Seven Teachings of the Anishinaabe

Page #1
Seven Teachings of the Anishinaabe ((one group NATIVE Americans))

The Seven Teachings are the gifts of the Seven Grandfathers. They are: Honesty, Love, Courage, Truth, Wisdom, Humility, and Respect. Each teaching is represented by an animal. Following the teachings leads a person to well being. ~ Gary Raven 2000.

Throughout the story, Omakayas and the other characters learn many lessons.

To cherish knowledge is to know WISDOM. Symbolized by the beaver.
To know LOVE is to know peace. You must love yourself in order to love another. Symbolized by the eagle.
To honor all of the Creation is to have RESPECT. Symbolized by the buffalo
BRAVERY is to face the foe with integrity. The bear symbolizes the moral courage to do the right thing.
HONESTY in facing a situation is to be brave. Symbolized by Sasquatch or Wilderness Man.
HUMILITY is to think things through carefully and to know your place. Symbolized by the wolf.
TRUTH is to know all of these things. Symbolized by the turtle.


From the farewell address of George Washington

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it

page #2
be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield. *(this paragraph is complete, only the underline is mine)


The following from President Eisenhower's farewell address, warning of the military- industrial-complex

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.


Abe Lincoln did not have a chance to have a farewell address. This little prayer at the end of the Gettysburg Address is as close as he got.

-- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

****************

WE THE CITIZENS of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA ( PEOPLE not corporations), no longer have a government of the People, by the People, for the People.
We must demand it,s return.


William McPherson
Citizen Lobbyist

A PEACEFUL REVOLUTION

Sunday, February 27, 2011 date begun construction ( updated 3/3/2011 )
A PEACEFUL REVOLUTION
A Peaceful Revolution ( Rough Outline)

It must be absolutely peaceful, we must carry no weapons, not even a short length of broomstick: our signs and chants should not be offensive. ( We should be inclusive, not divisive )

We must be many, and persistent; starting with a small crowd but constantly growing is OK, that could even be more effective. ( No revolution was ever finished in one day. )

We should not resist the police, ( they are only trying to do their duty, ”hopefully” ), there are of course, bad cops. Our best defenses are cameras and cell phones.

If others shout insults at us, just smile and wave to them, or simply ignore them; if they physically attack, get loud and take pictures and video. Do not fight back.!! ( Getting loud will make sure the police know there is a problem; Video and still pictures provide evidence. )

______________________________________________________________________________

Our demands must be realistic, reasonable and Fair.


Edit: Sunday 6th March
STOP THE DRONES NOW!!!! This requires nothing from Congress. Only the command from our President!!

Restoration of our democratic republic;

Reverse CITIZENS UNITED. (Congress or SC)

The Fair Elections Now Act. ;

One person one Vote ;

A simple progressive tax structure ;

Contracts must be in plain simple language, without any deceptive fine print;

Truth in advertising;


The above are all realistic, reasonable and fair. ( IMHO )


____________________________________________________________________________




for reference::

ARE CORPORATIONS PERSONS ??

DOES OUR CONSTITUTION EVEN MENTION, ARTIFICIAL PERSONS ??

What is a corporation? [ Wikipedia ]

(The following is taken directly from Wikipedia, no text is modified, I have emphasized a few phrases with square brackets and 1 wrong two letter word, not misspelled, just obviously wrong word.)

