1920s and 30s America, When We Were Censored and Prohibited For Our Own Safety

"The first week of December 1933 will go down in history for two repeals, that of Prohibition and that of the legal compulsion for squeamishness in literature. It is not inconceivable that these two have been closely interlinked in the recent past, and that sex repressions found vent in intemperance. At any rate, we may now imbibe freely of the contents of bottles and forthright books. It may well be that in the future the repeal of the sex taboo in letters will prove to be of greater importance. Perhaps the intolerance which closed our distilleries was the intolerance which decreed that basic human functions had to be treated in books in a furtive, leering, roundabout manner. Happily, both of these have now been repudiated." (Morris L. Ernst, New York, December, 11, 1933 on Judge John Woolsey's decision to lift the U.S. ban upon James Joyce's Ulysses)

Does Anyone Remember the Lessons of Black Americans?

Does anyone recall learning about the old days and of how people were put on the auction block and bid upon?

Part of the process of choosing a good slave was an examination of their body and teeth. A potential owner could touch and fondle any part of another person/slave.

Does anyone remember learning of how slaves weren't permitted to choose their occupation, their free time, or allowed to travel off the plantation without written permission of their master -- and even then, they were in danger?

Does anyone remember that slaves didn't often marry, but instead had several partners, and that they weren't allowed to stay home and raise their children, but had to leave them to the care of nature or someone that didn't love the child while the parent was at work for the master?

Does anyone remember that even after being granted so-called freedom many states and townships banned Black Americans from owning firearms?

Does anyone remember that it was forbidden to teach a slave to read or write, especially to write?

Does anyone remember that slaves were forbidden from gathering together in large groups to worship God?

Does anyone remember that in many parts of the country the slave population far outnumbered the non-slave population, yet they still submitted to being owned, rarely ever organizing effective revolts? It was nearly impossible for the slaves to organize and plan when they were banned from gathering together or having any free time or education.

Does anyone remember learning of Jim Crow and Separate But Equal laws? Does anyone remember how Black Americans were banned from certain businesses, universities, and neighborhoods for the "health" of the non-blacks?

Does anyone remember that the United States Constitution did not apply to Black Americans for many years, and that even after ratification of the 16th Amendment, the Constitutional rights of Black Americans were ignored?

Does anyone remember that the shoddy clothing, rations of poor quality food, and the paltry gifts given at Christmas were all provided by the "generosity" of the master?

Does anyone remember these lessons from our history books and can anyone make connections with our time? I guess, not, since these things aren't obvious. Even Black Americans can't see the connections, since they're not as black and white as they were in former days.

And does anyone recall how the slaves of America were set free? It wasn't they, but outside forces that fought and died. The help came from outside the slave community.

And then, does anyone remember how Black Americans won their rights as Americans? It took a long time, but they learned who they were and how to stand up for themselves and to defend their dignity and rights as humans.

And so, I wonder who will come in from outside to free the Americans? Who will fight and die for us? And how long will it take for us to learn to defend ourselves and move from superstition to educated and enlightened learning?

Americans are illiterate, uneducated and superstitious and believe in the Bogey Man. He's gonna get us. Boo!

We've wasted the lives of those lost during the American Civil War and we've wasted the lives of those who defended the rights of Black Americans in the following years. We've wasted their lives because now, we're all owned. At least, the slaves knew who their master was. We have no idea who has bought us or even that we've been sold.

image: The Problem We All Live With by Norman Rockwell. A painting and a title I find particularly revolting, racist.

How To Deal With TSA: Bathrobes and Slippers, NOT Violence and Mobs

My solution to the TSA: Bathrobes and fuzzy slippers.

I used to work with a lady that would say, "Kill 'em with kindness, kill 'em with kindness, that's what I always say," then, she'd laugh and take a big drag off her cigarette and exhale it out the window.

I've often found that these words are true and work better than obvious anger. For some reason, turning the other cheek and giving tyrants what they want and more, but in a way they hadn't planned on and that is humorous confuses and enrages them.

