The Bipartisan Page

Featured Material

Who But a Winner? Aspiring, Running and Winning the U.S. Presidency

Is Congress Hearing? If I were a Congressman voting on a $700 Billion Dollar Bill…

Discussion Excerpt: Spheres of Knowledge and Economic Death

Heard At The United Nations? With With An Eye Towards China

Heard On The Heard On The Earth? To The Intelligent People of Our Planet

Heard On The Hill? Abolish The Peace Prize Now!

Heard In America? A Letter To The Secular President of The Islamic Republic of Iran

Heard On The Hill? Ring Around The Churches?

Heard On The Hill? Holy Ozone!

Heard On The Hill! Getting Warmer?

Is The Supreme Court Listening? Who Decompensates?

Is The City Listening? To Hell With Over-Development

The "Foreign" in Foreign Communications (FISA)

National Security Letter Q & A

Heard On The Hill? PIMP MY HEALTH INSURANCE!

Justice & The Police: Statute Worship

Illustration: The People's Choice

Is The City Listening? Brand Name Trash

Heard In The Pentagon? "Tickle Torture"

Heard On The Hill! When Will The Madness End?

Copyright Notice

 

Congratulations To Those Who Aspire

Reported Anonymously

October 29, 2008

Two honored men have been campaigning for the Presidency. John McCain is an experienced Senator and a war hero. Senator McCain opposed the torture policies of President Bush during his tenure. Barack Obama is also an honored Senator and a man of principled ideas. While only one of these two great men will proceed into the Office of the Presidency, it should always be remembered during the campaign season that it is not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game.

The desire to be President is a calling that only a few people have and hold onto, often from childhood. Both Senator Obama and McCain probably enjoyed this dream for a long time and should savor the fervor of the moment when they can honestly and candidly express not only to the United States, but also a watching world, the principles which they believe in and the platforms of their campaigns.

Sometimes political partisanship eclipses the greatness of those who run the race. Today and after the election let us be thankful for our form of representative democracy which allows people to aspire and attain, rule within their scope of wisdom and lead us all to a hopefully better future.

My heart goes out to both candidates who have heard the call and may even consider it their duty to run the race. May the remembrance of their dedication to what they believe is their duty live on, win or lose, with the remembrance of all those who have heard the same call.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

An Actual Letter To A Congressman

If I were a Congressman voting on a $700 Billion Dollar Bill…

Reported Anonymously

I would vote “NO” today.

The bill presented by the Senate is a foolish handout to foolish people. Irrelevant tax incentives do not sweeten the bill for me. Pairing mental health parity with the bailout makes as much sense as pricing apples as oranges. Not all the panic on Wall Street incited by the media could change my mind today. We need to step back and ask a few questions that get to the meat of the matter.

My question to the Congress today is, “Where is Wall Street, where is Main Street?”

Both streets have been parallel in one respect: irresponsibility.

Main Street has been investing its dollars in Wall Street with the 401K vehicles instead of paying their respects to Social Security and Universal Health Coverage. Today it shows.

Wall street intersects with Main Street today in their irresponsibility: Wall Street understands the risks of the public investing their retirement and housing dollars but hands out the dollars irresponsibly to a negligent public that not only doesn’t read the fine print, but is just as greedy as the Wall Street CEO’s in making big bucks from inflated markets. Today the intersection of Main Street and Wall Street is a collision of these two parties.

Why should the responsible members of society who turned down the 401K and the Mortgage they couldn’t afford have to pay to primp up the fallen retirement accounts and foreclosed houses of both Wall Street and Main Street at the site of their “accident”.

There are no coincidences, but there are both responsible members of society and irresponsible members of society. Today, at the collision of Main Street and Wall Street, its time to hand out citations to the irresponsible parties that caused the collision. My driving instructor taught me this: there are no responsible parties in a collision and there are no accidents at the wheel.

My fellow Congress-people, take your time and devise a bill that rewards the responsible and leaves the irresponsible with what they have earned.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

From A Discussion about
Economic 'Spheres'

Regarding The Specialization of Knowledge and
The Death of the Post-Modern Economy

Reported Anonymously

Humankind has an interesting way of approaching spheres of knowledge in the post-modern world. The function of humankind in the environmental spheres in which we operate depends upon our ability to communicate with each other as both individuals and within the spheres of our institutions. Is it possible that current trends in the specialization of knowledge will lead to a “big crunch” in the economic spheres of the future?

Specialization of knowledge is prized in the intellectual world, but often discouraged in the populace in general. A university encourages us to obtain highly specialized knowledge in the pursuit of a doctoral degree while the popular media in the United States encourages us to generalize our knowledge of consumerism. Access to universities is a competitive endeavor requiring certain specialized skills and specific types of social connections, while access to the media is basically required by post-modern commercial marketing techniques.

Consider this same sort of scenario of specialization from the standpoint of computer programming languages. All computing languages are specialized, but there are different levels of “sophistication”. “Low-level” computing languages, such as machine code and assembly languages, are customized for direct communication with the computer. “High-level” computing languages, such as BASIC and C, are customized for direct communication with the user. The more advanced a computer programmer becomes, the more specialized his or her spheres of knowledge of a particular computing language become.

My point is that post-modern humanity prizes specialization of knowledge at the expense of communication just like computer programmers prize specialization of computing skills to create an application that interfaces appropriately between user and machine. My prior examples of universities and the popular media in the United States are examples of low-level and high-level specializations of knowledge for interfacing between humans and the world at large. The current trend of encouraging the low-level specializations of university knowledge with high salaries and prized positions in society over the high-level specializations of consumerism could be contributing to social dysfunctions in the spheres of individual and institutional communication, especially when those communications involve different levels of specialization among different sorts of knowledge communicators and consumers.

In the end, our whole cosmos of knowledge becomes unbalanced, leading to a sort of entropic heat death of communication, when incentives to specialize knowledge and the levels of knowledge become too specific.

Marketing practices in the post-modern world are based upon specialized forms of communication to divide or segment markets based upon the specification of stereotypes. It is not so hard to see how marketed incentive systems can lead to the death of communication between communicators divided by “walls” of specialized knowledge and specialized levels of knowledge. This does not bode well for the survival of humankind in relative relationship to itself and the environmental spheres in which we function. It is possible that popular marketing practices will lead to either a ”heat death” of entropy in communication or a “big crunch” of economic stereotypes in the not-so-far future.

