham Act or section 2320 of
24 title 18, United States Code; or

(ii) the operator of the U.S.-directed
2 site—
3 (I) is taking, or has taken, delib4
erate actions to avoid confirming a
5 high probability of the use of the
6 U.S.-directed site to carry out acts
7 that constitute a violation of section
8 501 or 1201 of title 17, United States
9 Code; or
10 (II) operates the U.S.-directed
11 site with the object of promoting, or
12 has promoted, its use to carry out
13 acts that constitute a violation of sec14
tion 501 or 1201 of title 17, United
15 States Code, as shown by clear ex16
pression or other affirmative steps
17 taken to foster infringement.

 

blah, blah, blah

The important parts above are the site is PRIMARILY designed or operated for the purpose of … the sale, distribution, or promotion of goods, services, or materials.  I left out the legalease mumbo jumbo referring to the US code sections related to copyright infringement and such.  The point of all that is the site must be primarily used to facilitate the distribution of illegal materials.  Putting a link on Facebook to my server for people to illegally download a song will not put Facebook in jeopardy of being blocked in the entire US.  They are targeting websites like the old Napster, Kaza, and other sites that serve little purpose than to facilitate the exchange of copyrighted materials.

 

The next major objection is that the government can just decide to shut down the site.  That is simply not true.  That is like saying the government can see the the drug dealer making a sale and they can put him jail for 20 years.  He is still entitled to due process, which includes a trial, and judgment.  This bill specifically states the government must notify the owner of the website of their illegal actions.  The bill gives that owner the ability to defend his site. (see page 29 of the cited pdf.)

Anyone that knows me knows I despise most of the bills passed by our government. However, this is almost a textbook definition of what our federal government should be doing besides defending our country.  There is no “free market” solution to this problem and only the government can stop this illegal behavior.

As of this writing my Congressman, Tom Graves, has stated he will be voting against this bill.  Congressman Graves is great congressman and I have agreed with nearly every vote he has made.  I understand Graves must vote with his conciense and the will of the people he represents.  I hope if you are in his district, the current or new one, you will take time to let him know you hope he will change his mind.

I fear this bill will not be passed, not because it is a bad bill, but because of all of the mis-information concerning the bill.

 

Words of Wisdom

Another entry from my previous blog:

Below are the lyrics to a song by the group Stuck Mojo. I assume all rights are reserved, I hope I do not get sued, but it does say, “An Open Letter…”

An open letter to the Rev. Jesse Jackson

We, the members of the Mojo family,
feel that your actions and rhetoric as a self professed leader
of the black community are in fact detrimental to the very
people you claim to represent.
We also feel that as a result you do much to undermine the well-being
and harmony of the United States as a whole. You kind of work for
the advancement of the black community and you speak from a position
that the black population cannot advance itself socially, politically
or economically because an immovable object, the white establishment,
forever blocks its path
Yet you preach further support such as welfare and affirmative action
that put members of the population in a position of dependency and
reliance on the establishment
You bask in the glow of the media spot light, you passionately decree
that racism and prejudice are alive today as they were four hundred
years ago, but does this do anything to reverse it’s effect?
No one with the intelligence will deny that a great atrocity was committed
against the black race at the hands of white settlers of this country,
but a wound cannot heal if it is continuously re-opened
That is to say, that it will heal but it will take much longer and the
scar it leaves will be grotesque and raise high on the skin
A true leader leads by example and the example you have shown is not one
of strength of character, self-reliance, commitment to excellence or
personal accountability
It’s these traits that are necessary to advance oneself as an individual
It is only as strong, courageous, and moral individuals that any race can
live the quality of life that it chooses
We give our deepest respect to the true leaders:
Alan Keys, J.C. Watts, Tony Brown, and Dr. Walter Williams
Men who never deny their heritage but are proud to be first and
foremost a part of the human race

To Be a Republican

I am often asked why I am running as a Republican. I am told there is little difference between the Republicans in Washington and the Democrats. As true as that may be, let me explain why it is important I am the next Republican representative from Georgia.

I am not sworn to the Republican party. I have my beliefs. It is the duty of the Republican Party to swear their allegiance to MY thinking, and the thinking of millions of people like me. We make the Republican Party, the Party does not make us. Just because members of the Republican party have failed the other members recently, it does not justify giving up on our values and beliefs. It IS the duty of the Republican Party Leadership to recognize the failures of some members and distance themselves from those actions, and support candidates that uphold Republican values and principles.

So, the question becomes, what are “Republican Values and Principles?” Let me tell you what they mean to me.

