Thursday, November 13, 2008


Editor's Note: Only Mark is likely to understand where this came from, as he seems to be a Pogo fan, as am I.

I am a Member of S.W.I.N.E.

That stands for Seniors Wildly Indignant about Nearly Everything.

I stole the title of my organization from Walt Kelly's comic strip called "Pogo."

Back then the word "Seniors" was "Students," but I got older.

My church members tell me that I must think that indignance is one of my spiritual gifts.

Be that as it may (or may not), I do find myself being extremely indignant about those things that contradict my experience with, and understanding of, what our country is supposed to be and how it is to be represented in the world.

Raised the son of a United States Air Force officer, I was taught a great deal about the war we were involved in at the time (WWII), as well as the history of our country.

My father often read to me at night.

Sometimes he read adventure stories.

Often, he read to me the writings of our founding fathers.

Contrary to what you might have been taught in government schools (before they started taking so much federal money they were public schools...they are no more), our country was NOT founded as a secular nation.

The Declaration of Independence is VERY clear that our rights come from our Creator.

The Constitution is built upon that premise, and assumes those rights as untouchable by the government. Never mind that the government continues to seek ways to touch those rights.

Furthermore, the Constitution is constructed around the principles of religious and civil law laid out in the Old Testament.

Where did YOU think those ideas (that were considered by the rest of the world to be inappropriate for government) came from?

Why did you think otherwise? Could it be that you were taught that we are a secular nation in your evolving government school system?

Since we get our rights from our Creator, and since the majority of those who originated this great nation wrote extensively about Him, it bothers me when the principles they set out are disturbed.

It occurs to me that it makes sense to hearken back to why we were formed as a country and what was expected of us as a nation by our historical leaders, to measure whether we are keeping faith with that vision.

One of their very strong visions was for a centralized government that was minimally involved in the daily goings on of our society, that is: a SMALL federal government.

Other nations had (and have) strong central governments that kept citizens in constant check, even to the point that they told on each other whenever someone strayed from the path set by the government.

We were quite the opposite. We believed in individual freedom, manifested in the First Ten Amendments to the Constitution and the Constitutional guarantees of life, liberty and property.

A few things were placed in the government's purview: 1) to form a more perfect Union; 2) to establish Justice; 3) to insure domestic Tranquility; 4) to provide for the common defence; 5) to promote the general Welfare; and 5) to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.

Those things that were not specifically covered by the Constitution were supposed to be left up to the individual states to determine for themselves.

As is the want of government, over the years the feds have usurped more and more of our freedoms and have become more and more involved, not only in the states' matters, but in matters of individual liberty.

This is an anamatha (a Greek word) to me, and causes be to react indignantly.

Thus, I am indignant when the federal government "nationalizes" private companies, "to keep them from going under."

They do this under the guise that if these large corporations fail, the country could be hurt and they are not supposed to let that happen.


If a private institution fails, and if our country is affording the opportunities it is supposed to, another will come along to take its place.

While this might be temporarily painful, the end result will be a stronger nation, not a weaker one.

But the government as assumed the roll of mega-nanny and watches over us.

That is as scary as anything that was imagined in novels such as "1984" and "Animal Farm."

And that, my friend, is why I am a conservative and a founding member of S.W.I.N.E.

Wanna join?

It's free.


Anonymous said...

The Declaration of Independence also says this: That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Joe said...

anonymous: You are absolutely correct. It is a sobering thought that such a thing is possible and may even become necessary.

I cringe at what would surely result in civil war, but having a government that provides true freedom for its citizens is why we were created and that is what we must remain...or else.

Mark said...

I'm considering writing a series of articles on what kinds of changes Obama will make to what he calls a "Flawed Document". Apparently, he believes it isn't au curant. (That's Latin to me)

Anyway, I am thinking of addressing each of the amendments in turn, starting with the fiorst, but so far, he seems to support the establishment clause, although it's a bit fuzzy on what he condsiders religion, (you know, atheism is a religion all it's own with man as God) and on which religion will get first dibs in his administration. Black Liberation theology? Islam? I don't see Baptist on his agenda.

The rest of the first amendment? Yeah, he wants to change that.

What do you think?

shoprat said...

I'm not a senior (yet) but when I become one I'll join.

Billy Budd said...

Count me in as well. How far we have fallen in so little time......

Joe said...

mark: Those would be good articles to do.

As near as I can tell, the only "faith" he has is that liberation theology stuff.

I am quite certain he has nothing but disdain for the rest of the First Amendment, as demonstrated by his support for the "fairness (read: censorship) doctrine.

shoprat: I'm patient...I'll wait until you're old enough.

On second thought I hereby grant you early admission.

I welcome you and billy budd to S.W.I.N.E.

You can each be the Chairmen of your chapter of the sub-division called: C.R.A.W.L., Conservatives Reforming All Who're Liberal.

Joe said...

Soon you will be promoted to Head of the overseeing agency W.A.L.K.
Wiping Away Liberal Kooks.

As everybody knows, you have to C.R.A.W.L. before you can W.A.L.K.