The point that the size of the economic sphere, in terms of population and economic connections to adjoining economic spheres is valid and goes along with these comments. Use of the scope of a sphere of economic influence is pertinent to my idea and similar to the influence of a planet in our solar system by the size of its orbit, since size of orbit and distance are related, like the size of an economy and its interconnections with other economies seem to be related.

Also, note that the size of the economic sphere, in terms of population, in such an example, roughly equates to my ideas about specialization of a sphere of knowledge: the fewer people in the sphere and the fewer the connections between economic "islands" corresponds to levels of specialization within and between the economic spheres.

However, the sphere of knowledge might not increase in direct proportion to the size of the population because of the specialization of knowledge within the population: Robinson Caruso might be a specialist at survival on a deserted island while 30,000 people in Tokyo that exchange the Euro Note might all be specialists in the widespread net of consumerism spread by popular marketing practices.

The imbalance created by post-modern market incentives in the specialization of knowledge could lead to a “heat death” or “big crunch” in the spheroids of communication and economics.

An Actual Letter To The U.N.

Regarding Freedom & The Sustainability of the Global Economy

Reported Anonymously

Looking from California to China, across the Pacific Ocean, one must look Westward! Freedom is an essential word on the lips of every citizen in the World, but freedom means different things to different nations.

In the United States, the government has claimed extraordinary freedoms over the past 60 years, but has ironically felt the need to limit the freedoms of individual citizens as the freedoms of the government have expanded. In China, our "westward neighbor", the government has never been able to afford to grant the same freedoms that Americans experience today, even in this more modern, limited sense.

For example, in the United States, it is essentially mandatory that employees drive to work. In China, this would be impossible. Driving is perhaps that greatest freedom promoted on American Televisions and it is not even mentioned in the Original Constitution of the year 1792. Now that a barrel of oil costs over $125.00 USD (approximately 13,750.00 Yuan), it is impossible for American and Chinese citizens to accomplish their employment and works by driving automobiles.

As the globe heats up and the oceans rise due to oil consumption around the world, it is important to keep perspective on the fact that China's eastward neighbors of the United States and Europe have disproportionately contributed to these impending global consequences. Environmental consequences will lead to Economic consequences and lead the global civilization as a whole into a tail-spin of technology and population explosions.

Greenspeech recognizes that in this hour of impending consequences, regardless of their cause or causes, that every nation will suffer and every nation will prosper from their work in the future. Setting the correct course today, in the United Nations, including the United States, China, Russia, Great Britain and France is our greatest hope of correcting the course of humankind's impact on the planet and the consequences to our economies.

Finally, in the United States, where driving is a great freedom, who will drive as the price for a barrel of oil skyrockets past $500 in the coming century? This price is not a fantasy, but a direct consequence of the wastefulness of freedom in many nations. No nation and no person can now afford to waste money as a source of freedom. 'The West" has a long history of doing just this: equating economic freedoms like the ease of buying a gallon of gasoline for a drive to Disneyland with "Television Freedoms".

Freedom is a concept shared universally among humans, but the concept is not universally defined. Let the World of humans now define freedom in terms of responsibility for the environment and technologies. Let the nations derive their freedoms from the people, and let the people derive their freedoms from the Earth.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard On The Earth?

An Actual Letter To The Intelligent People of Our Planet

Reported Anonymously

To whom it may concern:

Many intelligent people understand the immediate precipice that our species faces. Many may claim that we are incapable of exercising effective action to change the dangerous course that we tread. We seem bewildered by events both within our grasp and outside of our influence. However, I believe that the problems we face are surmountable by a truthful assessment of the vicious circles of our predicament. Obviously, what is outside of human influence at present is irrelevant to any solution, but many problems are actually rooted in the strengths and weaknesses of our present systems of religion, economics, government and ultimately science.

Our sciences do not adequately explain variations in human behavior or the cosmos. In fact no unified model of either exists. Looking at mankind through the microscope or the cosmos through the telescope has done little to ease the pain of our species or its devastating impact on the Earth. We seem to suffer most from our own behavior. In fact, we devise solutions to our problems that seem to prove that the cure is worse than the disease. The more knowledge we gain, the more questions we find unanswered. In fact, as human technology has advanced, global problems have compounded.

So we must ask, "What can we do to save ourselves?" Unfortunately, based on the history of humankind, it seems that nothing can be done from the perspective of the species: our institutions. Science in particular is problematic. It is the primary driver of technologies with powerful personal and impersonal consequences. In turn, we are forced to adapt to changing technologies and subsequently our systems of religion, economics and government are forced to change in an effort to compensate for the resulting problems. Therefore, to understand the evolution of our problems, we should review the advance of science.

Astronomy claims its roots in the star constellation observers of the ancient Mesopotamian Valley around 3000 B.C. It took about 2500 years before the Greek philosophers would invent astrology and ancient mathematics, although Vedic astrology and strategy systems existed in their own form sometime before that. Although "astrology" was considered a science at its invention, there was no way to pinpoint the motions of the planets until Isaac Newton made startling discoveries in Astronomy and Mathematics around 1700 A.D. Until Newton's discoveries, astrology was part of a broad swath of sciences known as "Natural Science". After Newton's discoveries, "physics" was born. Since it took about 4700 years for Astronomy to develop into physics, it might require more than the mere 150 years since psychology was taken seriously for comprehensive systems of human understanding to develop into full-blossomed sciences. Until that happens, it is doubtful that anyone will understand or be able to anticipate the consequences of science and its resultant technologies on the problems now facing us.

Many of us have rejected the "solutions" of science based on the increasing problems they pose. Instead, many of us choose the alternatives of philosophy and religion to solve our problems. It seems incomprehensible that ignoring the increasing impact of science and its technologies will help us survive. Likewise, dropping the longstanding arguments of philosophy and religion also seem to be driving society to destruction.

Both fortunately and unfortunately, it seems that the only solution to our problems lies in the responsible actions of individuals rather than the species as a whole. Both individual users of technology, who understand their personal impact of using it, and those who exercise their faith in a responsible manner, support this perspective with self-evident demonstrations.