If the TSA, under the auspices of our government wants us naked and wants to make sure we aren't carrying weapons or explosives upon our bodies why not make things easier and cheaper and save the environment while we're at it? Those Rapiscanners and the TSA cost the country billions of dollars and waste energy and space and time.

Wouldn't it be far cheaper and easier if travelers arrived at the airport in bathrobes and fuzzy slippers? This way, instead of passing through the Rapiscan or having to endure a pat-down, one could simply open their bathrobe and show themselves and it would accomplish the same thing as a scan and also cut down on time-consuming pat-downs.

If we gave them what they wanted and more and were jolly and made a holiday of it there would be no sense in the body scanners or in all of the TSA and we'd save billions of dollars and have fought back in a non-violent and humorous way. Also, sales of bathrobes and slippers would sky rocket, helping private businesses and the economy.

But no, Americans won't do this. It's too easy. Americans will continue to rant and rave about the abuse of the TSA and the stories of men, women, children, and handicapped being defiled will continue. And the TSA will continue laughing at us and telling us they're only going to get more invasive and thorough.

I've wanted to write in the subject of mass panic and lynch mobs for awhile and now, I may. What the TSA is doing seems deliberately designed to cause mass violence and terror.

In the early part of the 1900s there were numerous lynch mobs and riots across the nation. At that time they were white on black mobs, but now the color lines are a bit blurred which makes it harder to see the similarities. But there is one commonality to American lynch mobs. That commonality is the story of a woman or a child having been brutally raped by a member or members of a minority group which the majority feels threatened by.

The story of the woman being raped is often an exaggeration of a real event or never occurred. A few people spread the story around and incite the fear and hatred of the men who turn out to protect their women and avenge this heinous crime. In a short time there is violence and chaos in the streets. Entire neighborhoods are burned and looted, many are killed and injured, and the average person is turned into an angry animal. These lynch mobs are usually incited by manipulators in unions or governments who are trying to prove their power to another group in power who has not made concessions to their demands. But more on that later.

Anyway, the point I am making is that the TSA's arrogant attitude and Homeland Security's attitude, telling us that we haven't seen nothing yet and that the abuses will continue inspite of public outcry are obvious signs that they want the American people to form into a lynch mob and string up a few TSA workers. Each new article and YouTube image of men, women, and children being abused kindles the fire. Unlike the exaggerated stories of the past of the white woman being raped by the black man, these stories are true and have imagery to back them up.

I am not saying we should ignore the abuses of the TSA, but I am concerned about the mass reaction to them. It seems to me that someone higher up is trying to prove a point with someone else and will use the average blind citizen to carry out the force. It seems to me that somewhere someone desires to shut down all airline travel.

The attack on the World Trade Center in 2001 shut down travel and grounded flights. How much more devastating will a nationwide lynch mob in our airports be? This would stop all travel, cause fear, and perhaps even stop all automobile travel due to martial law in many states. Evidently, we are at war, and for some reason our government thinks it's an autoimmune disorder and wants to make us attack it so that it can attack us--funded entirely by our tax dollars and blindness.

The enemy is us. It's you and I. Our government is treating us this way and will incite us into making it a reality. If only we could kill 'em with kindness and show up in our bathrobes and slippers as a peaceful yet effective demonstration of our power and sense of humor. If only.

