According to Webster: ap·pa·ra·tus, 1.a. The totality of means by which a designated function is performed or a specific task executed, as in a system of government. b. A political organization or an underground political movement. Also called apparat. 2.a. An appliance or device for a particular purpose: b. An integrated group of materials or devices used for a particular purpose: 3. Physiology. A group or system of organs that collectively perform a specific function or process:

Sidebar: An “apparatus” as defined by Webster could, with the proper application of imagination, describes anything and everything on the planet. Which of course, “at least in my opinion,” places anything classified as an apparatus into the same venue as a thingamajig.

According to Webster: thing·a·ma·jig also thing·um·a·jig,  Informal. Something difficult to classify or whose name has been forgotten or is not known. [Alteration of obsolete thingum (from thing) + jig.

Personal observation: “Words are extremely fun!”

“The totality of means by which a designated function is performed or a specific task is executed, as in a system of government.”

Talk about a mouthful of words, ..what does all that gibberish actually mean?

According to Webster: to·tal·i·ty, 1. The quality or state of being total: 2. An aggregate amount; a sum. 3. The phase of an eclipse when it is total.

According to Webster: mean, meant, mean·ing, means. 1.a. To be used to convey; denote: b. To act as a symbol of; signify or represent: 2. To intend to convey or indicate: 3. To have as a purpose or an intention; intend: 4. To design, intend, or destine for a certain purpose or end: 5. To have as a consequence; bring about: 6. To have the importance or value of:

According to Webster: des·ig·nate, des·ig·nat·ed, des·ig·nat·ing, des·ig·nates. 1. To indicate or specify; point out. 2. To give a name or title to; characterize. 3. To select and set aside for a duty, an office, or a purpose.

According to Webster: func·tion, 1. The action for which one is particularly fitted or employed. 2.a. Assigned duty or activity. b. A specific occupation or role: 3. An official ceremony or a formal social occasion. 4. Something closely related to another thing and dependent on it for its existence, value, or significance:

According to Webster: per·form, per·formed, per·form·ing, per·forms. 1. To begin and carry through to completion; do: 2. To take action in accordance with the requirements of; fulfill: 3.a. To enact (a feat or role) before an audience. b. To give a public presentation of; present: 1. To carry on; function: 2. To fulfill an obligation or requirement; accomplish something as promised or expected. 3. To portray a role or demonstrate a skill before an audience: 4. To present a dramatic or musical work or other entertainment before an audience.

According to Webster: spe·cif·ic, 1. Explicitly set forth; definite. 2. Relating to, characterizing, or distinguishing a species. 3. Special, distinctive, or unique: 4.a. Intended for, applying to, or acting on a particular thing: b. Concerned particularly with the subject specified.

According to Webster: task, 1. A piece of work assigned or done as part of one’s duties. 2. A difficult or tedious undertaking. 3. A function to be performed; an objective.

According to Webster: ex·e·cute, ex·e·cut·ed, ex·e·cut·ing, ex·e·cutes. 1. To put into effect; carry out: 2. To perform; do: 3. To create (a work of art, for example) in accordance with a prescribed design. 4. To make valid, as by signing: 5. To perform or carry out what is required by: 6. To put to death, especially by carrying out a lawful sentence.

According to Webster: sys·tem, 1. A group of interacting, interrelated, or interdependent elements forming a complex whole. 2. A functionally related group of elements, especially: a. The human body regarded as a functional physiological unit. b. An organism as a whole, especially with regard to its vital processes or functions. c. A group of physiologically or anatomically complementary organs or parts: d. A group of interacting mechanical or electrical components. e. A network of structures and channels, as for communication, travel, or distribution. 3. An organized set of interrelated ideas or principles. 4. A social, economic, or political organizational form. 5. A naturally occurring group of objects or phenomena: 6. A set of objects or phenomena grouped together for classification or analysis. 7. A condition of harmonious, orderly interaction. 8. An organized and coordinated method; a procedure. 9. The prevailing social order; the establishment.

According to Webster: gov·ern·ment, 1. The act or process of governing, especially the control and administration of public policy in a political unit. 2. The office, function, or authority of one who governs or of a governing body. 3. Exercise of authority in a political unit; rule. 4. The agency or apparatus through which an individual or a body that governs exercises authority and performs its functions. 5. A governing body or organization, as: a. The ruling political party or coalition of political parties in a parliamentary system. b. The cabinet in a parliamentary system. c. The persons who make up a governing body. 6. A system or policy by which a political unit is governed. 7. Management or administration of an organization, a business, or an institution.

Was that a fun trip or what? ..or was it an exercise in complicating simplicity?

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow


 Crusader Rabbit…


According to Webster: or·gan·i·za·tion, 1.a. The act or process of organizing. b. The state or manner of being organized: a high degree of organization. 2. Something that has been organized or made into an ordered whole. 3. Something made up of elements with varied functions that contribute to the whole and to collective functions; an organism. 4. A group of persons organized for a particular purpose; an association: a benevolent organization. 5.a. A structure through which individuals cooperate systematically to conduct business. b. The administrative personnel of such a structure.

Statement of fact: The United States of America is an “organization.”

According to Webster: or·gan·ize, or, or·gan·izer, 1. To put together into an orderly, functional, structured whole. 2.a. To arrange in a coherent form; systematize: b. To arrange in a desired pattern or structure: 3. To arrange systematically for harmonious or united action: 4.a. To establish as an organization: 1. b. To induce (employees) to form or join a labor union. c. To induce the employees of (a business or an industry) to form or join a union: 1. To develop into or assume an organic structure. 2. To form or join an activist group, especially a labor union.

Statement of fact: During his campaign for the office of President of the United States, Barack Obama claimed to be an “organizer.”

According to Webster: un·ion, 1.a. The act of uniting or the state of being united. b. A combination so formed, especially an alliance or confederation of people, parties, or political entities for mutual interest or benefit.

Statement of fact: Barack Obama is a union “organizer.”

According to Webster: u·nit·ed, 1. Combined into a single entity. 2. Concerned with, produced by, or resulting from mutual action. 3. Being in harmony; agreed.

Statement of fact: Barack Obama has not “united”America.

According to Webster: A·mer·i·ca, 1. The United States.

Statement of fact: Barack Obama is the President of the United States of America.

According to Webster: pres·i·dent, 1. One appointed or elected to preside over an organized body of people, such as an assembly or a meeting. 2.a. Often, President. The chief executive of a republic. b. President. The chief executive of the United States.

Statement of fact: Barack Obama has failed to “unite” the people of the United States of America.

According to Webster: United States or “The United States of America,” A country of central and northwest North America with coastlines on the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. It includes the non contiguous states of Alaska and Hawaii and various island territories in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean. The original Thirteen Colonies declared their independence from Great Britainin 1776 and formed a government under the Articles of Confederation in 1781. A new constitution, adopted in 1787 and in effect after 1789, provided for a strong central government, and the nation soon began to expand westward. The Civil War (1861-1865) was a brief but tragic disruption in the unity of the nation. Since that time the United States has evolved into a vast, diversified economic power. Washington, D.C., is the nations Capital with New York City currently being the largest city by Population, 249,632,692.

According to Webster: failed, fail, 1. To prove deficient or lacking; perform ineffectively or inadequately. 2. To be unsuccessful:

According to Webster: di·vid·ed, 1. Separated into parts or pieces. 2. Being in a state of disagreement or disunity: a divided nation. 3. Moved by conflicting interests, emotions, or activities: divided loyalties.