Everyone knows that the beliefs of any single individual will not solve our problems, and scientists have made a stunning case that their technologies will do the same. Only collective, intelligently organized action that involves the source of our problems will be effective at solving them. Therefore, the primary purpose of all effective solutions to human problems may be to unify peoples' minds, rather than to unify the universe. This becomes clear when one realizes that the fabric of the universe performs its duties perfectly well without thinking, but we in all our thinking seem unable to perform anything perfectly well.

As an intelligent person of the Earth, I cannot blame the problems I or my species faces on "humankind", its systems of religion, government, economics, or science, but I can certainly try to act in concert with other intelligent people to responsibly use technology and faith. This seems to me to be my single best recourse for survival. Begging others to do the same seems, to me, to beg the question.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard On The Hill?

Abolish The Peace Prize Now!

Reported Anonymously

Dear Congressman:

With the outgoing year we have an outgoing U.N. Secretary General. He is vilified in a Boston Globe article (enclosed) by a number of prominent Washington know-it-alls, but what is more disturbing to me is that the article says the Secretary General received the Nobel Peace Prize. I am writing you today to say that I think that for the sake of everyone who has received that prize that it should be abolished.

Only those who have been vilified, tortured, imprisoned, harassed, or otherwise suffered great human indignities have ever received the prize. Take for example Anwar Sadat, Menachem Begin, and Jimmy Carter who were joint recipients of the “prize”, if my recollection is correct. Carter has suffered indignities and vilification stemming from everything from observing elections in South America to hemorrhoids. Anwar Sadat was assassinated. Menachem Begin lived long enough to see his peace plans criticized and dumped by his own people. I don’t think that Yasser Arafat received the “prize”, but he should have, by current standards, because he lived in a compound under almost constant Israeli attack and then had to suffer the indignity of dying in France. I mean, come on, French fries were renamed “freedom fries” by Congress during the beginning of the current Iraq war. For that alone, the entire nation of France should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize!

In conclusion, I have written about the psychology of peace. I sent the book to your office. I authored the book in part to avoid being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. I figured that no one would really take the book seriously enough to persecute me for writing it (thus making me eligible for the “prize”). If people do take it seriously enough and think that it is Nobel material then I figure they will award me a prize in economics, or maybe even open up a new prize in psychology.

I wish you a happy and prosperous New Year (as if you don’t have enough money already). I mean, I wish you prosperity in your family life and with your friends and relations. After all, aren’t human relationships the things that really matter? I guess when it comes right down to it, I would suffer all the indignities required to get the Nobel Peace Prize if I could compensate for it by feeling like I spent a lifetime dedicated, at the very least, to my wife.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard In America?

An Actual Letter To The President of Iran

Reported Anonymously

Dear President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

I am a citizen of the United States of America.

Since the writing of the Declaration of Independence, I conceived of the United States as an experiment in Democracy. By the time the Constitution was ratified, I was convinced that a model form of government had been made. Obviously, the Forefathers foresaw the demise of slavery by inserting the 3/5ths tax into the Constitution. This naturally led to the civil war. As Abraham Lincoln gave the Gettysburg address to the Governors of the legitimate Union, consecrating the bodies of over 5,000 men both Union and confederate, he said, "A Government of the people, for the people and by the people shall not perish from the Earth (forever)." I know he meant that.

I know that George Bush and Company violated international law by refusing to heed the vetoes of 3 Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and attacking Iraq. I in fact believe that many members of the illegitimate government of the United States sincerely believed that they could achieve global domination by doing so. I also believe that many common citizens of the United States were in support of the war, not because they wanted global domination (that point had already been proven by Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin), but because they wanted free gasoline. I must say that I warned President Bush that our army, our navy and a significant portion of our air force would be trapped in Iraq by this illegal action.

I have always believed that human beings, without exception, are trying to do the best they can, always striving to achieve the Supreme Objective of personal perfection. However, as history has shown, most human beings suffer from a neurotic disorder that leads them to do misguided things even to spite the face of good advice. As President Bush seems to believe "All people are created evil."

On the other hand, the legitimate government of the United States of America has always existed since the Declaration of Independence was penned and they certainly believe that the bounty of happiness should be fairly shared by everyone in God's creation. These men, though in the minority and not in trust to any political or commercial party of any sort, are driven by this single goal.

It is very unfortunate that three world wars have been fought in less than one hundred years and that it has literally led to your doorstep. On the other hand, most people sense that these events, while not inevitable, are accounted for by God in his divine plan. You, like I, probably understand the significance of those the "Christians" refer to as Adam, Eve, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. These creators surely have provided for the current global situation by offering us many options to ease the suffering of every man, woman and child on the Earth such that everyone may share fairly in the bounty of happiness.

Politically speaking, many young people in the United States (including myself), are in full agreement that all nations have a right to explore nuclear energy within the guidelines clearly established by the United Nations and their proxy organization: the International Atomic Energy Agency. We can find no violation of these guidelines by Iran or any other nation in the Middle East. Furthermore, if this is in fact the case that Iran is complying with IAEA guidelines, then there is no basis on which to raise the matter to the security council without the consent of the IAEA, which answers to the General Council.

Furthermore, the citizens of the United States are very productive people. They work very hard to the extent that they often neglect even their own families in a race to gain what they believe is happiness. As I said, many people are confused by the true relationship between money and happiness. Buddha clearly outlined the relationship between riches and happiness more than 2,700 years ago: there is no relationship. Therefore, like most human beings susceptible to neurosis, Americans experience an unwitting anxiousness, excitement and frustration as they try to gain the bounty of happiness. I think you can see that Americans are overly anxious about gasoline prices while Iranians, Israelis, and citizens of every kind on the globe are anxious about there own happiness.

Furthermore, the misguided and treacherous attacks on the World Trade center seem to me to obviously be the result of the illegitimate corporate powers exercising chaotic and treasonable initiatives far beyond the reaches of any existing law, Earthly or Divine. The ultimate end seems to me to be an attack on the two largest banks in the world and ultimately, by miscalculation, the demise of the World Trade Center. This terrorist attack was a sobering reminder to every person in the World that ignorance of the Divine Heart leads surely and ultimately to utter destruction.

With Britain already leaving the Iraqi front, the United States stands now alone in the defiance of international law. That is why I have copied a Senator's office on this email. I know for a fact that he is a major Knight in the legitimate government of the United States of America and that he will fully understand why I have written you.

It is my sincere hope that all the nations of the world will someday heed international law and that every citizen will keep those laws written in their hearts as the Forefathers of the Union intended. Following in the footsteps of the Charter of the United Nations, it is my sincerest hope that this will someday be the case and that the bounty of happiness will be equally spread.