Samuel Wolanyk chose to strip down to his underwear in San Diego in order to comply with TSA's need to make sure he was safe and was recorded by a woman. For some reason Wolanyk's compliance wasn't acceptable procedure and TSA wanted him to put his clothes back on so that he could have a pat-down. He and the woman that taped him are under arrest. Huh? If I had to guess, Wolanyk's choice to comply in a non-aggressive, sexy, and creative manner which "turned the other cheek," frightens TSA and Homeland Security more than anything yet. Way to go Wolanyk and may God Bless and Protect you. "Passenger Chooses Strip-Down Over Pat-Down," R. Stickney, NBC San Diego, 22 Nov. 2010 http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local-beat/Passenger-Chooses-Strip-Down-Over-Pat-Down-109872589.html?dr

Why You Should Read Lolita Before Traveling In the U.S.A.: American Travelers Are Lolita, and The TSA Is Humbert Humbert

In 1955 Vladimir Nabokov, a Russian emigre to the United States, published Lolita, a tale of a linguistically and aesthetically talented pedophile who runs off with his 12 year old step daughter, "Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta" (first lines of Lolita).

Lolita was not published in the U.S. until 1958 due to its pornographic subject matter. Nabokov intensely hated cruelty to others and sexual deviants. So why did he write a book from the viewpoint of the pedophile, Humbert Humbert, who has conned several generations of readers and academics with the beautiful account of his love and "protection" of a 12 year old girl?

Nabokov hated evil. He had escaped the Bolsheviks in Russia, then later, escaped the Nazis with his wife of Jewish descent and their young son. They arrived in America and fell in love with it. Nabokov's wife, Vera, promptly purchased a gun to replace the one she had left behind in Europe, and learned to drive.

Nabokov, a seemingly absent-minded butterfly-chasing professor with an innocence about him that relied upon his wife's ferocity and protection liked to look at things from a very detailed and scientific perspective. He hated evil and studied it, dissected it, and understood its minutest detail. He climbed into the mind of evil when he wrote Lolita, shocking readers and enchanting millions with the beauty of his language.

Lolita was a triumph and proved how easily a population can be tricked into accepting evil, calling it beautiful, spending entire lifetimes studying its details without ever getting to its ultimate meaning. Anyone can tear apart an engine, or dissect a body and name the parts and figure out how they operate, but most cannot figure out the ultimate meaning -- why was this human body created, what is its purpose? How does one get into the mind of the creator via the act of dissection and cataloguing of the parts? It is impossible if one has no love or passion driving them. Creators and inventors generally have more love and passion which compels them to work harder and longer at something, creating a thing that changes the world for better.

Most inventions and creations were initially designed for the betterment of mankind or to add beauty or freedom. But many inventions are corrupted and used for evil purposes. The written word was made to better the world, but evil tries to corrupt it. The same goes for all art. We see technology abused, being used to make life harder rather than easier. Even Lolita, meant to show us evil from its own perspective, has been corrupted and adopted as a wonderful and dreamy tale by many gullible girls and joking young men, none of whom are aware that they have been artfully conned and that Nabokov proves his case of how evil survives and is accepted into the world.

Nabokov, the great enchanter and magician deceives many with his artistic slight of hand, keeping our focus upon the aesthetic, causing us to accept Humbert Humbert's defence because it is merely art and has no ultimate meaning or moral. If art is only aesthetic, then beauty has no meaning, thus what is the point of creating it?

Nabokov, a talented lepidopterist, studied butterflies and moths and was fascinated by their beauty. These creatures are patterned in ways that attract and enchant us, but also hide them from evil. Some butterflies blend in with their surroundings while others mimic dangerous animals to avoid being eaten. Nabokov learned that a butterfly's patterning is not merely aesthetic, but also enhances its survival. And this is what art's purpose is. Art is not merely aesthetic, but driven by truth and survival. If we cannot learn from art how to be wiser, better, kinder, and more graceful to others; to have pity, then art has no purpose, much as a shiny car has no meaning or purpose without an engine. A car is nice to look at, but without an engine it gets us nowhere.

The reason I expound upon Nabokov's Lolita and art is that more than ever America is deceived by the Humbert Humberts who claim they love us and want to protect us, while molesting us in various ways. We are made to pass through Naked Body Scanners, which undress us and expose us to dangerous mutagenic radiation. We are searched and groped by TSA officials as we travel the country, much as Lolita was groped by Humbert Humbert along the highways and byways of America. The stories now include "enhanced" searches that have left many feeling sexually violated after having had their penises, anuses, labia, and breasts felt by TSA screeners.