A corporation is an entity created by people as a method to pool capital and socialize liability. This text focuses on business corporations, which are created for profit. A corporation can also be created for other reasons. Many churches and charities are established as non profit corporations. Many government entities take a corporate form. Whatever its purpose, a corporation has several unique features under the law.
1.Individuality. Corporations are legal entities. They can theoretically last forever: some corporations have been in continuous operation for hundreds of years. A corporation is also treated like a [person for many (but not all) legal purposes.] It can enter into contracts under its own name, it can sue or be sued, and it has many of the same constitutional rights enjoyed by natural persons.
2.Separation of ownership and control. A corporation used to [by] owned by shareholders, but, as it increased in size and shareholders became dispersed at the turn of the 20th century, it became controlled by a board of directors. While shareholders vote on the board of directors, [in practice, board members are selected by other board members] who then manage the corporation. The board has a fiduciary duty to the corporation as a whole, not just shareholders. Shareholders can also freely transfer their interest in the corporation, which is known as stock.
3.Limited liability. Under normal circumstances, shareholders cannot lose any more than the amount of their investment in the corporation. If creditors demand more than the corporation can pay, the shareholders' personal assets are usually safe.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment: ( Posted to ETHICS & MORALS )

Paul Magill said...

Are 9 SCOTUS politically appointed judges representative of the will of over 300 million citizens or their interpretation of the Constitution? I am inclined to say no. Even with senate sanction/approval this still leaves law subject to current political temporary power. Although mutable, law should be consistant with the will of the people (which caused the Constitution to be written in the first place) or the law will be rejected/ignored by the populace affected in toto. Just look at marijuana laws for a perfect example. Have financially/politically motivated marijuana/drug laws led to greater respect for the rule of law or less? Any informed thinking person would give a definite NO!

Two suggestions:

1) Expand the court to 19 judges,

2) When a vacancy on the court appears have each state proffer a candidate. These are then thoroughly vetted & investigated by the DOJ Then the field is reduced to 3 candidates through a vote in the house. The top vote winner gets a straight up or down vote from the Senate.

The bottom line is presidents alone should not have sole authority over who is selected as candidates for the third branch of government.
February 28, 2011 4:11 AM


The following: is a post of Art_emisia, posting two days ago, which I found helpful.

(( I'm taking my 14 year old son to the Boston rally tomorrow! I've been waiting for this.

Progressives should take this as an opportunity to also rally around words, to present a clear, unified message that is easily understood. It's not really unions vs. the Tea Party, or public sector vs. the private. It's 98% of ordinary, hardworking Americans vs. corporate greed and corporate lies. Elevate the discussion to this one, overarching issue. Corporate malfeasance is what got us here, and THEY should take responsibility and we have the RIGHT--and the POWER--to demand that they play fair and to set the playground rules.

Rule #1: no more buying of government influence. Fair elections, public-funded...I swear to you that it will be a bargain!

Rule # 2: no more tax dodging. PAY YER DARN FAIR SHARE OF TAXES. Fair taxes!

Rule #3: no more covert propaganda. The 1st amendment does not protect deceptive advertising. DISCLOSE, and no more corporate personhood! When a corporation can goes to jail for breaking the law, then we'll think about that one. Jeez.

Rule #4: The public gets to set public policy, based on access to truth. Period. ))


Please give me your comments.

ETHICS & MORALS

Page #1

ETHICS &
MORALS

Where do I start? Usually the Golden Rule comes to mind. I had learned the rule in Sunday School as I am sure many of you did. Also, as a youth, I had read all of the New Testament and at least 95% of the old, but I could not remember reading the Golden Rule there. I will admit that my memory nor my comprehension are perfect.

Then about 25 years ago I made a deliberate search for it and found it in two of the gospels. It was not phrased the same as I had learned in Sunday School, but the meaning was the same. Today you can find it on the web in seconds. Also you can find that almost every religion has a very similar version of the Golden Rule.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, along with the negative version, [do_not unto others]; the Golden Rule works well as written in the great majority of cases. The ethical values of honesty and fairness, to do no harm seem to me to be very clear. Empathy [per- Wikipedia Empathy is the capacity to, through imagination rather than literally, share the sadness or happiness of another sentient being.]
In common expression, walking in another person's shoes, may be required for compassion especially if the other is in need. Also one should consider the possibility that the other may not wish to be treated the same as you would like, especially if he or she is from a different culture or religion. In all cases, one should also be respectful, thoughtful and understanding.