On that note, I must caution not only the governments of the United States of America and Iran, but the governments of all nations that further attempts to gain even a penny that has not been earned will surely result in the demise of Capitalism as we know it. However, I have no doubt that a truly free market accompanied by power sharing and technological advancements, such as the Iranian Government has recently made, will ultimately result in new forms of communication, trade and the advancement of law.

Please accept my apologies on behalf of the American people. As misguided as our leaders have been and as much as the responsibility for their actions ultimately rests on the shoulders of the American people, we are a young nation. Many Americans, like many Iranians are hopeful that peace may lay its hand on the world such that all people, regardless of religion, riches, creed, or color may someday find true happiness. As the banks say: "That is priceless."

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard On The Hill?

Ring Around The Churches?

Reported Anonymously

Dear Congressman:

Last week the New York Times Company ran a series of stories about changes in the funding of faith-based organizations during President Bush’s administration. I read a couple of the articles and a letter to the editor about this matter.

In the letter to the editor, the writer says that “Thomas Jefferson never intended the ‘wall separating church and state’ to keep the two from interacting. Instead he (Jefferson) did not want the government to interfere with the sanctity of the church”. In my opinion, the writer leaves out the other half of the story: Jefferson also did not want the church to interfere with the state. The case can be made, based on the Declaration of Independence, that Jefferson wanted a society where every person shared equally in the bounty of happiness. This would not be possible if the wall between church and state became a one-way proposition.

In my opinion, if a church receives government money for a specific foreign or domestic aid project, then that project should be administered in such a way that it is legally separable from the church, and the project itself should not enjoy the tax and employment-discrimination exemptions granted to the church as a whole.

The wall between church and state makes it clear that churches, and President Bush cannot have their cake and eat it too. Characterizing religious activity funded by public money as anything other than “commercial” or “non-profit” activity is a misnomer. For example, The Archdiocese of Boston is a non-profit corporation that does at least some of their business under the fictitious name of "The Roman Catholic Church".

Although a non-profit organization separately liable from the parent church could offer “religious activities” as a part of its services, it must not violate laws against discrimination and taxation. This becomes especially clear when you consider that the government holds secular commercial and non-profit organizations receiving public funds to higher standards of non-discriminatory policies than it does the wholly commercial sector, which has greater latitude in deciding what legal risks to take in these areas.

With public money there is no such latitude. Lawmakers must follow the law, and in this case that means remaining on their own side of the fence!

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard On The Hill?

Holy Ozone!

Reported Anonymously

Dear Congressman:

In this letter I present to you an alternate history of and a possible solution to global warming.

We have been observing a global temperature increase over the 20th century. I believe there is a reason for this and it is not at all due to chance. The reason is the hole in the ozone layer which has been observed over Antarctica. This hole is allowing high-energy particles emitted by the Sun to enter the blanket of the Earth’s atmosphere. Once in the atmosphere, these high-energy particles bounce around and increase the surface temperature. There is possibly a way out.

Jet engines produce ozone as a by-product of their operation. They also produce air pollution. Perhaps a jet engine could be manufactured that would maximize ozone production and minimize pollution. These engines could be attached to large aircraft and flown within the ozone hole above Antarctica in an attempt to seal the hole. Measurements of the ozone density in the northern hemisphere could be used as the target for increased ozone production in the southern hemisphere. I believe it is imperative that planes be flown for however long it takes, even years, in order to seal the ozone hole which may be a menacing threat to all life on Earth.

One solution that I believe will not work is to seal the hole by spewing tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This seems to be the solution of the automobile corporations and the people of the United States. It should be noted that carbon dioxide does not work as effectively as ozone to block solar emissions. Therefore, the amount of carbon dioxide required to seal the hole would also cause severe air pollution. Furthermore, carbon dioxide would collect in the lower atmosphere where we breathe, thereby increasing the harmful effects of the resultant pollution. Finally, if the ozone hole is later sealed by jet engines or some other means of ozone production, the build-up of carbon dioxide in the lower atmosphere will then slow the rate of dissipation of the century or centuries old build-up of heat.

The question remains, how did the hole in the ozone layer get there? I believe there are two primary culprits. The first is the testing of nuclear bombs of increasing power. The bombs used on Japan at the end of World War II were powerful enough to blow through the lower reaches of the ozone layer (about 30,000 feet). Those bombs were, I think, about one-half megaton each. In the recent past, bombs as strong as 50 megatons (100 Hiroshimas) have been tested. Most, if not all of these bombs were tested in the southern hemisphere. Secondly, the use of Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's) by many global corporations in the 1970's-1990's probably caused damage to the ozone layer around the globe. CFC damage probably resulted in more damage to the northern hemisphere's ozone shield, in effect thinning it. CFC production probably did more damage in the north where those corporations which produced and distributed them were located.

Today, I told a precocious 9-year old boy about the ozone hole and my plan to fix it. He said that he thought that “God” would take care of the problem because he wouldn't let his people die in 300 years. I said that that was why I had contacted the legitimate government of Earth and that they would eventually fix it if I pushed the point. He continued to hold that “God himself” would fix it. I told him then that God expected the people of the Earth to fix it with his help. The boy asked, "Where did you find this?” I told him "I am telling you that you have to fix it!" He said, "O.K."

At this point I hope you recognize the urgent need to do something to save us.

The problem with blaming this problem on God, on other people, the government, or any other scapegoat is that nothing will be done as a result of placing blame alone. The process of placing blame clearly leads to ourselves. It is time to place the responsibility, not the blame, squarely on the shoulders of the government first and then the people of Earth.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard On The Hill!

Getting Warmer?

October 7, 2003

Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher
Walnut Creek, CA 94596

Dear Ms. Tauscher:

Thank you for your reply to my letter regarding global warming. Your letter cites the fact that international bodies of scientists have agreed that the globe has warmed about 1 degree on average during the last century. In my letter to you, I had made the following assertion:

“Based on estimates collected during the 20th century, Terra is warming at a rate of about 12 degrees Fahrenheit per century. This means that a mild 70-degree day in California in 1950 would translate to an 82-degree day in 2050, a 94-degree day in 2150, and a 106-degree day in 2250. As you can see, in a mere 250 years, California will be uninhabitable in terms of today's ecology.”