Now, does Humbert's love for Lolita feel nice and beautiful? Sure, he attacked the pornographic movie maker that ran off with Lolita, because that kind of art is immoral and degrading; but what of Humbert's protective and fatherly love for her? More than ever Nabokov's Lolita is important, for we all are her.

Was Lolita clean and innocent as the wind-driven snow? Was she faultless? No. But was that any excuse for Humbert Humbert to molest her? Was Lolita a kind and sweet child? No. She was obnoxious and sometimes crude. Was she more deserving of Humbert's sexual predation because of this? No. Americans are like this 12 year old girl and even though we are annoying and obnoxious and immoral it does not mean that we deserve to be treated by our states, by our fellows that work at TSA, as criminals in need of being stripped down or molested as we travel. Humbert Humbert protected Lolita as much as our airports are protecting us.

This is not beautiful, this is not America. This isn't even Nazi Germany. This is worse. This is worse for numerous reasons. Firstly, it's far worse and more abusive passing through United States airport security than in the rest of the world. America is supposed to be less abusive than the rest of the world. Second, the atrocities of the Nazis and American eugenicists and corporations in the first part of the 20th century are not so far removed from memory that we have forgotten them and what they looked like -- and what is going on in the United States right now resembles these past times.

The TSA's arrogance is only a small, yet extremely visible HINT as to what period of history we have regressed to. If a Naked Body Scanner, a long line in which one is divested of their possessions and shoes, hurried along, and subjected to physical searches which involve humble and silent endurance while one's anal and sexual reproduction areas are touched by uniformed employees of the government before being boarded upon crowded vehicles traveling somewhere doesn't wake us up and cause deja vu; then far worse than what happened in Nazi-controlled areas of Europe awaits us.

Rather than humbly lining up like the Jews, believing they'd eventually return home, we should stop cowering in embarrassment and start saying to hell with the "law," which breaks every law written into our soul. American travelers aren't terrorists and neither are visitors from other countries. The terrorists are the ones that apply for TSA jobs, and willingly carry out the orders of their superiors. If TSA employees were intelligent Americans they'd go on strike until they no longer were made to mistreat their fellow Americans. The terrorists are the ones groping for your wallet and now, your genitals. Soon, the women and children will be divided from the men, then the children from the women as enhanced airport security. It's already happening on an individual level. What next? Confiscation of Passport and Citizenship? Child sacrifice? When will their appetite be filled?

Wake up, America. Don't let the lives lost of the millions of Jews and others be for nothing. It's time to wake up out of our self-righteous and false morals. We are imperfect, we are obnoxious, we are all sinners, and we're not afraid of it. The Nazis were afraid of sin and imperfection and tried to hide it and eradicate it. We don't have to fall for that lie.

America wasn't founded as a utopia away from imperfection, but a place that would toughen up and accept it. That First Amendment isn't for the perfect or the safe people, but to protect the imperfect and those that speak unsafe things even if they are the truth and offend others. Our entire Constitution was designed to protect the so-called "impure," the "unsafe," the "sinful," the obnoxious, the rude, and the human. If the Constitution was only for the perfect and the moral, then our Founding Fathers would not have had any rights.

According, to Britain the American Revolutionaries were a bunch of terrorists, criminals, and tax evaders. And, according to our side of history they were brave, courageous, educated lovers of freedom. It all depends on who is writing history as to what the words "terrorist," "art," "pedophile," and "free" mean. We want to be on the right side of history. The trick is figuring out what the "right" side is. Usually, it's the side that is willing to break the law to show pity and hospitality to others when they are traveling in an inhospitable world.

America, this is not ancient Sodom where travelers were subjected to rape when visiting that town. Why are we forcing ourselves upon travelers? How does it protect us to treat citizens and visitors to this country this way? We are not Nazis, not Humbert Humbert, not Sodomites -- are we?

image: George Washington, Commander of the Terrorist Americans who threatened Britain's safety and health, also known as The Father Of Our Country, The United States Of America.