Morals are closely related to ethics; but they are more affected by a person's religion, culture, family and many other differences. Therefore morals are much more varied than ethics. I will not go further into morals here simply because that would be such a complex subject; and probably no one would agree with my assessment.

If we wish to live by the Golden Rule, we need to get to know our neighbors better, so that we will better know how they would like to be treated rather than just assuming that they would have the same desires as ourselves.

As for strangers that we meet on a hike or on the street or anywhere, a friendly greeting is usually welcome, sometimes very appreciated and occasionally, the beginning of a friendship. Until you know a little more about a new acquaintance, a bit of caution should be used in choosing a subject to talk about. Rarely can you tell what a person's beliefs are by looking at him or her. Weather and pets are almost always safe subjects, politics and religion should be delayed until you know a person a little better.

Page #2

Ethical Questions for Senators and Congresspersons

1.Is it ethical to accept campaign contributions from persons outside of your district or state? – My answer would be NO; if they are outside your district or state, you do not represent them. However I know that it is common practice to solicit contributions from others, there are solicitations in my e-mail quite frequently.

2.Is it ethical to accept contributions from corporations or lobbyist?

3.Is the Electoral College for the election of president fair? Again I say NO on at least two counts. First every small state has two Senators no matter how small the population. Then there are the so called battle ground states, with nearly, equally divided politics, they get the greater part of attention of presidential candidates. I can see only one fair solution to this problem. Popular vote. The Electoral College may have made some sense when the thirteen colonies first became the USA, and messages were sent at the speed of a horse.

4.Is it ethical for the Supreme Court to usurp the power of Congress?

Article I. Section 1.
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Article III part of Section 2
....In all the other Cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

I would very much like to hear your answers to these 4. questions.
1 2 and 3 could be yes or no or longer. I would like a sentence or two for #4.
Thanks for reading this..

THE LOST REVOLUTION?

THE LOST REVOLUTION?
By John D. Borah

It is virtually impossible to understand what is happening in the economy today, unless one understands the two economic systems. The Revolutionary War was fought in large part to annihilate the abuses, monopoly dominance, corruption and injustices perpetrated against America by the English capitalism system. Those who believe the Founders established that capitalistic system are unaware of the determination before, at and after the constitutional convention of 1787 to overthrow capitalism. The Founders wanted no part of Adam Smith’s capitalism. The thinking in the later part of the eighteenth century is as germane today as then and the current discussions are similar to those of yesteryear.

            Adam Smith, a professor in England, who described, “The Wealth of Nations,”  supported the two class system. He believed the ruling class should pay for private education for children of the working class so they would be good workers for the upper class, not allowing for upper mobility. Smith is alleged to have established the science of economics, but his work is primarily an explanation and justification for the meagerly regulated economic policies of England, while the social science of economics is not a science. However, he did encourage global free trade and, as he saw the problems of monopoly, some changes in practices.

It was Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury under George Washington, who from discussions at the convention and the Constitution itself, defined and set forth our constitutional economic system. In letters to Washington, writings in the Federalist Papers, his First Report of Public Credit, 1790, and his Report on Manufactures, 1791, he set forth the principle of the freedom to engage in business. He demanded that it be regulated to ensure competition, the public interest be served and that the weaker be protected from the powerful. All men had equal rights and public education for all should edify for individual development and engender the collective ability for self-government. Upward mobility should exist as Benjamin Franklin, also, so ardently advocated. Hamilton refuted Smith’s dogmas and brilliantly dismissed them as not in accord with the intent and tenor of our Constitution.

Two schools of economic thought have evolved. One is the Adam Smith school, represented by very well paid lackeys to the corporations, such as Milton Friedman. Wages are not included in the revenues of this Market Economy. So this school by measuring only business activities reflects only the prosperity of the market and not that of the nation. This, it is known, is to deliberately justify low pay for labor which is classified as a commodity. Controlled by greed they underestimate demand. Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Timothy Geithner and many right wing republican economists adhere to and report on this economy.