I am not an environmental scientist. I am a social scientist with a background in statistics. My figure of 12 degrees +/- 7 degrees Fahrenheit was based on my own personal observations of San Francisco Bay Area summers from the 1970’s to present. Here is my statistical support and evidence that the 12-degree figure is still conditionally correct.

Recent summers seem to support a 12-degree warming trend in the local area. Statistical law (but not necessarily environmental science) would support using such an observation as a point estimate of the larger picture. In fact, I visited two web sites regarding global warming: a U.S. government sponsored web site, and a web site developed by the Union of Concerned Scientists in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The government web site supported what you said. The other web site also cited the 1-degree average global warming figure, and also listed many events indicative of global warming by continent. By crunching the available numbers from the web site regarding rates of warming for North America, I found that the average of those rates was 10.75 degrees per century. This is well within my home-cooked estimate of 12 degrees +/-7 degrees. I had not tried to independently verify my point estimate before this. I can stand the embarrassment of being wrong, and the satisfaction of being close to right.

The reason I was apparently close to right predicting such an outrageous picture was because I adhered to statistical law. The same law I used to place a confidence interval on my 12-degree figure could be used to determine the applicability of the estimate to surrounding geographic regions. In fact, I would expect my figure to hold within 18 degrees of latitude and longitude of San Francisco. These simple methods of estimating global events are the basis of what I call “Social Predictive Science”. I am about to introduce this science in a book next near. I expect resistance to my theory, but I think it will ultimately sell. The reason is that the statistical science is based on a physical theory I call MassTime Physics. This theory was recently brought to completion and will be published in the same book. The theory is rightly called the Grand Unified Theory of Physics because it conceptually unites all forces, matter and energy as a single attribute of the particle wave. The theory describes viable concepts that could be plied into cars that defy gravity and operate without producing carbon dioxide and even to make materials that are invisible. While invisibility is probably further off in the future, defiance of gravity could be achieved by the middle part of this century.

The major obstacle to achieving greater technologies is often the cost. In the present case, increasing military, social, and environmental problems are competing for funds. I believe as a social scientist that all funds should be spent with the end of increasing social cooperation, thereby decreasing global tension and also with an end towards decreasing excess consumption of resources. This is in stark contrast to what is going on.

Based on my study of the future, I think that what will happen is that dictatorial Presidents such as Nixon, Regan, and the Bushes will wane and that Congress will take a larger role as the balancer of power between the people and commercial interests. Unfortunately, I think that Congress will continue to empty the treasury into the pockets of the builders of the missile defense shield or some other large-scale for-profit corporate project. A short-term economic recovery will be seen between 2005 and 2012 in response to this. After that there will be no more treasury to spend. After 2015, in a balancing act with the largest corporations and Congress, the country will follow a path through a number of small and largely unprofitable wars. The balancing act will become increasingly difficult, and by around 2030 the world may well be on the verge of economic depression and mounting environmental problems. Following that, countries around the globe will reap what they have sown in terms of the environment. At some point late in the century, I believe the United Nations will begin to seal the ozone hole. Of course, these predictions come from a guy who predicts global warming at a rate of 12-degress +/-7 degrees per century when international conventions of scientists are settling on a rate of 1 degree.

I support you in your efforts to make the tough choices that must be made in these areas, often with a limited set of options. Many people would have left it to Hitler to decide our fate, but people like you are trying to make a difference in the outcome. I would like to let you know that in this difficult time I do see a light of sustainable social behavior at the end of this 2000 year-old tunnel. Every choice made with reference to that light, and every decision or vote cast in that direction will lead us efficiently to a just and balanced world. I believe that this path is the only option when you consider the World Wars, 100-megaton bombs, and Iraq as the alternatives. It is my goal and wish that we should get a sustained glimpse of that brighter future in our lifetimes.

Sincerely,
State University Alumnus

P.S. Here’s the contact information for the global warming web site:

http://www.climatehotmap.org/
Deputy Program Director for Science Outreach
Union of Concerned Scientists
2 Brattle Square
Cambridge, MA 02238
Email to: climateinfo@ucsusa.org

Is The Supreme Court Listening?

Who Decompensates?

Reported Anonymously

Dear Justices:

I am much aggrieved at the recent behavior of the Justices on the Supreme Court.

In the year 2000, the Justices essentially passed on to a state court an order to decide a federal election. Since the state court has no federal authority, only the Supreme Court could rule on federal election matters. Since there is no precedent or Constitutional power granted to even the Supreme Court to decide a Presidential election, I feel that the Justices were in error, that they violated the separation of powers, that they should have known better and that they showed a lack of “good behavior”. Therefore, the pay of those members sitting on the Court at the time should be suspended in accordance with the Constitution.

In addition to side-stepping the authority of the Court by passing along federal election matters to a state court, the Justices have also side-stepped international law and the power of Congress to establish binding treaties by essentially granting Congress the power to pass laws in violation of the Geneva Conventions, by allowing torture under U.S. law. The Justices in essence have reserved the power of judicial review on this matter and that is not “good behavior”. Those Justices sitting on the Court at the time of forgoing the responsibility of judicial review as required by the Supreme Court ruling of Marbury vs. Madison should not receive compensation.

In addition to side-stepping the authority of the Court in federal election matters, international law, and judicial review, the Court has made rulings that provide for laws in conflict with the 4th Amendment of the Constitution regarding “sneak and peak searches” and the “exclusionary rule”. This is further evidence that sitting justices have not acted in “good behavior” and therefore should not be compensated.

In accordance with the Constitution, the Congress has the discretion to appropriate monies for the compensation of the Supreme Court Justices. I hope that the Congress resolves to stop granting such monies to the Justices.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Is The City Listening?

To Hell With Over-Development

Reported Anonymously

Re: Hell Hound Noise Ban

Dear City Council Members:

I'm sorry, but I thought it was public knowledge! Lucifer Enterprises (Satan Incarnate, CEO) has entered into an agreement with the city, in association with Properties, Inc. to develop the Vista site as a kennel for raising Hell Hounds.

Attorneys will be managing and attempting to create a crossbreed with Presa Canarios and Hell hounds. This dog would be much suitable to the political and social climate of the city and provide many employment opportunities for the damned and evilly impaired (the darned). And imagine how wonderful and mysterious to hear their woeful cries in the night when the wind howls off the Pacific Ocean over our denuded landscape. Jeepers, I'm excited!