American Travelers Uncovered At Their Own Expense

I'll be traveling soon and have been studying the TSA site in hopes of passing the security exams I will encounter along the way. And I wonder to myself, if it's really this dangerous to fly, then why isn't it banned altogether as so many other health risks are these days?

It's amazing how much fear our government is in when it comes to travelers. Every particle must be examined and X-rayed. And now, passengers must stand in a Stick 'Em Up pose and have naked photos taken. Why would someone willingly give their government which is supposed to protect them, not expose them, a naked photo of them self, but not dear Granny or their own child?

Granny would take better care of that naked body shot than anyone else and protect it from all other eyes because it embarrasses her to even have such a thing, and she's embarrassed for you. She'd probably tear it into a million pieces, then burn it to make sure no one ever saw it.

And most children would also be embarrassed to possess a nude photo of their parent, and would hide it from any friends that may see it. Any parent who gave their child a naked photo of themselves would be considered a pervert. Conversely, any parent that gave a stranger a photo of their child naked would be a pervert. Any parent so afraid of their own child that they forced them to strip down upon entering and leaving the house needs help. And any child old enough to stand up for them self should never allow this kind of abuse from a parent. If a child is this dangerous, then they should be confined behind barbed wire and constantly monitored by professional guards.

What if you were a woman and had been raped by a knife-wielding man and from that point on demanded that all men, including relatives, entering your house submit to a strip search to make sure they weren't carrying any weapons or other dangerous objects? People would pity this woman and think her paranoid and in need of psychological help in order to regain her confidence and ability to live in a world were most are harmless and only a few dangerous. Wouldn't it also help such a woman to own a gun and learn self-defense techniques? America is this woman and has been attacked, but she hasn't been given the tools and confidence to face the world again.

Why would we trust the government and an invisible viewer with an image of our naked body but not a close friend or relative? It seems that a relative or close friend would be a better guardian and more respectful of this image than a person or government that has no personal love or interest in us. Not all of us are Playboy Play Mates or gigolos and there's a reason for that.

We live in a society that is image-obsessed, thinking that image is everything, and tells us everything about a person. Yet, increasingly, we are afraid of human touch and contact. We are paranoid of physical touch, which is not a cold image.

I've observed this fear of human contact around my little town. I've seen girls snap at men for touching them in the smallest way or by accident when passing by. I've seen guys stand like statues, their arms crossed over their chests in large crowds, glaring at anyone who dares tap them on the shoulder.

I've overheard girls talking about "the circle," an invisible area that others should know better than to enter. Evidently, there is an unspoken rule these days that says "thou shalt not cross within a few inches of any other person at any time." These girls were agreeing with each other that it was very rude of others to get too near, even though they were in a crowd. And this wasn't even about being touched or bumped up against, this was about getting too near although never having made physical contact. Yet, these same girls will post their image and every detail of their lives online and dress attractively. If one really doesn't want to be touched or have anyone get near to them they should refrain from bathing several days before going into public, step in a fresh dog pile, dump an ashtray over their head, and spill a glass of whiskey and coke on their clothes, and write "leper" across their forehead.

If you wanted to keep me at a distance you'd put on too much perfume. It works every time. My eyes roll up into my head, I feel as if a plastic bag is being wrapped around my head, and I wish there was a tobacco smoker in the vicinity to hide the smell (incidentally, where I live the indoor tobacco ban supposedly includes perfume, incense, candles and other strong smells in the air. I doubt that anything other than the tobacco ban is enforced).

Anyway, I'm not so much offended by the radiation factor of the full-body scan in airports, as by our society's willingness to give a government such power and a nude photo, which they never paid for. I don't know about you, but giving away naked photos of myself wasn't what I paid for when I bought my airline ticket. It offends me and breaks my heart when I see people standing in a pose reminiscent of a crucifixion.