The Keynesian school recognizing the importance of demand includes John Kenneth Galbraith, his son James, Paul Krugman, two of my professors at Indiana University, many progressives, and I accept that school. We call it the National Economy as it includes the incomes of workers as well as the incomes of business in the economy revenues. So the aggregate of those two, plus government spending, reflects the prosperity of the country.

Here is the tricky part and reasons why what is good for one system is bad for the other. The market economy is quite worried about deflation as lower prices would decrease profits, but it would be good for the National Economy because the quality of living would be enhanced for those purchasing at lower prices. Sales work. The cost of labor, classified as a commodity, is a burden to business, they say, so reducing labor costs to increase profits is an intense motivation of corporations in lobbying for a global free economy to outsource labor or move factories out of the country.

This is a failure to understand, as Henry Ford understood, the revolution of money from consumer to business to consumer to business. By lowering labor costs, incomes of American workers are deflated or jobs are lost so the National Economy, as well as people, suffers. About seventy percent of consumer spending comes from employees, so a reduction in consumer spending when jobs are lost or with smaller income means less revenue to business. At present, additional jobs or higher incomes would enhance spending for consumer goods. Business leaders have falsely argued that with increased capital they will hire workers but they are not hiring now even though many have received money from the government. The cause is insufficient demand.

In an unforgivable blunder Obama, shortly after taking office, stated that he would work through private enterprise to regenerate the economy. In a hand-me-down approach he has funneled money to banks and business rather than, as President Roosevelt did, to hire workers in federal agencies to build and repair governmental infrastructure. Their incomes through purchases stimulated the National Economy. Obama misunderstood his election mandate to overhaul a totally dysfunctional corrupt government with well functioning administrative agencies and departments that would work for the people. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act did save some jobs, but this approach has failed to start the revival of the depressed economy that should be properly named a depression so people would understand the enormous challenge before us. Unfortunately, Obama representatives are misleading the American people by indicating the nations is moving forward. Employment is the key and he isn’t unlocking the door.
 
By accepting the definition of the economy of the Republicans, Obama has accepted Adam Smith’s capitalistic system that the nation overthrew by fighting the Revolutionary War. So in that aspect we have lost that part of the Revolution. He should endorse the National Economy by putting people to work on the infrastructure with additional tax dollars, otherwise the nation will languish in an unnecessary desperate crippled state, as under President Hoover, for a long-long time.

The number of facilities owned by governments such as roads, bridges, utilities, schools, town halls, convention centers and more in need of drastic repair and remodeling are almost mind boggling. As in World War II, the nation must go to work - to repair and build. Numerous jobs could be created by direct employment by government by spending more tax stimulus funds thereby increasing consumer purchases that could send the economy toward recovery. Shortly after taking office President Eisenhower, aware that the U. S. highway system was in a deplorable condition, coached the congress into authorizing taxes for commencing the construction of the interstate highway system. This program created a humongous amount of development all around the country and tied it together. It was a great investment  by the taxpayer. A new railroad system is now sorely needed. Even though Republicans would envision a cataclysm by the spending of money to initiate some of these projects hope, which comes from specific visions, not just generalities, could again be revived if taxes on the higher incomes would be imposed for a much needed fast modern railroad transportation system. It would be a great investment by the taxpayers.

9-2-2010
---------------------

John Borah is a good friend of mine from Port Angeles, WA. He is an excellent historian on the constitution and Supreme Court, is 90 years old and is still sharper than any tack.

William McPherson – bill.mcpherson@hotmail.com

ANGRY CITIZENS of the US of A

ANGRY CITIZENS of the US of A

Democrats are mad, Republicans are mad, Independents are mad, Tea Parties are mad, Greens are mad, Libertarians are mad, Mad as Hell Doctors are mad and, and Anthony Weiner is really mad.