To me, a Republican is
• Abraham Lincoln, who believed all men, no matter the color of their skin or social status, were created equal.
• Andrew Johnson (though a Democrat, he was a Republican VP) who knew the Constitution was rules for the federal government and was willing to be impeached rather than go against The Constitution.
• Rutherford Hayes who knew political favoritism had no place in politics and enacted major civil service reform.
• James Garfield who ordered federal investigations into people of his own party when evidence of wrong doing was presented to him.
• Chester Arthur who vetoed a very popular spending bill, because it was nothing more than pork.
• Benjamin Harrison who knew we must support our troops, both during war and peace.
• Warren Harding who continued to fight for equal rights for all races.
• Calvin Coolidge who knew we do not make the poor rich by taking making the rich poor.
• Dwight Eisenhower who knew the strength of our military was the best defense for our country.
• Ronald Reagan who knew lower taxes will expand the tax base and increase the quality of life for everyone.
• George Bush who protected innocent lives of our allies.
• George W. Bush who, even to his own political determent, kept America safe.

None of the people I mentioned are without their faults, some had more faults than they did redeeming qualities. However, it is the culmination of certain aspects of each of these men, among many others, that show what being a true Republican is. So, I do not fault the Democrat party for failures on their watch, or praise the Republican party for successes on their watch. I am my own man, I am my own leader. It is time we remember for what we stand for. When like minded individuals come together to form a political party, whether it be Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, TEA, or any other label one wants to assign, the bottom line is, we must hold true to our values and our beliefs. I vow to always do so, damn the consequences from the party. Too much is at stake to worry about such things.

Jeremy Jones for Congress

Jeremy Jones is running for the Republican Nomination for the US House in the 9th district of Georgia.

The REAL problem in Catoosa County

Below is the second part of a prior post I made. This is what I believe to be the real issue in regards to events in Catoosa County.

As any issue does, this has evolved into something much bigger than anyone has ever anticipated. As far as the signs for the cheerleaders are concerned, the next step is completely in the hands of the cheerleaders. If they are satisfied with the board’s decision, and wish for their issue to subside, that is their decision. However, the issue for me is now much bigger than signs on a football field. The actions of our local school board are a symptom of a problem much bigger.

Our society has “evolved” into a society governed by DC. We have lost control of our ability for our local values to be reflected in our communities and schools. I no more want the values of Arizona Public schools to be placed upon my community than they do ours. However, because of the fear of the federal government, our local school board has bowed to the powers of DC. Our school board has decided the collective values, or lack thereof, of the entire country is more important than the people that elect them directly. This problem is not limited to our schools. It can be found in almost all aspects of our life. Everything, from national retail chains having “Holiday” sales to small town courthouses no longer having Christmas trees on display, is being done as a reflection of national blandness rather than local community values and tradition.
Our fear of DC, and our desire of the power of DC, is a serious problem. To do something in my community, whether it be how our schools are to be run to how our Sherriff treats illegal aliens, should be handled according the desires of the local community in accordance with local state law. Federal law, defined within our Constitution, is mostly limits of power, not writs of influence. However, our local roads department must depend on help from the federal government and follow federal government rules to fix a local road damaged by recent floods.

So, vote out the current school board if you feel that will solve the problem at hand. However, I submit it will not. I submit the problem is much bigger than the Catoosa County School Board. I believe if you want your local school board to reflect the values of your local community, you start higher, much higher. I believe you must work to change the mindset of the American people. You must work to remove the politicians that perpetuate the power hold of Washington DC on our lives. Our elected officials must begin to depower DC. Only then will our school board be free to truly reflect the values our community. Only then will we be able to live our lives, not in fear, but in peace and prosperity.

Catoosa County School Board

The Catoosa County School Board affirmed the actions of Superintendent Deina Reece and their unanimous resolution of support for her in determining the signs displayed on the football field of LFO High School by the cheerleaders to be in violation of federal law.

I cannot say I am surprised by the action, nor can I claim to have expected it. I must warn the reader, this will be a long writing, but I feel the issue is very complex, and many aspects must be addressed.

Reece claimed to be a supporter of the cheerleaders. She went as far as signing our informal petition of support for the cheerleaders. Let me be clear, no one, to my knowledge, believes Reece, or the school board, is “against” the cheerleaders. We simply believe she has made an error in judgment. More on that later.

Reece said as Christians, we must follow the law. I seem to recall Jesus breaking many laws of man. My point is not a religious one, so I will not dwell on this aspect of her speech, but, to me, it solidifies my point that the board is not examining all of the facts. The board has a set of “facts” they use to justify their decision and are not open to opposing, legitimate, counterpoints.