Once, a long time ago, a man was hung on a cross, judged between two criminals. His crime was that he was a king, a person with dignity and who desired all people be royalty and their nakedness covered. He was naked and the entire world saw him and became obsessed with the image of him naked and bleeding, prone, unable to cover himself from our gaping and disrespectful eyes. And now, we are all like him, naked, being judged with the terrorists although we are royalty.

Anyone who thinks a naked body scanner protects them from death is a hypocrite. That America is this weak, this afraid is sad. A naked body scanner cannot save us or protect us from evil. Uncovering people has never saved anyone from crime. Whenever people are uncovered, laid bare, and treated as criminals by their master or government it has been a time of great suffering and hatred.

Can a naked body scanner read a heart? If it could I'd put the things at the entrance of every state capitol building and in Washington, D.C., for this is where the most danger to American safety resides. These few men and women have images that appear clean and safe, but are their hearts free of terrorist threats, do they use their pens as weapons of defense against evil or to enact evil upon women and children by stealing freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and fought for by a few belligerent and brave souls during the Revolutionary War?

I'm not Jesus and I won't sacrifice my life for a government that is afraid of me. If I sacrifice my life and my dignity it will be for those I love and for freedom and those brave enough to love me.

What is America so afraid of, what is our government afraid of? Why do we believe it makes us safe to hand over our freedom and ease of travel to a government agency? When a government restricts and controls freedom of movement and travel, rather than increases it we should be very concerned. When a government accuses all citizen travelers of being potential threats, then we must wonder why. Has America grown so weak and prone, so exposed and defenseless that it fears everything and everyone? What happened to the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave? Where are those who remember these words and what they mean?

Free doesn't mean tobacco free, sugar free, or free from something. It means free to DO something. Freedom is an action, not something that is excluded from the mix. We've twisted the word free to mean something is missing and that somehow this is a good thing. We now identify ourselves as free from this or that, rather than free to do this or that. America is not free if it thinks it's terrorist free. America is free when it's free to do, to take action, to move about, to stand for freedom, to stand against evil -- because evil is everywhere and always will be.

The only way to fight evil is with freedom to do, not freedom from.

Note: I will be requesting a pat down in place of the full body scan wherever possible. I can see who is touching me and prefer this human touch, even if slightly invasive and humiliating. I'd rather not lie to myself that I am fully clothed by stepping into the full body scanner. I much prefer the truth and the truth is often quite unpleasant -- which is why so many silently step into the scanner.

image: Amelia Earhart

Tobacco Prohibition Increases Crime, Violence Against Women, and Even Ecological Disaster

"There's no doubt that there's a direct relationship between the increase in a state's tax and the increase in illegal trafficking"(John D'Angelo of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms qtd. in "Cigarette Smuggling," by Bruce Bartlett, National Center For Policy Analysis No.423, 30 Oct. 2002)

"Another problem is that cigarette distribution moves out of normal outlets and into criminal channels, controls on cigarette purchases by minors erode" (Bruce Bartlett).

Something that people rarely ever consider when prohibiting or overtaxing items such as tobacco, alcohol, firearms -- or tea is the increased leverage and power this hands to black market entrepreneurs. Usually, those willing to risk working in the black market are involved in violent crime and subjugation of those born into lives of poverty.

When my state tobacco prohibition went into effect nearly a year ago, the violent California gangs moved right on up and began recruiting on the Indian reservations. The reason for this is that Indian reservations, especially in border states, become very important areas for the transport and storage of the black market product due to the fact that they're somewhat independent of the rest of the state. Actually, a reservation is not so much free and independent, but neglected and not allowed to enforce justice as well as they might if the states actually allowed them independence.