According to Webster: loy·al·ty, 1. The state or quality of being loyal. 2. loyalties. Feelings of devoted attachment and affection: My loyalties lie with my family.

Editorial: Considering the possibility, that Barack Obama may through some medium come to read what I write, with his proclivity for pursuing life and his responsibilities in a manner opposite to anything that makes sense to me, i.e., Example: The White House declaration that he, Barack Obama, is a man “comfortable” with “leading from behind.” Accordingly, in consideration, I will begin with my opinion of Barack Obama’s loyalty to America, by working backwards.

As Webster’s last example in conveying the definition of loyalty being; “My loyalties lie with my family.” Which of course I believe in my personal, (glass half full) “what you see, is what you get,” outlook on life, Webster’s example fits Barack Obama to a tee.

Example: On Saturday, June 18, 2011, Barack Obama, the President of the United States was upbeat and displaying his signature grin on the links with VP Joe Biden and speaker of the house John Boehner, while 13.9 million Americans who are presently unemployed, (according to the Bureau of Labor statistics) spent the day concerned with surviving the economic implosion that he and his administration have provided for them and more than 100 million others, with ridiculously high prices at the pump, and at the grocery store, and everywhere else in America where money makes the difference between feeding and sheltering your family, or finding yourself and your family out in the street. Which of course, “at least in my opinion,” playing golf on the taxpayers dime is condescending enough when so many American’s are being forced to discover a new appreciation for a dime.

(W.A.M.) According to Webster: con·de·scend·ing, Displaying a patronizingly superior attitude. 2. To deal with people in a patronizingly superior manner.

According to “Free,” Posted on Tuesday, June 21, 2011 8:29:27 AM by “Sub-Driver.”

‘Michelle, Mom, Kids Africa Trip Costing Taxpayers $171,000 At Least for Air Travel Alone Tuesday, June 21, 2011 By James Zilenziger’

( – The White House isn’t saying how much of a tab the taxpayers will need to pick up for the week-long trip that First Lady Michelle Obama, her two children, her mother, a niece and a nephew are taking to South Africa and Botswana.

But according to Congressional Research Service estimates, the flights alone will cost taxpayers more than $171,000–almost as much as the $174,000 annual salaries paid to rank-and-file members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The first lady–joined by daughters Malia and Sasha, Marian Robinson, and niece and nephew Leslie and Avery Robinson–is going to Africa to “improve relations between the U.S. and Africa and promote youth engagement, education, health and wellness,” according to the White House.

When CNS asked the first lady’s press office how much, on a daily basis, her trip to Africa will cost U.S. taxpayers her press secretary did not offer a response

The White House did tell the Associated Press that all costs regarding Mrs. Obama’s family members are to be paid privately. However, because Mrs. Obama’s trip will be considered official travel until her family heads off for “private time, including a safari and an overnight stay in the animal park” on Saturday, the taxpayers will be footing the bill for the first lady up to that point. (Source Free

Living under the pressure that an individual married to the President of the United Statesmust live under, I personally have no quarrel with Michelle Obama taking a vacation. With or without her mother, her children, her niece and nephew and Press Secretary, and whoever else she would deem fit to invite, long as I don’t get stuck with the bill. I mean after all, America, is the “Land of the free, ..Home of the brave,” So what business is it of mine who goes where and when? Oh yeah, ..unless of course, I get stuck with the bill, ..or any part of the bill, ..even a dime.

Accordingly, I suppose subscribing to those parameters, I do take exception to the Obama family’s vacation. But then why not? Being a focused conservative who pretty much “has and do” take issue with pretty much everything that Michelle Obama’s husband pursues, why not bundle the Obama family into one package. After all, I myself totally subscribe to the belief that a family is a unit. Accordingly, whether evolved through nurture or by nature, with Barack Obama being an individual with a well honed and celebrated talent for reading a teleprompter, riding in public funded transportation, i.e., limousines, helicopters, and jumbo jets, (although I am not a college graduate) it is not beyond the scope of my intellect to understand the appetite that an idealistic human being, i.e., Homo sapiens, can engender over his or her lifetime, for depending on a free lunch.

Especially for an individual who spent their formative years, and pretty much their entire life, dependent on free lunches.

So of course, America is divided, America has always been divided and will always be divided. The Constitution of the United States more than the Constitution of any other nation on the planet Earth guarantees a citizen of the United States of America choices that allow us to be divided. “Divided is not a bad thing.” America was founded on division, the division between church and state, the right to believe as we choose.

Correct me if I am wrong, however from past research, it is my understanding that Barack Obama is not only a card-carrying Constitutional scholar, but he taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law school from 1992 to 2004.

“In 1991, Obama accepted a two-year position as a “Visiting Law and Government Fellow” at the University of Chicago Law School to work on his first book. He then served as a professor at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years, as a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996, and as a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004—teaching constitutional law.” (Source Wikipedia)

There you see? I wasn’t wrong, or more correctly, I wasn’t incorrect.

Accordingly, “at least in my humble opinion,” there should be no reason for Barack Obama not to understand that America is a country divided by design and at this point if I wanted to really stack on the issue, I could remind you and Barack that life itself is divided by design. Mother Nature has provided our magnificent blue planet with a variety of animal life, to include, (at least in my opinion) human beings, i.e., Homo sapiens, which of course I am sure that there are human beings, i.e., Homo sapiens that will object and dispute my opinion as to where human beings fit into the mix. A mix, that not only provides human beings in pretty much every size and shape imaginable, we have the capacity for individual thought, i.e., reason. Further, if I haven’t convinced you as yet that “division and difference” are “good,” and as “natural” as an artesian spring, Mother Nature provided for us to come in different colors as well. Viva la division, Viva la difference.

Continuing in my effort here, let’s move on to an arena, the only arena, (at least in my opinion,) in which Barack Obama has shown success. Which of course would be in the arena of failure.

According to Webster: suc·cess, 1. The achievement of something desired, planned, or attempted: 2.a. The gaining of fame or prosperity:

Ooops, ..looks like Webster has cut me off at the knees here, as the way I’m reading Webster on this one, I’m only half right.

Because Barack Obama, by anyone’s measure has indeed gained fame and prosperity. I mean go find someone on the planet who communicates with anything more advanced than a smoke signal, and they know who Barack Obama is. As for prosperity? You decide. As for my opinion, if I was a man making $400,000 a year, living in a rent free house with a staff that consisted of six levels, 132 rooms, 35 bathrooms, 412 doors, 147 windows, 28 fireplaces, 8 staircases, and 3 elevators, a custom limousine, two helicopters, and a jumbo jet at my disposal night and day, even without a degree from Harvard, I would consider that I had achieved prosperity.

Thus, by the parameters that I myself set, I cannot describe Barack Obama as a complete failure. However with that said, I would like to take the liberty to ask you.

Question:  What part of our New (secret) Healthcare Law, i.e., “Obamacare,” do “you” (using your personal knowledge of the law) truly believe will benefit you and the rank-and-file, taxpaying American citizen?

Question:  What part of spending trillions of dollars to prosecute, (presently, either four or five military actions,) i.e. “wars,” in pursuit of establishing democratic governments around the world, do you believe will benefit you and the rank-and-file taxpaying American citizen, or his or her children?

Question:  How does sacrificing 4466 Americans in Iraq since March 19, 2003 and sacrificing 1638 Americans in Afghanistan benefit you and the rank-and-file taxpaying American citizen?