In the agreement the city might promise to change the name of El Cerrito to Hell Cerrito. Some citizens have agreed that with only the addition of two letters to the name (H and L) there won't be financial burden to taxpayers, but there will be time for public comment (perhaps changing Font?).

There could now be 7 houses built instead of the original 66, this number being more Biblical in suitability. All addresses could be 666 Vista Street. Zip code 94666. We have a wonderful opportunity here and I urge everyone to get on board.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard On The Hill?

The "Foreign" in Foreign Communications (FISA)

Reported Anonymously

Dear Senator:

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act mandates that a warrant be issued to intercept communications from anyone within the borders of The United States of America to anybody outside of our borders. The word “Foreign” is a clue that the FISA was not intended to be a substitute for the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution which reads, “The right of the people to be secure… shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Fourth Amendment is one of the cornerstones of law in our society. The Bush Administration has shown a poor understanding of the Constitution, to say the least, when it comes to the use of FISA. Indeed, intercepting overseas communications requires a FISA warrant, but intercepting domestic communications does not. There is no substitute for the Fourth Amendment within the borders of our country. Please do something to correct Mr. Bush’s misunderstanding of United States laws.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

National Security Letter Q & A

Reported Anonymously

Below are guidelines for how to deal with a “National Security Letter”. I suggest that these guidelines be posted on the White House web site and the NSA web site. There is a lot of confusion regarding what to do if you receive a National Security Letter. So below are the guidelines, in Q & A format:

Q: What is a National Security Letter?
A: A National Security Letter is a letter issued by the National Security Administration (NSA) to people being investigated for suspicion of terrorism. They are issued under the Patriot Act, and are now authorized as a permanent part of U.S. law.

Q: What should I do if I receive one?
A: Don’t tell anyone. If you tell anyone you are considered an "Enemy Combatant" and lose all of your rights under the Constitution.

Q: How are National Security Letters Delivered?
A: There is no set criteria under the law for delivery of National Security Letters. They can be mailed first class, certified mail, overnight mail, or by bicycle courier. They can be inserted in Credit Card offers, Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes, or included with the napkins of a pizza you are having delivered.

Q: What do I do if I mistakenly tear up or throw away my National Security Letter?
A: Report directly to Guantanamo Bay detention camp to get another copy. There may be a fee to obtain another copy.

Q: Will a man in a black coat follow me around after I receive a National Security Letter?
A: Yes.

Q: Does my National Security Letter entitle me to receive other valuable offers by mail from the government?
A: Only tickets to far-away and glamorous lands like Cuba, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and other countries where torture is practiced on a regular basis.

I hope these guidelines help. I suggest sending them to your representative in Congress for consideration of posting on his or her web site too!

Heard On The Hill?

PIMP MY HEALTH INSURANCE!

Reported Anonymously

Dear Senator:

You don’t have to have a Nobel Prize in Medicine to know that prostitutes need health insurance. This is no joke. Prostitutes work hard. For example, in one town in the United States, a teen prostitution ring was recently broken up. Two prostitutes testified that they served 4-5 clients a day, 5 days a week. Their service was essentially involuntary. 13th Amendment issues aside, isn’t it obvious that these prostitutes needed health insurance even more than the “normal” population?

Getting back to 13th Amendment issues, both prostitutes who testified were minors. Men and women, boys and girls serve as prostitutes. While the case could be made that all prostitutes are serving the needs of certain sectors of society under some form of bondage, the case is closed when it comes to minors. Adult prostitutes are often the grown-up versions of and the self-same people as child prostitutes. Child prostitutes are often the victims of sexual abuse within the family. The rationale that drives child prostitutes might be that running away from a sexually abusive family into a house of prostitution at least affords them a wage for their “work”.

This brings us to the sex industry in general, which also includes prostitution’s (sometimes) ugly cousin: pornography. Why should any adult be so marginalized by society that their chosen line of work is illegal and that they should not be guaranteed a wage for their labor? While child prostitutes and pornography models are by definition too young to consent and therefore always involuntary servants, their adult counterparts are subject to exploitation not because of age but because of societal norms. Doesn’t this mean that society is in fact helping the pimp by refusing to recognize the legitimate role that prostitutes and pornography models play in our society? Since the dawn of man, men and women have been sexually exploited. In some cultures, courtesans are considered the elite among the sexual; a legitimate pleasure which the lonely and wealthy can afford. In our society, all prostitution has come full circle back to involuntary servitude.

No one should be a slave. Give prostitutes the rights to form legally binding contracts with their clients and employers; and for God’s sake, give them health insurance.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

An Actual Letter To A Police Commander

Justice & The Police: Statute Worship

Dear Commander:

Before I commend you on your 29+ years of service with the police force, I want to thank you and your staff at the department for inviting me to your retirement dinner. Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend but I want to express my gratitude to you, and in fact the rest of the dedicated force, for protecting our city in what seems to be some of the most difficult times in human history.

I believe that all law, physical, civil or otherwise follows from God. Enough said on that for now. I also believe that the founding fathers (and their significant others) believed that they were inspired by God with the purpose of framing a document of law that is in complete harmony with this idea. The document they framed, The United States Constitution, is a few pages of law applying mostly to the founders themselves and the government which they established for their posterity. It also establishes a short set of laws that apply to the people. These laws reserved for the people they called The Bill of Rights.

Apparently, and I do say apparently, something has gone seriously wrong since the original framing of the Constitution. For example, the first few pages of Constitutional law seem to no longer be observed by the three branches of government for which they were established. For example, since the end of hostilities after World War II, various Presidents have routinely ordered military actions, including wars, without the explicit consent of Congress. That is forbidden by the Constitution. Such action should be considered void under the law and the President impeached to reestablish order. Furthermore, in the year 2000, the Supreme Court ruled on a state election matter (on behalf of the State of Florida) and appropriately remanded the case back to the Florida Supreme Court. At that point, the Florida Supreme Court took action that decided a Federal Election. Now, the United States Supreme Court knew that the remanded case was in effect an order to decide Federal law by a State court and they did it anyway. Such action is void under Constitutional Law and the Supreme Court Justices have thereby shown a lack of “good behavior” and should no longer be compensated, at least, or removed from the bench. To make matters worse, the Senate certified the results of the voided election and thereby voided their own action under the law. Finally, the President was sworn into office by a Supreme Court Justice on the basis of a voided and certified voided election. The President then proceeded to accept the office which became void under Constitutional law.