Is it any wonder that Gallup Polls report that approval of Congress is an all time low of 11%.?? – Gallup's 2010 Confidence in Institutions poll finds Congress ranking dead last out of the 16 institutions rated this year.

Barack Obama averaged 47.3% job approval during his sixth quarter in office, spanning April 20-July 19. A long way down from his first quarter at 63%, but still a heck of a lot better than Congress's 11%.


What can congress do to improve citizen's confidence?

They could do something about the corporate money that is corrupting our elections, and restore this country to a democracy that Abraham Lincoln thought we had when he wrote his Gettysburg Address. That address ended with this phrase “and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

I do not know if we really had that government in Abe's day but we certainly do not today. We still have the facade; but we have a government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations. ---- Congress could pass the Fair Elections Now Act S752 – HR- 1826, that would let congressmen depend on their constituents rather than the corporations and their lobbyist for campaign contributions. As of today Aug-2-2010, there are 23 cosponsors for the Senate bill, and 159 cosponsors for the House bill.

It is time to put it to a vote, and see who is for the people, or who is for the corporations.

One more thing the Congress could do to restore confidence, and bring back government to the people. IRV Instant Runoff Voting, also called ranked voting needs to go along with the Fair Elections Now Act. IRV will save the expense of runoff elections, and give good third party and independent candidates a fair chance to be elected.


William McPherson [unpaid citizen lobbyist]

Working on the Railroad

Working on the Railroad
JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS

We can not compete efficiently with Europe or Asia with the most inefficient transportation system on Earth. - If we are to compete, there must be a complete system from every neighborhood by bicycle and foot to buses, trams, to high speed trains.

The plan we need is not only a transportation plan, but a plan to improve the economy, the health of our citizens, the environment and an energy plan. – All of these are affected by our transportation system, for good or bad.

IMHO we need at least two or more lines from the Atlantic to the Pacific and three or more north/south lines. I am sure many will disagree with me, thats ok, but lets get things going. The first N/S line should go from Bangor, Maine to Miami, Florida. I think logically the next to concentrate on would be the east/west line connecting either LA or San Diego, CA through Atlanta, GA, intersecting the north/south line at Columbia, SC and on to the Atlantic at Wilmington, NC. This E/W route would not encounter any major geological obstacles that would be difficult to avoid.

Obviously New York and Chicago should be connected to the Pacific as well, but the route is not as clear. Possibly we may find that cooperating with Canada on the north west link could be the best solution. The Pacific Coast line should be fairly straight forward. From San Diego to Vancouver, Canada, with coordination on exact track location. Canada might be interested in other links such as New York – Burlington, VT to Montreal,-- Chicago – Detroit – Toronto.

The high speed system should have no highway crossing and be separated as much as possible from the old freight lines. And as there are already trains operating at well over 200 miles an hour in Europe China and Japan, Our tracks should be designed for a speed of at least 250 mph.

Ray LaHood and his team have been working diligently on this project from bike paths to high speed trains for a year and a half. It is time we all get in high gear to get it done. That is you Congress, that is you Mr President, that is you grassroots of the USA.

Our country desperately needs this infrastructure, and the economy needs the JOBS.
The Interstate highway system is badly overloaded, and in a sad state of repair. And our present rail system is in bad need of repair as well.

THERE ARE MANY GOOD PAYING JOBS NEEDED FOR THIS PROJECT.


Ray LaHood's blog – http://fastlane.dot.gov/

William McPherson – http://ethicaldemocracy101.blogspot.com/

COMMUNITIES WITHOUT CARS

This essay is one of a series called Myopia (correcting our environmental vision) written in or before 1997. The outline and other completed essays are on this site under Environmental Essays on the side bar.