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…


With the atmosphere, i.e., environment, i.e., temper, tone, or mood in America gearing up, albeit extremely early in my simple, albeit considered opinion, the “Media,” i.e., “News Media,” i.e., “The News Market,” having secured the grip, i.e., “Monopoly,” that they have come to secure in American society, I beseech each and every one of my readers to pay extremely close attention to my offering today.

According to Webster: be·seech, 1. To address an earnest or urgent request to; implore: 2. To request earnestly; beg for:


According to Webster: mar·ket·ing, 1. The act or process of buying and selling in a market. 2. The commercial functions involved in transferring goods from producer to consumer. mar·ket (mär“k¹t) n. Abbr. mkt. 1. A public gathering held for buying and selling merchandise. 2. A place where goods are offered for sale. 3. A store or shop that sells a particular type of merchandise: a meat market. 4.a. The business of buying and selling a specified commodity: the soybean market. b. A market price. c. A geographic region considered as a place for sales: grain for the foreign market; the West Coast market. d. A subdivision of a population considered as buyers: cosmetics for the upscale market. 5. The opportunity to buy or sell; extent of demand for merchandise: a big market for gourmet foods. 6.a. An exchange for buying and selling stocks or commodities: securities sold on theNew Yorkmarket. b. The entire enterprise of buying and selling commodities and securities: The market has been slow recently. –mar·ket v. mar·ket·ed, mar·ket·ing, mar·kets. –tr. 1. To offer for sale. 2. To sell. –intr. 1. To deal in a market. 2. To buy household supplies: We marketed for a special Sunday dinner. –idioms. in the market. Interested in buying: We are in the market for a used car. on the market. 1. Available for buying: Many kinds of seasonal flowers are on the market. 2. Up for sale: They put the family business on the market. [Middle English, from Old North French, from Vulgar Latin *marc³tus, from Latin merc³tus, from past participle of merc³rº, to buy, from merx, merc-, merchandise.]

With full knowledge and understanding that the Lions share of individuals who publish their thoughts and ideals via the Internet and cyberspace to be, “at least in my opinion,” from having personally investigated more than 100 blog sites at random to date, to be written by individuals with the intellect and agenda of fungus.

A fungus (pronounced /ˈfʌŋɡəs/, pl. fungi or funguses) is a member of a large group of eukaryotic organisms that includes microorganisms such as yeasts and molds (British English: moulds), as well as the more familiar mushrooms. (Source

Accordingly, and in spite of, I continue my effort to reach out and educate the American public, the best way I know how, via the truth, personal experiences and legitimate substantiated information.


So to begin, the truth, I have a brother, (name withheld for his personal privacy.) My brother (name withheld) is an individual that if there were a contest for individuals who could sell ice cubes to Eskimos, I would stake my lot on him. Salesmen are not strangers in America, to the contrary, “we” are as abundant as jackrabbits in Wyoming. (Note) …like the way I slipped that “we” in there? Yes, that’s right, although I by no stretch of my imagination would I ever consider placing myself upon the same plane as my brother (name withheld,) I am a salesman. After all, since I promised the truth, if I didn’t have something to sell, I wouldn’t be sitting here. Make no mistake, I am here to sell, I am here to sell you a concept, a concept of America. A totally opposite concept of America to the concept of America that Barack Obama’s campaign strategists sold America in 2008.

Barack Obama, prior to his election was no more than a product being offered on the open market. Which is of course, since we’re dealing with the truth, is the same circumstance that each and every one of us deals with any time we venture outside of our own mind. And no, I am not suggesting that each and every one of us has campaigned for the office of President of the United States. What I am stating is the fact that any time any human being ventures beyond his or her own mind, we, you, I, they, all have an agenda. Your agenda could be as simple as a day at the beach, or a trip to the grocery store for a loaf of bread. Nonetheless, we all have agendas, a multitude of agendas, some more than others, some grander than others, what does it matter?

Good question; if your agenda is a day at the beach or the acquisition of a loaf of bread, compared to the scope of America’s failing economy, “at least in my opinion,” it wouldn’t even register.

While researching last night for a subject to blog about this morning, I logged onto ( to see what it would reveal? To be precise, I Googled; “Barack Obama’s national security policy.” ..and then selected the [PDF] National Security Strategy – The White House. Which presented me with an extremely interesting and informative read. Which of course I decided that I would like to share with those of you who read my publication. However, when I attempted to select and copy the material, it was unavailable. Accordingly, I offer the URL to my readers and suggest, “vehemently,” that you read Barack Obama’s (supposedly): words, which reveal his vision for America.


Keeping in mind, that Barack Obama as a matter of record is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law school when you read his composition, then assess his composition, not for its content, but rather for its likeness to the composition of Dick and Jane, and “at least in my opinion,” if you are an individual with a formal education beyond the sixth grade, you will as I did, find Barack Obama’s aptitude for composing declarations sorely lacking.

Nevertheless, with the guidance and support of a team of professional salesman, Barack Obama was elected to the office of President of the United States.

In closing, I offer this Council, the next time you are considering a purchase, make damn sure you know what’s inside the container. As more often than not, the package does not reveal the product.

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…


i·de·al·ist, 1. One whose conduct is influenced by ideals that often conflict with practical considerations. 2. One who is unrealistic and impractical; a visionary. 3. An artist or a writer whose work is imbued with idealism. 4. An adherent of any system of philosophical idealism.

i·de·o·logue, An advocate of a particular ideology, especially an official exponent of that ideology.

i·de·ol·o·gy, 1. The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, a group, a class, or a culture. 2. A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system. –i”de·ol“o·gist n.

i·de·al·is·tic, Of, relating to, or having the nature of an idealist or idealism. –i”de·al·is“ti·cal·ly adv.

Barack Obama is an idealist.


prag·ma·tism, A movement consisting of varying but associated theories, that the meaning of an idea or a proposition lies in its observable practical consequences. 2. A practical, matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems. –prag“ma·tist n. –prag”ma·tis“tic

Sarah Palin is a pragmatist.

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…


War in Libya..

According to the Christian science Monitor; “Nkoranza,Ghana, Once an important financial lifeline to Ghana, more than 18,000 Ghanaian migrant workers are back in their home country and unemployed after having fled the violence of the Libyan civil war. Although they are now safe, the workers’ return ended the flow of money via remittances into Ghana, putting their families under economic strain. Although they are now safe, the workers’ return ended the flow of money via remittances into Ghana, putting their families under economic strain.” (Source, Christian science Monitor, article by Heather Yundt)


Ghana, officially the Republic of Ghana, is a country located in West Africa. It is bordered by Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast) to the west, Burkina Faso to the north, Togo to the east, and the Gulf of Guinea to the south. The word Ghana means “Warrior King” and is derived from the ancient Ghana Empire. Ghana was inhabited in pre-colonial times by a number of ancient predominantly Akan kingdoms, including the inland Ashanti Empire, the Akwamu on the eastern coast, and various Fante and non-Akan states, like the Ga and Ewe, along the coast and inland. Trade with European states flourished after contact with the Portuguese in the 15th century, and the British established the Gold Coast Crown colony in 1874 over parts but not all of the country.