So why do I relate to you these sordid details of political debauchery? Because those laws which our government voided applied mostly to themselves, but we should ask, have the people voided the Bill of Rights in some likewise fashion? Of course some people have, and it was your job as a police officer to handle those offenders before they (the people) started acting like the government!

So what is the solution when someone voids the law? We have a number of statutes which the people are expected to observe and the police are expected to enforce the peoples’ observance. However, these statutes have become a quagmire of sometimes contradictory interpretations of the law. The police must do their best to enforce the “justice” of the statutes by bringing before the courts all those who are not observing them. I would think that after 29 years of observing this behavior and trying to enforce it in good faith you probably can honestly say you think you have failed – at an impossible job.

So I think the problem is not in trying to enforce the law, but the consequences we all suffer as a “society”, including the police, when we do. Jail and Prison are the two poster children of how the consequences of enforcing “justice” promote in fact the opposite consequence of “injustice”. The more people we put in prison, the more wily the criminals that are released back onto the street. The more wily the criminals, the more need for new statutes. The more criminals and statutes there are, the more need for the police. This cycle of lawlessness is caused by the voiding of the consequences of the enforcement of justice.

So what are the appropriate consequences to voiding the Bill of Rights? Well, I have said that the Constitution is divinely inspired and all law follows from God. So one man had suggested that we love our neighbors as ourselves, and that we love God above all else. So here is where the full commendation comes in. If you, Commander, have tried to follow these two greatest of commandments during the course of your law enforcement career, then you have done more to promote a lawful and just society than all the governments on Earth, all the laws devised by the highest of human courts, and all of the statutes made to be broken in the city.

Sincerely,
Anonymous Citizen

The People's Choice

Watermarked Image. Click Image To Enlarge & For Pricing.

Artist: Ed Romano
www.edromano.com

© Copyright 2007 Ed Romano

Is The City Listening?

Brand Name Trash

Reported Anonymously

Dear City Council Members:

Much of the trash we see today has a brand name on it. Litter carrying corporate logos can be found on the streets and in the parks of most American cities. Even here, litter sends people the message that we don’t care if our city is beautiful. We begin to accept that cities are ugly and that we have no choice in the matter.

We may make littering a criminal offense for the people, but it is also necessary to hold their brand name accomplices responsible. Corporations apply the ultimate in peer pressure through their targeted advertising. While corporations teach us to raise children who prefer their products, they seem to have forgotten to teach us how to use their products responsibly. Littering is irresponsible and it is a problem that is perpetrated by individuals who apparently have never been taught how to dispose of a product properly, hopefully to recycle the product, after use.

Instead of punishing the corporations for producing what becomes brand name trash, we reward them by allowing it. When we find a chicken bucket lying around, we notice the chicken bucket logo. It is a form of free advertising. So corporations benefit from their trash.

The corporations would have us believe that any benefits of producing brand name trash are unintended. On the contrary, many products are designed to be throwaway items, which means more profits in replacement sales and more trash in the county landfill or on city streets. Many products are specifically featured as disposable items. In addition, disposable items are repetitiously packaged in throwaway brand name containers and bags. Rarely do advertisers tell us how to properly dispose of items and packaging, or publicize the consequences of improper disposal. Placing the words “Don’t Litter” on a candy wrapper is much like putting the words “Drink Responsibly” on a can of beer after a multimillion dollar television advertising campaign associates drinking with more fun during the Super Bowl. Corporations in general are not responsible for the trash they produce and it shows.

There are global consequences to our local investments in the trash producers. In spite of my dissatisfaction with brand name trash, I believe that multinational corporations are necessary to produce and distribute the vital products that the people of the world need and to feed the local economy. I would like to see the city encourage corporations that serve the needs of humankind responsibly and deliver products efficiently. For example, I think large corporations are needed to distribute food globally, but not to provide us with cute dolls for the garbage. Unfortunately, in today’s corporate world, disposable dolls are more profitable than global food distribution and I point to the starving continents of Asia and Africa in contrast to multi-cultural Barbie-in-a-box as an example of this.

In honor of decisions by the U.S. Supreme court establishing corporate personhood, corporations should selflessly invest in the cities in which they operate, including funding trash removal and street beautification. They should do this in the spirit of “Do to others what you would have them do to you.” If they don't, what kind of citizens are they? Who wants to do business in an ugly store? Who wants to do business in an ugly city?

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Heard In The Pentagon?

"Tickle Torture"

Reported Anonymously

Dear Secretary of Defense:

I read in the newspaper that you took a personal interest in the interrogation of a detainee at Guantanamo Bay. It is good to know that you are attending to our national security interests, personally!

It said in the article that during the course of the interrogation that the detainee urinated on himself. I’m sure you know that, because the article said you took a personal interest in the interrogation. Well, I got to thinking that if you applied “tickle torture” to a detainee that you could get him to not only urinate on himself, but to poop in his shorts besides. Now, I don’t want you to get confused by the term “tickle torture”, because it is not torture at all. That’s just what my brother used to call it when he would sit on me and tickle me until I passed gas. I never actually pooped my shorts, but I bet you could get someone to do it if you did it long enough. You would know better than me how long it would take, and still not have it be called “torture”. After all, you once said that you stand for eight hours each day, and that’s not torture.

I have also sent a copy of this letter to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff because we live in a Democracy that is Republican, so civilian leaders, like yourself, call the shots, but it doesn’t hurt to consult with the soldiers about military matters. If “tickle treatment” is against military laws as defined by the Geneva Conventions, then I wouldn’t want it to be used. Even if the United Nations has become irrelevant, I wouldn’t want to end up in The Hague, or anyplace like that.

Could you also check with my Representatives in Congress about this matter? I wouldn’t want them to think that I went around the chain of command by contacting you about this first.

With your best interests at heart,
Anonymous

P.S. You should hire Pepsico to feed the Guantanamo Bay detainees. I can’t thing of anything more punishing to the heart than a double-whopper with cheese or a taco bell-beefer (that’s trademarked).

 

Heard On The Hill!

When Will The Madness End?