Speaking from the legal perspective from which the board made their decision, attorney Renzo Wiggins said several Christian law firms agree with the school board on their decision. He cited the very same law firms which have told us the board is in error, and the signs should be permitted to continue. This too, proves the board does not have the intent or desire to work with the cheerleaders to allow the signs to come back. For instance, maybe, there were some aspects of the case of which we are unaware. Maybe there was some tax money used to create the signs. If so, this problem is easily corrected. The cheerleaders, their parents, or even I, would be more than willing to repay the tax payers for these funds. I would guess, any deficiency of fact would be easily corrected, if that option were made available to the cheerleaders. These legal groups have provided us with specific requirements which must be followed for these signs to stand up against legal scrutiny. These requirements are specific, but easily attainable. Why will the board not allow the cheerleaders to cure the deficiencies and have their signs back?

At the school board meeting tonight, a prominent local attorney, Matthew Bryan, spoke on the legal aspect of this, and outlined case law and conditions which prove the courts’ acceptance of the actions of the cheerleaders. He was given 5 minutes to make his points. It took Mr. Wiggins almost 20 minutes to attempt to discredit Mr. Bryan. The objections Mr. Wiggins presented were easily answered in the material on hand with Mr. Bryan, but, the format of the meeting did not allow for such an exchange.

Therefore, we have two well known, well respected, attorneys making arguments for both sides of the issue. After which, the board unanimously sides with one? Simple logic dictates this is not acceptable.

It is the community’s wish, as evidenced by the support present at various local rallies, the school board should fight this issue. To that cry, the school board ignored the people. There are obviously two sides to this issue. Mr. Wiggins used the fact that for 20+ years the school board has never lost a court case as evidence of the good judgment of the board. First, this board has not been around for this long, members change, community values change. Second, if the board continually runs away from cases, it is easy to claim to have never lost. I have never lost a boxing match to Mike Tyson, that does not make me a prized fighter.

It was said tonight, if parents want their children to be taught Christian values, they should be enrolled in a Christian school or be home schooled. To that, I agree. However, that statement was out of order and irrelevant, for no one is advocating the teachers be involved in the religious teachings of our children. It is another example of the board simply not understanding the issue at hand. They know the outcome they want and are working to prove their desired outcome, rather than working to uphold the desires of the people they are elected to serve.

It has been said that speech can in fact be regulated, one cannot go into a crowded theatre and yell “FIRE” and claim the action to be protected by free speech. Mr. Wiggins tried to tie that aspect into this case by saying the cheerleaders could not hold up a sign before a football game reading, “The school is on fire.” To that, I disagree. It is not the words spoken by the person yelling “Fire” in the theatre that is wrong, it is the common and expected actions of creating an unsafe environment. If the cheerleaders were to hold up such a sign as described by Wiggins, an unsafe environment would not be expected or created, for a person realizes the way to communicate such a message is not through a pre-planned, labor intensive project such as a large sign or billboard. To me, this is another example of the board grasping for straws in the form of commonly understood language, to create the illusion of proper thought and reason, when in fact, neither exists.

As any issue does, this has evolved into something much bigger than anyone has ever anticipated. As far as the signs for the cheerleaders are concerned, the next step is completely in the hands of the cheerleaders. If they are satisfied with the board’s decision, and wish for their issue to subside, that is their decision. However, the issue for me is now much bigger than signs on a football field. The actions of our local school board are a symptom of a problem much bigger.

Our society has “evolved” into a society governed by DC. We have lost control of our ability for our local values to be reflected in our communities and schools. I no more want the values of Arizona Public schools to be placed upon my community than they do ours. However, because of the fear of the federal government, our local school board has bowed to the powers of DC. Our school board has decided the collective values, or lack thereof, of the entire country is more important than the people that elect them directly. This problem is not limited to our schools. It can be found in almost all aspects of our life. Everything, from national retail chains having “Holiday” sales to small town courthouses no longer having Christmas trees on display, is being done as a reflection of national blandness rather than local community values and tradition.
Our fear of DC, and our desire of the power of DC, is a serious problem. To do something in my community, whether it be how our schools are to be run to how our Sherriff treats illegal aliens, should be handled according the desires of the local community in accordance with local state law. Federal law, defined within our Constitution, is mostly limits of power, not writs of influence. However, our local roads department must depend on help from the federal government and follow federal government rules to fix a local road damaged by recent floods.

So, vote out the current school board if you feel that will solve the problem at hand. However, I submit it will not. I submit the problem is much bigger than the Catoosa County School Board. I believe if you want your local school board to reflect the values of your local community, you start higher, much higher. I believe you must work to change the mindset of the American people. You must work to remove the politicians that perpetuate the power hold of Washington DC on our lives. Our elected officials must begin to depower DC. Only then will our school board be free to truly reflect the values our community. Only then will we be able to live our lives, not in fear, but in peace and prosperity.