The Gold Coast achieved independence from the United Kingdom in 1957, becoming the first sub-Saharan African nation to do so, and the name Ghana was chosen for the new nation to reflect the ancient Empire of Ghana, which once extended throughout much of west Africa. Ghana is a member of the South Atlantic Peace and Cooperation Zone, the Commonwealth of Nations, the Economic Community of West African States, the African Union, and an associate member of La Francophonie. Ghanais the second largest producer of cocoa in the world and is home to Lake Volta, the largest artificial lake in the world by surface area.

The economy of Ghana has been listed as The World’s Fastest Growing Economy in 2011 in an economic research led by Economy Watch with data coming from the IMF’s tracker of GDP Growth in constant prices in the national currency (not converted to US dollars). With an economic growth of about 20.146 % for the year 2011, Ghana growth rate stands ahead of the rest of the world in economic growth and ahead of the next eleven fastest growing economies in the world by 2011 with Qatar following Ghana as the second fastest growing in the world with an estimated growth rate of 14.337 % for 2011. (Source Wikipedia)

UNITED STATES, “G.D.P.” (Gross Domestic Product)

Quarterly data: Real gross domestic product — the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States — increased at an annual rate of 1.9 percent in the first quarter of 2011, (that is, from the fourth quarter to the first quarter), according to the “third” estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth quarter, real GDP increased 3.1 percent. (Source, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of economic analysis)

Ghana, a country with a population of 24,223,431 people is recorded to have reported a growth rate in GDP of 20.146% to date for 2011, ..while the United States of America, listed by the US Census Bureau to have a population of 311,630,000 people, is reporting a growth rate in GDP of 1.9% for the first quarter of 2011.

Question: Do you as an American citizen have a problem with those numbers, ..or are you a Democrat?

The United States public debt is a measure of the obligations of the United States federal government and is presented by the United States Treasury in two components and one total:

  • Debt Held by the Public, representing all federal securities held by institutions or individuals outside the United States Government;
  • Intragovernmental Holdings, representing U.S. Treasury securities held in accounts which are administered by the United States Government, such as the OASI Trust fund administered by the Social Security Administration; and
  • Total Public Debt Outstanding, which is the sum of the above components.

As of May 6, 2011, the Total Public Debt Outstanding of the United States of America was $14.32 trillion and was approximately 98% of calendar year 2010’s annual gross domestic product (GDP) of $14.66 trillion. Using 2010 figures, the total debt (96.3% of GDP) ranked 12th highest against other nations.

In layman’s terms, America is circling the drain, up to its eyebrows in debt, America is broke, busted, without funds, on the verge of bankruptcy, how many ways can it be expounded? ..and our employees, i.e., the President, Vice President, Senators, Congressmen and Congresswomen are still roaming the halls of our Nation’s Capital searching for Band-Aids to keep America’s failing economy from virtually bleeding to death.

As being a college graduate is a prerequisite to holding federal office, or at least I assume it is? I have a real problem understanding, (which of course, may stem from the fact that I am not a college graduate,) that a simple rank-and-file, retired, blue-collar worker like myself, has the capacity to understand the concept of responsibility, income, and debt. When the individuals, men and women, that I helped to hire with my constitutionally provided vote, do not seem to understand the concept of responsibility, income and debt.

If I fail to make my mortgage payment, I understand that I need to start looking for another place to live. If I fail to pay my utility bills, I understand that I will have to adjust to living without lights, heat, water and trash pick up. So why do you suppose that the President, Vice President, and the 535 other titled (college-educated) individuals that we, “we the people,” pay exorbitant salaries to can’t figure it out?

Being that this is Sunday, the one day of the week that is predominantly monopolized by the network and cable media talking heads, a group that I do indeed find interesting, even though, “in my opinion,” the Lions share of them are self-aggrandizing idiots enthralled by the belief that they in some measure make a difference to the disenfranchised in a failing society. What can I say, I enjoy abstract comedy.

I mean, think about it? What is funnier (in a pathetic sort of way) than a group of overpaid, overinflated, ridiculously out of touch, men and women who couldn’t survive a weekend, i.e., 48 hours without their cell phones and blackberries in the real world, ..the world I live in.

Accordingly, if we can’t appreciate a media talking head for who they are, at least we can appreciate the fact that they work for the private sector, instead of for the taxpayer. As we, “we the people,” the taxpayers of America have enough to deal with, with footing the bill for adventures such as the one presently being undertaken by Sen. John McCain and Sen. John Kerry to promote harmony and a better life for citizens of a foreign nation.

What do you think? Wouldn’t it be nice if Sen. McCain and Sen. Kerry were to travel to some location within the United States to promote harmony and a better life for the citizens of the United States, know, ..the country that pays their salaries.

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow


Crusader Rabbit…


According to Webster: rep·re·sen·ta·tive, 1. One that serves as an example or a type for others of the same classification. 2. One that serves as a delegate or an agent for another. 3.a. A member of a governmental body, usually legislative, chosen by popular vote. b. A member of the U.S. House of Representatives or of the lower house of a state legislature.

Yesterday, June 25, 2011, when I went to my mailbox, along with the envelopes containing applications for new credit cards, because with America’s economy circling the drain as it is due to the Obama administrations policies concerning jobs in America, or more correctly, their policy of not being concerned about jobs in America, I receive a minimum of 30 to 40 solicitations from banks and credit card companies every month. Which of course is distressing and annoying, distressing because a tree was sacrificed to manufacture the paper and the envelope these applications arrive on and in, and annoying, simply because they arrive. Accordingly it was a pleasant surprise to receive a letter from my State’s (South Dakota,)  representative, Kristi Noem.

It was a nice letter, although doubtful that it was composed by Kristi herself, the message was positive. Kristi, in order to keep me informed as to her labor on my behalf, informed me that she is working to get America’s budget and spending under control, while protecting critical programs like Medicare. After which of course the rhetoric was pretty much standard fare. Nevertheless, being an individual at this point in history who has decided that it is no longer to his benefit to simply sit back and do nothing while our employees, Kristi Noem included, enjoy an importance and status that I believe that they believe they deserve once we hire them.

The United States House of Representatives is one of the two Houses of the United States Congress, the bicameral legislature which also includes the Senate. The composition and powers of the House are established in Article One of the Constitution. The major power of the House is to pass federal legislation that affects the entire country, although its bills must also be passed by the Senate and further agreed to by the President before becoming law (unless both the House and Senate re-pass the legislation with a two-thirds majority in each chamber). Each state receives representation in the House in proportion to its population but is entitled to at least one representative. The most populous state,California, currently has 53 representatives. The total number of voting representatives is fixed by law at 435. Each representative serves for a two-year term. The Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, traditionally the leader of the majority party, is the presiding officer of the chamber, elected by the members of the House. (Source Wikipedia)

Kristi Noem, a woman judged by me in 2010 when I voted for her, to be an individual of intelligence, (common sense) and integrity. With “common sense,” being (at least by the measure) that I use in my life, the most important asset I have attributed to her. Hopefully, she will not disappoint me. Especially if she hopes to count on me in her bid for reelection in 499 days, but who’s counting.

When a person, i.e., Homo sapiens, i.e., human being, gets to be my age and he finds himself, or herself, living in a society which has pretty much in general rolled over and submitted to the fact, or more correctly, what he/she or they perceive to be a fact, that the little guy, “the individual” no longer has a chance. I say; “Bull Crap!”America is still America. I am still alive and I still enjoy my rights guaranteed to me by the Second Amendment of the Constitution, along with the rights guaranteed to me by the First Amendment. Accordingly, if you’re a human being that still has a pulse, you have the capacity to help me return America to where America belongs, to the people of America.