Reported Anonymously

Dear Senator:

If God had a name, what would it be?
And would you call it to his face, if you were faced with him, in all his glory?
What would you ask if you had just one question?
-Artist: Joan Osborne, Album: Relish

A friend of the Congress related to me that a big question that many in Congress would ask is: “When will the madness stop?” So let me relate to you an answer to this question.

I begin with a story from my high school days when I was mysteriously transferred from the college preparatory geometry class into the remedial geometry class held for the football players. These players were an unruly bunch who threw wads of paper at the chalkboard and otherwise disrespected the laws of mathematics. The problem for them was, if they did not pass geometry they would not graduate. Now the teacher was their Coach, and he was in fact a man who understood geometry. So for the first week I was there he stood in front of the class and demonstrated the Euclidean proofs complete with diagrams. I of course took diligent notes and prepared for the “pop quiz” which he said he would hold at the end of the week. This went on for about two weeks with myself getting an “A” on my quizzes and everyone else failing.

Then it happened. One day, the Center of the football team got curious as to how I could possibly understand geometry. So I told him to sit right next to me and I would explain as I did my work during that part of class. So we did. Come Friday we took the quiz and the Center of the football team got a “C”. He loudly and proudly proclaimed his victory to the rest of the team (in class) at which point one of them said, “So how did you do it?” The Center said, “Someone helped me”. The other guy said to the Coach, “But that’s cheating, isn’t it?” Coach said, “No.” Then the football star said it, “You mean, we can get help with geometry!?” Coach took the opportunity to teach us all a lesson in geometry. At the end of the semester I received and “A+” and was transferred back to the more challenging college preparatory geometry class.

Likewise on our planet, some people are “college preparatory” material and others are simply trying to “graduate”. Among those trying to graduate, some are trying to follow the rules and others are blindly striking out at those trying to guide them.

Our species “Homo Sapiens” began its domination of the planet about 50,000 years ago. Allowing for the law of reincarnation, then our species could be seen as a single class that actually graduated 2,000 years ago when Jesus Christ forgave each and every one of us of our misdeeds, forever. Now, for the past 2,000 years we have been in a graduate school of sorts.

The curriculum is described in the last book of the Bible, called the “Revelation to John”. It basically describes the culmination of capitalism. As with most graduate curriculum, the syllabus does not seem comprehensible, and the coursework is both difficult and unavoidable. However, graduation is almost certainly assured to all those who ask questions of the professor.

The question, “When will the madness end”, has often been asked throughout history by the heads of state and their generals. In fact, the question was asked once of Isaiah, a biblical prophet. Remember now that humankind is like a class reincarnating through time, so humankind was essentially in Junior High School when Isaiah was asked the question. Children of that age are pretty predictable, so Isaiah was able to answer the question with relative surety. He said “The madness would end with the Persian Empire dominating the known world.”

A couple of hundred years later, humankind had made it into High School, and things were changing as Isaiah had said. Now the King of Babylon asked Daniel, another biblical prophet, “When will the madness end?” Keep in mind that humankind is like a class reincarnating through time with essentially the same set of leaders. Now that we were in high school, things were getting more complicated. Daniel described a succession of kingdoms: Persian, Greek, Roman, and finally a Kingdom that would dominate the entire world.

By the time Jesus of Nazareth was born, the heads of state who had themselves, by means of reincarnation, actually led the conquest of the kingdoms according to the prophets’ syllabi were ready to take the world. However, the common people had come to the realization that there must be some greater meaning to life than simply serving their leaders as they conquered their kingdoms. So the people asked Jesus “When will the madness end?”

Jesus explained the entire syllabus of creation from beginning to end and said that the madness would indeed end in heaven on Earth.

Not only that, but the heads of state did not know exactly how to conquer “heaven on Earth”, but wanted to conquer the world instead as it seemed to be getting bigger all the time and their resources were limited, even as vast as they were. So they asked John, another biblical prophet, “When will the madness end?” and he wrote the book of Revelation.

The book of Revelation relates in detail the plan of the capitalists who refuse to allow people to create heaven on Earth. In fact, the book ends with the capitalists dethroned and a kingdom that stands to time indefinite in its place. So the most up-to-date syllabus as we know it says that capitalism must somehow turn into heaven on Earth.

So here we are, at the end of the book of Revelation, and I have been asked the question once again, “When will the madness end?”

First, I should convince you that what has led up to the present circumstances in history has all been absolutely necessary and therefore everyone gets a “B” for taking the course and attending life so far.

Second, I should convince you that in fact the madness will end for a number of reasons:

1. Profit taking is an inefficiency in the economic system whereby capital might not be reinvested in the means of production. That inefficiency allowed to run itself long enough will result in the collapse of capitalism. The profit centers in the capitalist market are the stock markets and banks, which are in fact the points of weakness causing “crashes” in the system.

2. The Malthusian Curve of population outgrowing resources is proving correct. It was the maxim of the capitalists during Malthus’ time that technology and the reinvestment of capital could flatten the curve. This has not been the case. There is a reason. You cannot derive infinite profits from limited resources.

So for these reasons we see that capitalism must come to an end, as was stated in the book of Revelation. However, we have also learned that endings are always transformations into new beginnings, and the new beginning predicted in Revelation is a millennium of peace and prosperity followed by heaven on Earth.

...Snip...

So what are some of my suggestions to converting capitalism to a peace-on-earth, sustainable economic system? I could simply reveal another syllabus, but we are in graduate school. So I think the better thing to do is to help you devise a thesis of your own for “When the madness ends.”

For the first part of our thesis project I would like you and everyone of stature in the government, even those people of stature who advise the government to consider the nature of human law and how it relates to the laws of cause and effect. Finally, as you ponder that question of this test, ask yourselves, “Are we subject to the consequences of our actions, and how?”

I am most serious, please take at least 15 minutes to ponder the questions above as the knowledge gained will be most helpful in your future endeavors, which I hope are successful!

Sincerely,
Anonymous

The Following Response Was Returned From The Senator's Office:

Dear Constituent:

I read with great interest your analogy relating humankind's existence to a progression within an educational system. I value your ideas on this matter, and please be assured that I will keep them in mind as we progress through 'graduate school'. You seem to have a gift for predicting the future and explaining the past. I wish you good luck as you continue to explore your interest in these matters.

 

Copyright Notice

The GreenSpeech.org web site, it's design and contents are protected by U.S. copyright laws. This includes anonymously reported content. For copyright permissions, please contact GreenSpeech.org.