Friday, February 27, 2009

Another comment From Mike's Blog

This is a comment I made on Mike's Blog on MySpace, in response to a comment by another commenter.

I hate to be the barer of such, but you assumption that I assumed is incorrect, in that I based my "assumptions" from your misunderstanding, which is not uncommon, but actually the precise education achieved through years of public education. That you believe that the Constitution is a document that gives us freedom from the obligation to the British Crown, you therefore do not understand the language of the Constitution. The belief that General George Washington was fighting for our freedom is a gross misconception. The Continental United States of America were fighting for representation not independence in the sense that we are made to believe. That you as well do not know me, as I do not know you, I was responding directly to your words, as you provided, and given that you continue with your belief indicates that you are yet to understand that I am not an advocate for any type of government, or organized religion for that matter, however with that understanding I am aware of what this government is, and isn't, and that they, the government, are not giving us anything but what we ask for, even if that is not what you are saying, but by what you are doing. My main point was not that you or anyone is mindless, but that it is personal responsibility that proves the difference, and that not you personally, but people as a whole have created what they now realize is not exactly what they thought they were creating. We were taught certain things, and for the most part we are conditioned to accept these things, as they are presented through the public education system. That I live here in this country and that we do have freedoms of expression allows me to be as I am, and that other countries do not allow this is well documented. I have sufficient experience to know enough to understand this, from a more objective perspective. I do not want to assume anything in particular, but your response again provides me with additional information on you that allows me to make at least basic assumptions of your experience, which does not probably include political theology, or classical study of politics or theocracy. I am absolutely certain that you are not mindless, or otherwise, and that you are not unusual in your basis of theory of such, as I am absolutely certain that you are a product of your public education and environment.

That you are concerned that we are truning into a communist state indicates that you do not understand communism, or political systems, except the fear factors. We are not turning into a communist state, that would be ridiculous, we are globalizing the American way, so why would be turning into a communist state. That we are embracing a socialist republic, FDR ensured that through the New Deal, and other public works programs. We as a country are not interested in such concepts as we are a catalyst for the Global Free Trade society. For proof of this consider that we have signed the NAFTA and CAFTA-DR acts into law, all under the radar of most citizens, which create combined the largest free trade republic yet, twice as much GDP as the European Union. That the EU and the US are considering further collusion is indicating that we as a country are seriously considering creating the largest free trade consortium in history. Not even the Dutch Trading Company had as much influence as that which would be possible through a global free trade union, headed by the G8 and administered through the United Nations. Your understanding from your perspective may be astounding considering the limits that most people have on their grasp of global trade and commerce. Since economics is the driving force behind this and several other geo-political positions, it indicates that the United States of America is looking to acclimate the American public to a more social design, but this is what we are asking for. We want the government to help us ou7t of this economic mess, and save our country from financial ruin, unless I am mistaken, which would be great, but I do not think I am, I rarely am.

Perhaps Mike can help you with this, as he knows me well enough to know that I am not exactly unaware of what is or isn't. I would say though that I find this type of exchange less than enjoyable, and that maybe we could find a little better form of communication or at least try to better understand each other. I would say that I am offering you the opportunity to obtain a difference of perspective, and that if you would like to continue with the debate, I am more than willing to continue. If my delivery is less than appropriate, or does somehow offend you, let me be the first to say it is not intentional, but perhaps my lack in that respect. Of course I understand if Mike doesn't want to throw his opinion into this foray as it would be difficult for him to maintain objectivity. I would understand your ire if you feel this, although it is not productive, I respect it as the common reaction to that which we do not want to see.