With that said, I share with you my reply to Kristi Noem:

Congresswoman Kristi Noem

226 Cannon HOB,


 June 25,2011

 Dear Kristi,

As your constituent in South Dakota, who not only voted for you, but campaigned for you as well during your bid for the job you now hold, I thank you for your communication of June 21, 2011, in which you inform me that you are working on my behalf to get America’s budget and spending under control while protecting critical programs like “Medicare.” Which of course, as a 69-year-old retired American citizen living on Social Security along with my wife Linda, who is 62 years old and drawing her Social Security as well, I relate my appreciation for your consideration in keeping Linda and myself informed by way of your mailings.

With that said, might I suggest, since you brought it up, a surefire way to save Medicare and guarantee it for thousand years! Would be for you to advocate on my behalf and on the behalf of every man and woman in America that depend on Social Security for their livelihood, to introduce a bill to undo the legislation passed in October of 1968, a time in history that I personally remember as if it were yesterday, when the Congress of the United States of America voted to attach the Social Security fund, a fund created in 1935 to assure working Americans that they would have money to depend on in their “Golden Years.” A fund that up until the Congress of the United States of America voted in October of 1968 to attach to the “General Fund” of the Treasury of the United States of America, in my opinion, to have access to funds and money that was never intended by its original purpose to be used.

Accordingly, as a 17 year resident of South Dakota, and a supportive constituent, I would personally appreciate any consideration and effort you might be willing to work towards on my behalf and on the behalf of every Social Security dependent citizen in America.

If indeed, you actually read this missive, know that although I am only one person, I am an active person, especially within the realm of American politics. Accordingly, if you are the “interested in helping people” person that you portrayed yourself to be during your campaign, I invite you to understand me better by logging on to my website.


“Double click and read”

Thank you very much..


Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…


According to Webster: re·al·i·ty, 1. The quality or state of being actual or true. 2. One, such as a person, an entity, or an event, that is actual: “the weight of history and political realities” (Benno C. Schmidt, Jr.). 3. The totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence. 4. That which exists objectively and in fact: Your observations do not seem to be about reality. 5. Philosophy. That which has necessary existence and not contingent existence. –idiom. in reality. In fact; actually.

Which I suppose pretty much covers the definition of reality intellectually, however as I enjoy my constitutionally guaranteed right to take things a step further, I would like to add my personal two cents.

Reality to me, encompasses the sky over my head and the earth I walk on, and the sustenance that I require to maintain a condition of fitness needed to discover tomorrow. Because without tomorrows, we cease to exist and the reality of reality is negated. Further, with no more tomorrows, how would we, i.e., “mankind” place a value on yesterday? Yesterday, today, and tomorrow are all concepts of man.

Which of course brings us, at least those of us with inquiring minds, to ask; “What is man? ..and of course, what is a concept?

According to Webster: man, 1. An adult male human being. 2. A human being regardless of sex or age; a person. 3. A human being or an adult male human being belonging to a specific occupation, group, nationality, or other category. Often used in combination: 4. The human race; mankind: 5. Zoology. A member of the genus Homo, family Hominidae, order Primates, class Mammalia, characterized by erect posture and an opposable thumb, especially a member of the only extant species, Homo sapiens, distinguished by a highly developed brain, the capacity for abstract reasoning, and the ability to communicate by means of organized speech and record information in a variety of symbolic systems.

According to Webster: human being, 1. A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species Homo sapiens. 2. A person: a fine human being.

According to Webster: Homo sapiens, The modern species of human beings, the only extant species of the primate family Hominidae.

According to Webster: Extant, 1. Still in existence; not destroyed, lost, or extinct:

According to Webster: Mammailia, mam·mal, Any of various warm-blooded vertebrate animals of the class Mammalia, including human beings, characterized by a covering of hair on the skin and, in the female, milk-producing mammary glands for nourishing the young.

Accordingly, at least from what I have gleaned, man is a mammalian creature designated by science, i.e., the science of anthropology…

Anthropology, is the study of humanity. It has origins in the humanities, the natural sciences, and the social sciences. The term “anthropology” is from the Greek anthrōpos (ἄνθρωπος), “human being”, and -logia (-λογία), “discourse” or “study”, and was first used in 1501 by German philosopher Magnus Hundt. Anthropology’s basic concerns are “What defines Homo sapiens?”, “Who are the ancestors of modern Homo sapiens?”, “What are humans’ physical traits?”, “How do humans behave?”, “Why are there variations and differences among different groups of humans?”, “How has the evolutionary past of Homo sapiens influenced its social organization and culture?” and so forth. (Source Wikipedia)


According to Webster: hu·man, 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of human beings: the course of human events; the human race. 2. Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character that distinguish human beings from the lower animals: an act of human kindness. 3. Subject to or indicative of the weaknesses, imperfections, and fragility associated with human beings: a mistake that shows he’s only human; human frailty. 4. Having the form of a human being. 5. Made up of human beings: formed a human bridge across the ice.

…accordingly, from what I glean, to be human, or a human being is a classifying or designation bestowed by society.

According to Webster: Society, 1.a. The totality of social relationships among human beings. b. A group of human beings broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and a common culture. c. The institutions and culture of a distinct self-perpetuating group. 2. An organization or association of persons engaged in a common profession, activity, or interest: 3.a. The rich, privileged, and fashionable social class. b. The socially dominant members of a community. 4. Companionship; company: 5. Biology. A colony or community of organisms, usually of the same species.

Going with biology, “A colony or community of organisms, usually of the same species,” …added to the intellectual product that I have provided still fresh in your mind, ..within the purview of “nature,” has no more standing in the universe than an “amoeba.”

According to Webster: Amoeba, A protozoan of the genus Amoeba or related genera, occurring in water and soil and as a parasite in other animals. An amoeba has no definite form and consists essentially of a mass of protoplasm containing one nucleus or more surrounded by a delicate, flexible outer membrane. It moves by means of pseudopods. The amoeba is remarkable for its very large genome. The species Amoeba proteus has 290 billion base pairs in its genome, while the related Polychaos dubium (formerly known as Amoeba dubia) has 670 billion base pairs. The “human genome” is small by contrast, with its count of 2.9 billion bases. (Source Wikipedia)

According to Webster: Concept, 1. A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences. 2. Something formed in the mind; a thought or notion.

Editorial: Something formed in the mind, i.e., (the human mind,) a thought or notion…

Thought: 1. Past tense and past participle of think, 1. The act or process of thinking; cogitation. 2. A product of thinking.

Notion: 1. A belief or opinion. 2. A mental image or representation; an idea or conception. 3. A fanciful impulse; a whim.

So what have we learned today? ..and how does it relate to you?

Great questions, we have learned that man, i.e., Homo sapiens, i.e., human beings, are substantial, yet frail creatures endowed with a capacity to reason.

As simple as possible, Reason: The basis or motive for an action, a decision, or a conviction.

If you are presently, (regardless of your age, heritage, race, political affiliation, or religious beliefs) a sane unemployed, disenfranchised American citizen that understands your capacity to reason, then “at least in my opinion.” You have no choice (based in reality) if you would like to see America returned to its station as the Greatest Nation in the history of the world. You must ignore the misinformation, outright lies, and political rhetoric coming at you between now and the election in 2012 and join me in voting against anyone and everyone designated by the word incumbent.

Incumbent:  A person who holds an office or ecclesiastical benefice:

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Electoral College..