COMMUNITIES WITHOUT CARS

Just try to imagine a place where everything necessary for a good standard of living is within easy walking distance. Certainly not the typical suburban neighborhood. Let us try to plan such a place. Sounds difficult doesn't it; but let's first decide what is most important to have nearest to our doorstep. A safe place for our children to play might be most important for many of us. Other things most of us would want to have close by are somewhere to buy food, a place to work, schools, medical offices, libraries, a place
where we could enjoy nature, a place to worship, athletic fields, and of course somewhere to buy clothing and furniture, hardware, etc. We will need to prioritize locations of each facility according to frequency of use and economy of scale. If we
eliminate the space needed for roads, parking and garages, and we share common space, we can design very livable communities with all of these facilities within a 15 minute walk or 5 minute bike ride.

There could be many basic designs for such compact communities and several levels of density. Some could be planned for retirement and the handicapped with wider pathways to accommodate small electric vehicles. My idea of an efficient community is
based on a cluster of mixed apartments, town-houses, condos etc built in a circle with a large common courtyard with access only to residents. Each home would have back door access to the common courtyard and front door to the outside of cluster. The courtyard would have a diameter of about 200 - 300 feet with playgrounds for small children and picnic areas for adults and families. Access and exit directly from outside to courtyard could be by two or three gates that would be opened by unique codes or even computer recognition of each resident's hand print. A courtyard of this size is large enough to accommodate all residents and small enough that parents could know all the children near their own children's ages. Mothers or fathers could keep watch from their kitchen or home office window.

A community of such clusters with an area about one mile square could easily accommodate from 10 to 20 thousand people, including places of employment, entertainment, sports facilities, schools and shopping. This density can be achieved with no high rise towers; two and three story homes and apartments are all that is required.

A simple sketch I have drawn looks like a tic-tac-toe grid with residential clusters in the corners, a commercial / light industrial area in the center, the top and bottom squares with schools athletic fields and garden plots, the left and right squares contain parks and churches.

The residential squares need not all be of the same design; some clusters could have taller apartments, more suited to singles and childless families, and many other variations. Probably most squares should have a convenience store and a child care center; and possibly a small office complex, and a self storage facility which could also serve as shops for small businesses.

Most people could find work within the community in the schools, parks, churches, the commercial and industrial center. Working out of our own home is rapidly becoming an option for more people than ever before. Most office work, design engineering,
computer programming, and other similar work can be done on home computers and much of the necessary communication with other associates can be done by phone, fax, email or teleconferencing

For those who must work in other communities and for other travel needs we need to develop a transit system. For local community service, there is no more practical mode than busses. To provide frequent convenient service for compact communities, we
would need one forty passenger bus operating about 16 hours a day for approximately every four or five hundred people. Today's sprawling communities would use more than one hundred private automobiles to serve the same population. No subsidies are needed
for an efficient transit system serving such compact medium to high density community. The extent and complexity of such systems would depend upon how many of such communities are close enough to be served by the same system. And the locations of industrial parks, airports, rail terminals, and if traditional suburban developments will also be served.

While every town or community's needs may be somewhat different because of many variables, from size and density to terrain and prevailing weather; ideal systems for a retirement community in central Nevada would not serve well in the diverse
communities of the Puget Sound in Washington with it's much more frequent wet weather. However most local communities in both areas would probably be best served by a system of busses of a variety of sizes from mini-vans up to the largest needed on the most heavily traveled routes. Rush hour schedules may be best served by two or,
in extreme cases more busses, running the same time. With this scheme, only the leading bus would stop at the next stop allowing the following bus to leapfrog past to take the following stop unless someone needed to get off at the previous stop. This
leapfrogging should allow the schedule to be completed in normal time even during periods of heavier than normal traffic. Schedules can be kept much simpler and by far less confusing if they run at the same time all day. Changing the size of busses to fit capacity needs can easily improve overall system efficiency. In a relatively large system this could easily be done by scheduling maintenance on larger busses during slower periods of traffic.