According to Webster: E·lec·tor·al College, A body of electors chosen to elect the President and Vice President of the United States.

Electoral College (United States)

The Electoral College consists of the popularly elected representatives (electors) who formally elect the President and Vice President of the United States. Since 1964, there have been 538 electors in each presidential election. Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution specifies how many electors each state is entitled to have and that each state’s legislature decides how its electors are to be chosen, U.S. territories are not represented in the Electoral College. The Electoral College is an example of an indirect election.

The election for President and Vice President is not a direct election byUnited States citizens. Citizens vote for electors, representing a state, who are the authorized constitutional participants in a presidential election. In early U.S. Hiistory, some state laws delegated the choice of electors to the state legislature. Electors are free to vote for anyone eligible to be President, but in practice pledge to vote for specific candidates and voters cast ballots for favored presidential and vice presidential candidates by voting for correspondingly pledged electors. The Twelfth Amendment provides for each elector to cast one vote for President and one vote for Vice President. It also specifies how a President and Vice President are elected. The Twenty-third Amendment specifies how many electors the District of Columbia is entitled to have. (The Electoral College’s existence is controversial.) A 2001 Gallup article noted that “a majority of Americans have continually expressed support for the notion of an official amendment of the U.S. Constitution that would allow for direct election of the president” since one of the first-ever public polls on the matter in 1944, and Gallup found no significant change in 2004. Critics argue that the Electoral College is archaic, inherently undemocratic and gives certain swing states disproportionate influence in selecting the President and Vice President. Proponents argue that the Electoral College is an important, distinguishing feature of federalism in the United States and that it protects the rights of smaller states. Numerous constitutional amendments have been introduced in the Congress seeking to alter the Electoral College or replace it with a direct popular vote; however, no proposal has ever passed the Congress. (Source Wikipedia)

Editorial: ..and with good reason, eliminating the Electoral College would eliminate one of the greatest sources of individual power ever bestowed upon any human being, and it would greatly diminish the access to corruption that a good number of our Government employees now enjoy.

Origin of name

Although the United States Constitution refers to “Electors” or “electors”, the name “Electoral College” — or any other name — is never used to describe the collective vote of the electors. It was not until the early 19th century that the name “Electoral College” came into general usage as the collective designation for the electors selected to cast votes for President and Vice President. It was first written into federal law in 1845 and today the term appears in 3 U.S.C. § 4, in the section heading and in the text as “college of electors.”

 Editorial: ..and with good reason, if the (inattentive, i.e. unmindful) rank and file citizens of the United States actually understood the electoral college and the fact that it negates their involvement in the entire presidential electoral process, those with a grasp of common sense would demand a change.

Original plan

Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution states:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the Constitution states:

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 of the Constitution provided for the original fashion by which the President and Vice President were to be chosen by the electors. In the original system, the candidate who received both the most votes and more than half of all votes cast would become President, the candidate receiving the second most votes would become Vice President. This was changed in 1804 by the Twelfth Amendment so that the President and the Vice President were elected separately, each according the rules set forth originally for election of the President: the candidate with the greatest number of votes and more than half of all votes cast would become the President or the Vice President.

The design of the Electoral College was based upon several assumptions and anticipations of the Framers of the Constitution:

  1. Each state would employ the district system of allocating electors.
  2. Each presidential elector would exercise independent judgment when voting.
  3. Candidates would not pair together on the same ticket with assumed placements toward each office of President and Vice President.

Under the original plan for the Electoral College, each state government was free to have its own plan for selecting its electors. Several different methods emerged and are described at length below.

Breakdown and revision

The emergence of political parties and nationally coordinated election campaigns soon complicated matters in the elections of 1796 and 1800. In 1796, the winner of the election was John Adams, a member of the Federalist Party. The runner up, and therefore the new Vice President, was Thomas Jefferson of the opposition Democratic-Republican Party. In 1800, the candidates of the Democratic-Republican Party were Jefferson for President and Aaron Burr for Vice President. Each received the same number of electoral votes and, since all electoral votes were for President, Burr’s votes were technically for him being President even though he was his party’s second choice.Jeffersonwas so hated by Federalists that the party members sitting in the lame duck Congress tried to elect Burr. The Congress deadlocked for 35 ballots as neither candidate received the necessary majority vote of the state delegations in the House (the votes of nine states were needed for an election). Only after Federalist Party leader Alexander Hamilton, who disliked Burr much more than Jefferson, made known his preference for Jefferson was the issue resolved on the 36th ballot. In response to those elections, the Congress proposed the Twelfth Amendment, with electors casting one vote for President and one vote for Vice President, to replace the system outlined in Article II, Section 1, Clause 3. The Twelfth Amendment was proposed in 1803 and was adopted in 1804. (Source Wikipedia)

Editorial: History might not be as interesting or as fun as reading a J.K. Rawlings novel, i.e., author of Harry Potter books, however, at least in my opinion, with a little patience and imagination, history, especially American history, is amazingly interesting.

Take the two aforementioned gentlemen, Aaron Burr, and Alexander Hamilton for example.

Aaron Burr, Jr. (February 6, 1756 – September 14, 1836) was an important political figure in the early history of the United States of America. After serving as a Continental Army officer in the Revolutionary War, Burr became a successful lawyer and politician. He was elected twice to the New York State Assembly (1784–1785, 1798–1799), was appointed New York State Attorney General (1789–1791), won election again as a United States Senator (1791–1797) from New York, and reached the high point of his career as the third Vice President of the United States (1801–1805), under President Thomas Jefferson. Burr is also remembered as one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. Despite these accomplishments and others, including his progressive views against slavery and in favor of equal rights for women. Burr is mainly remembered as the man who killed Alexander Hamilton in the famous 1804 duel.

Alexander Hamilton (January 11, 1755 or 1757,  July 12, 1804) was a Founding Father, soldier, economist, political philosopher, one of America’s first constitutional lawyers and the first United States Secretary of the Treasury. He has been described as one who “more than any other designed the Government of the United States”:  As Secretary of the Treasury, Hamilton was the primary author of the economic policies of the George Washington Administration, especially the funding of the state debts by the Federal government, the establishment of a national bank, a system of tariffs, and friendly trade relations with Britain. He became the leader of the Federalist Party, created largely in support of his views, and was opposed by Democratic-Republican Party, led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

The Burr–Hamilton duel was a duel between two prominent American politicians, the former Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton and sitting Vice President Aaron Burr, on July 11, 1804. At Weehawken in New Jersey, Burr shot and mortally wounded Hamilton. Hamilton was carried to the home of  William Bayard on the Manhattan shore, where he died at 2:00 p.m. the next day.

One of the most famous personal conflicts in American history, the Burr–Hamilton duel arose from a long-standing political and personal bitterness that had developed between both men over a course of several years. Tensions reached a bursting point with Hamilton’s journalistic defamation of Burr’s character during the 1804 New York gubernatorial race in which Burr was a candidate. Fought at a time when the practice of dueling was being outlawed in the northern United States, the duel had immense political ramifications. Burr, who survived the duel, was indicted for murder in both New Yor kand New Jersey, though these charges were either later dismissed or resulted in acquittal. The harsh criticism and animosity directed toward him following the duel brought an end to his political career. The Federalist Party, already weakened by the defeat of John Adams in the Presidential Election of 1800, was further weakened by Hamilton’s death.

The duel was the final skirmish of a long conflict between Democratic-Republicans and Federalists. The conflict began in 1791 when Burr captured a Senate seat from Philip Schuyler, Hamilton’s father-in-law, who would have supported Federalist policies. (Hamilton was Secretary of the Treasury at the time.) When the Electoral College deadlocked in the election of 1800, Hamilton’s maneuvering in the House of Representatives caused Thomas Jefferson to be named President and Burr Vice President. In 1800, the “Philadelphia Aurora” printed extracts from a pamphlet

Hamiltonhad earlier published, “Letter from Alexander Hamilton, Concerning the Public Conduct and Character of John Adams, Esq. President of the United States,” a document highly critical of Adams, which had actually been authored by Hamilton but intended only for private circulation. Some have claimed that Burr leaked the document, but there is no clear evidence for this, nor that Hamilton held him responsible. Morgan Lewis, endorsed by Hamilton, defeated Burr in the 1804 New York Gubernatorial election When it became clear that Jefferson would drop Burr from his ticket in the 1804 election, the Vice President ran for the governorship of New York instead. Hamilton campaigned vigorously against Burr, who was running as an independent, causing him to lose to Morgan Lewis, a Democratic-Republican endorsed by Hamilton. Both men had been involved in duels in the past. Hamilton had been a principal in 10 shot-less duels prior to his fatal encounter with Burr, including duels with William Gordon (1779), Aedanus Burke (1790), John Francis Mercer (1792–1793), James Nicholson (1795), James Monroe (1797), and Ebenezer Purdy/George Clinton (1804). He also served as a second to John Laurens in a 1779 duel with General Charles Lee and legal client John Auldjo in a 1787 duel with William Pierce. In addition, Hamilton claimed to have had one previous honor dispute with Burr; Burr claimed there were two. Additionally, Hamilton’s son, Philip, was killed in a November 23, 1801 duel with George I. Eacker initiated after Philip and his friend Richard Price partook in “hooliganish” behavior in Eacker’s box at the Park Theatre. This was in response to a speech, critical of Hamilton, that Eacker had made on July 3, 1801. Philip and his friend both challenged Eacker to duels when he called them “damned rascals.” After Price’s duel (also at Weehawken) resulted in nothing more than four missed shots, Hamiltonadvised his son to delope (throw away his fire). However, after both Philip and Eacker stood shotless for a minute after the command “present”, Philip leveled his pistol, causing Eacker to fire, mortally wounding Philip and sending his shot awry. This duel is often cited as having a tremendous psychological impact on Hamilton in the context of the Hamilton-Burr duel.

Editorial: Any relationship between the behaviors described in the previous paragraph to the behavior of a gathering of six-year-old children on a playground is purely a matter of personal judgment.


In the early morning hours of July 11, 1804, Burr and Hamilton departed by separate boats from Manhattan and rowed across the Hudson River to a spot known as the Heights of Weehawken in New Jersey, a popular dueling ground below the towering cliffs of the Palisades. Hamilton and Burr agreed to take the duel to Weehawken because although dueling had been prohibited in both states, New York more aggressively prosecuted the crime (the same site was used for 18 known duels between 1700 and 1845). In an attempt to prevent the participants from being prosecuted, procedures were implemented to give all witnesses plausible deniability. For example, the pistols were transported to the island in a portmanteau, enabling the rowers (who also stood with their backs to the duelists) to say under oath that they had not seen any pistols.

According to Webster: port·man·teau,  A large leather suitcase that opens into two hinged compartments.

Burr, William P. Van Ness (his second), Matthew L. Davis, and another (often identified as Samuel Swartwout) plus their rowers reached the site first at half past six, whereupon Burr and Van Ness started to clear the underbrush from the dueling ground. Hamilton, Judge Nathaniel Pendleton (his second), and Dr. David Hosack arrived a few minutes before seven. Lots were cast for the choice of position and which second should start the duel, both of which were won by Hamilton’s second who chose the upper edge of the ledge (which faced the city) for Hamilton. However, according to historian and author Joseph Ellis, since Hamilton had been challenged, he had choice of both weapon and position. Under this account, it was Hamilton himself who chose the upstream or north side position.

All first-hand accounts of the duel agree that two shots were fired; however, Hamilton and Burr’s seconds disagreed on the intervening time between the shots. It was common for both principals in a duel to fire a shot at the ground to exemplify courage, and then the duel could come to an end. Hamilton apparently fired first, and into the air, though it is not clear whether this was intentional, much less that Burr perceived him to be “throwing away his fire” (as it did not follow the standard protocol). Burr returned fire and hit Hamilton in the lower abdomen above the right hip. The musket ball ricocheted off Hamilton’s second or third false rib, fracturing it, and caused considerable damage to his internal organs, particularly his liver and diaphragm before becoming lodged in his first or second lumbar vertebra. According to Pendleton’s account, Hamilton collapsed immediately, dropping the pistol involuntarily, and Burr moved toward Hamilton in a speechless manner (which Pendleton deemed to be indicative of regret) before being hustled away behind an umbrella by Van Ness because Hosack and the rowers were already approaching.

It is entirely uncertain which principal fired first, as both seconds’ backs were to the duel in accordance with the pre-arranged regulations of the duel (and also so the men could later testify that they “saw no fire”). After much research to determine the actual events of the duel, Pulitzer-prize winning historian Joseph J. Ellis gives his best guess:

Hamilton did fire his weapon intentionally, and he fired first. But he aimed to miss Burr, sending his ball into the tree above and behind Burr’s location. In so doing, he did not withhold his shot, but he did waste it, thereby honoring his pre-duel pledge. Meanwhile, Burr, who did not know about the pledge, did know that a projectile from Hamilton’s gun had whizzed past him and crashed into the tree to his rear. According to the principles of the code duello, Burr was perfectly justified in taking deadly aim at Hamilton and firing to kill. But did he? …What is possible, but beyond the reach of the available evidence, is that Burr really missed his target, too, that his own fatal shot, in fact, was accidental.

Burr had a reputation for being a poor shot, but there is little doubt that he had every intention of seeking full satisfaction from Hamilton by blood. The afternoon after the duel, Burr was quoted as boasting that had his vision not been impaired by the morning mist, he would have shot Hamiltonin the heart. According to the account of Jeremy Bentham, who met with Burr in 1808 in England (four years after the fact), Burr claimed to have been certain of his ability to kill Hamilton, and Bentham concluded that Burr was “little better than a murderer.”

Although politicians and the elite no longer face off with dueling pistols, the damage they do to each other (and America) in their quests to fulfill their particular agendas, is, “at least in my opinion,” equal to, if not more devastating than a musket ball. Not that I would have a personal objection to any of the present politician who are currently draining our treasury to stand on a knoll and take shots at each other, if we, “We the People,” were picking up the tab for their healthcare.


According to Webster: ref·er·en·dum, 1.a. The submission of a proposed public measure or actual statute to a direct popular vote.

Keywords there folks, are “popular vote.” It is a matter of historical record that the Constitution of the United States has twice been altered with the 12th and 27th amendments, just not in the right direction. “We the people,” are and have been constantly reminded, at least throughout my entire life, that America is governed by a Government, “of the people, by the people, for the people.” Accordingly, I suggest to anyone and everyone reading my blog today to begin at whatever level, even if it’s only talking to a neighbor across to your backyard fence, let your neighbor know that it’s time, or way past time for the citizens of the United States of America to demand a constitutional amendment to elimination of the Electoral College.

The next scheduled public (albeit meaningless) election to be held for President of the United States will be held on Tuesday, November 6, 2012. The next (Official, as per the Constitution, via the Electoral College) Presidential election, will be held on December 17, 2012.

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Statement of fact..

Angry people vote, disappointed people don’t. This time around, conservatives are angry, liberals are disappointed.

Do the math!

In closing, with the majority of America’s media commentators, i.e., “talking heads” suggesting that if the Presidential election were held today, (which is ridiculous, due to the fact that the 2012 election is still 502 days away, or/One year, four months, and twelve days,) take your pick! Anyone suggesting that this candidate or that candidate, depending on the candidate and the bias of the particular individual or outlet offering the suggestion that they would win by this percentage or that.? Is totally insane! Of course with being an American history buff, in particular, an early American history buff, if America’s economy remains where it is? (in my considered opinion,) since I’ve never heard of or read about a Lynch mob that didn’t show up at a hanging, or recall any stories about a time or a place during that era when a group of deadbeat whiners did. I’m placing my bet on America’s conservatives.  

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…


According to Webster: en-dub-er-ience, 1. Of relating to or concerning the appreciation of the overall encompassment of an idea or other circumstance. 2. A coined word relating to, and/or concerning absolutely nothing meaningful in the pursuit of knowledge, and/or understanding; i.e., en-dub-er-olgy – en-dub-er-ist – en-dub-erienc-ing;

Barack Obama, at least in my opinion, regularly and religious subscribes to the institution, i.e., rules of enduberience when deliberating a major issue concerning world peace, alphabet soup, and the future sanctuary status of Cincinnati, and/or Albuquerque, not to diminish his fondness for cornbread and/or oatmeal cookies.

So boys and girls, what have we learned today? Have I got your attention? ..and I don’t simply mean for the moment, or should I declare my intention to run for President and give true meaning to the doubletalk I provided in my opening paragraphs?

According to Webster: double talk, n. 1. Meaningless speech that consists of nonsense syllables mixed with intelligible words; gibberish. 2. Deliberately ambiguous or evasive language. In this sense, also called doublespeak.

While enduring my tour of duty in the U.S. Army, stationed at Fort Devens, Massachusetts, when financial sovereignty allowed, a couple of fellow inductees, good friends, and great cohorts, Edward Antonio Rico Jr., Don Sullivan and I would travel via Greyhound from Fort Devens to New York City to explore; “The fifth dimension, a place beyond that which is known to man, a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity, the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, a place that lies between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge, a dimension of imagination, ..a place that we called, “The Twilight Zone.”

Were it that I could match the writing talent of “Rod Serling,” can you imagine how many readers I could have?

Returning to my exercise of relating an anecdotal story…

an·ec·dot·al, or an·ec·dot·ic, also an·ec·dot·i·cal, Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes. –an”ec·dot“al·ist, n. — an”ec·dot“al·ly adv.

According to Webster: an·ec·dote, 1. A short account of an interesting or humorous incident. 2., pl. an·ec·dotes or an·ec·do·ta. Secret or hitherto undivulged particulars of history or biography.

…Don, Ed and myself, when eligible and affordable, enjoyed the occasional weekend in New York City, (drumroll) as well as enjoying the ride to and from, or at least Don and I enjoyed the rides. Not that Ed wasn’t as fun as anyone else in a setting where having fun was appropriate. Ed was simply a more serious individual, more given to respecting the public than Don or I. Not that Don and I were set in stone incorrigible buffoons, to the contrary, Don and I, being as young as we were, were more in the category of apprentice incorrigible buffoons.

Accordingly, lashing that image to your wagon, imagine two impeccably groomed young soldiers in uniform, with brass and shoes polished to mirror the world occupying timeworn tilt back seats in their upright position, side-by-side, engaged in seemingly serious, albeit jocular conversation just loud enough to be overheard by anyone within 5 to 6 feet. Then imagine these two clowns expounding absolute gibberish with just enough coherence to make anyone who took the hook wonder if they were losing their hearing or their mind? Of course it was mean, what didn’t you understand about my use of the adjectives, “incorrigible.” and “buffoons?”

According to Webster: in·cor·ri·gi·ble, 1. Incapable of being corrected or reformed: 2. Firmly rooted; ineradicable: 3. Difficult or impossible to control or manage: One that cannot be corrected or reformed.

According to Webster: buf·foon, 1. A clown; a jester: 2. A person given to clowning and joking.

When Don and I engaged in our games of doubletalk in our youth, it was a hoot and although I’m sure that it caused a few individuals a bit of temporary concern, I don’t believe that we left anyone with irreparable psychosis.

However, in all good conscience I don’t believe that I can say the same for the double-speak and gibberish that we, “We the People,” have been, and are currently receiving from our employees in Washington D.C., Beginning at the top and carried down through the chain of command, the gibberish, double-speak, misinformation, and outright lies that we are provided on a daily basis via, what I currently enjoy referring to as the (Mainstream) News Media, is destroying America.

Barack Obama, as with pretty much every one of his predecessors while campaigning professed to being the man that could bring it all together.

According to Webster: to·geth·er, 1. In or into a single group, mass, or place: 2. In or into contact: 3. In association with or in relationship to one another; mutually or reciprocally: 4. By joint or cooperative effort: 5. Regarded collectively; in total:6. In or into a unified structure or arrangement: 7. Simultaneously: 8. In harmony or accord: 9. Into an effective, coherent condition: 10. Emotionally stable and effective in performance: 11. In tune with what is going on.

A quick review:

The U.S. Constitution provides that the U.S. Government consists of three distinct branches, the legislative branch, the executive branch, and the judicial branch.

The legislative branch is made up of the Senate and the House of Representatives, their job is to make the laws for the country, i.e., “America.”

The Senate has 100 Members, two members from each state. Senators are elected for 6-year terms. A senator must live in the state from which he or she is chosen. A senator must be at least 30 years of age. A senator must have been a citizen of the United States for at least 9 years

The House of Representatives is made up of 435 members. A state that has a big population will have many representatives. A state that has a small population will have only a few representatives. Every state must have at least one representative. Members are elected by the people for 2-year terms. A representative must live in the state from which he or she is chosen. A representative must be at least 25 years of age. A representative must have been a citizen for at least 7 years.

The executive branch of Government makes sure that the laws of the United States are obeyed. The President of the United States is the head of the executive branch of government. This branch is very large so the President gets help from the Vice President, department heads (Cabinet members), and heads of other agencies.

The judicial branch of government is made up of the court system. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. Courts decide arguments about the meaning of laws, how they are applied, and
whether they break the rules of the Constitution.

Question: With the basics still fresh in your mind, do you by any stretch of your imagination believes that America’s current government is functional?

Question: Do you believe in or support segregation?

According to Webster: seg·re·ga·tion, 1. The act or process of segregating or the condition of being segregated.

Definition: Current American Government: (in my considered opinion) 1. A tax evaporating organization composed of two distinct groups of ideological opposed Homo sapiens dedicated to disagree.

If your answer to either of my questions is yes, then you are a liberal.

If your answer to my questions is a hardy, Hell No! Then you are a Conservative and I invite you to join me in 2012 to eliminate liberalism so that the responsible rank-and-file can get back to work and back to the business of saving America before Webster changes the definition of America from; 1.a. The Greatest Country in the World.” To; 1.b. ..just another third world nation.”

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Previous Older Entries