Part of the beauty of an Indian reservation to crime syndicates is this condition of limbo many reservations are trapped in. On many reservations, the citizens are unable to get the criminals off the streets and out of their neighborhoods because they don't have the same type of court system we have. Criminal cases are supposed to be in the hands of the state, rather than in the local city and county courts. The state often ignores the pleas of the locals and won't prosecute a criminal or get around to trying the case. Many neighborhoods are held hostage by the local pedophile or violent gang member because the people cannot put them away and the state won't do anything. This causes a feeling of helplessness and despair amongst the people. I'm sure this is not the case on all reservations, but on many it is. It's the perfect environment for crime syndicates.

Earlier this year Obama signed the PACT Act ("Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking" Act), which prohibits the shipping of all tobacco products via the U.S. Postal Service. Oops, one, tobacco product was exempt from this law. Can you guess which one? It's the one that Bill Clinton couldn't figure out how to smoke, thinking it was a sex toy; it's the one they smoke at my state capital inspite of the ban on smoking, because politicians and their big fat cigars are above the law.

This act will dramatically increase the power of criminal elements in the U.S. Already, it is costing the USPS in lost shipping charges. Is it possible that the PACT Act is the reason the Post Office can no longer afford to operate and will have to stop shipping on Saturdays?

The PACT Act is a direct assault upon tobacco business and the U.S. Postal Service. This means more honest people out of work, higher shipping rates for everyone, less service, and increased crime.

The PACT Act dramatically effects international trade too. I'm seeing that products such as Swedish snus and certain types of pipe tobacco are nearly impossible to obtain in the U.S. Interestingly, this Act harms the most innocent and respectful groups amongst those who use tobacco: the poor, handicapped, and those with a heightened respect of tobacco--the pipe smoker.

Does anyone remember what happened during the Tobacco and Alcohol Prohibitions of the 1920s?

Before alcohol was prohibited a woman was rarely ever seen in a tavern drinking alongside the men.

We don't talk about it much, but preceding the Volstead Act, Tobacco Prohibition was rampant across the United States. Some states had bans against buying or selling it, while others had bans implemented by cities and counties. But by the 1920s something like 20 states had prohibited tobacco, especially cigarettes.

Why did women not belly up to the bar before Prohibition? And why was it only rebellious feminists openly smoked cigarettes before the 1920s? Well, for one, many laws were sexist and prohibited women from smoking, but beyond that there must have been another reason.

Hmm. Do drug dealers card their patrons to make sure they're of legal age? Do they look at the pretty young woman and say, "Sorry, hon, but you're too young and pretty. I just can't sell to you. I'm a good upstanding citizen with a reputation to keep and don't want to be responsible for your demise"?

Do drug dealers have shops with big windows and wide open doors where people can walk by and see inside?

Before Prohibition of Alcohol and Tobacco these consumer items were in the hands and control of honest citizens running honest and respectable businesses. It wasn't that men hated women, but that they respected them, that they didn't want them in the bar with them. Often, men were gathering in the bar after work and looked a bit rough and felt it too. They didn't want a woman having to look upon them in such a disgraceful state, before they'd cleaned up a bit. It was out of love for the woman that they wanted to protect them from a rough and dirty environment. It wasn't that women were too weak to handle the nitty gritty, every married man knows this, it was that they wanted to spare them added nitty gritty.

But along comes Prohibition, a favorite agenda of the feminists, and suddenly women were equal to men--equally low and drunk. When a crime lord runs the local speakeasy he doesn't give a damn who walks in the door as long as they've got money. In fact, having women there makes it easier for the men to spend more and get wasted. If the woman is right next to you getting tipsy, then the worry about drinking too much and having to face the wife is erased--or is it? Geez, who is this woman sitting on my lap? It sure isn't Ethel. She's younger and prettier than Ethel.

And so, a woman's life is ruined by Prohibition because now there are women in the bars with her husband. The Carry A. Nations got their way. They cast out one demon and replaced it with seven more.

Prohibition forces respectful and responsible citizens to quit consuming a product, thus eliminating them from society. When responsible and mature people are removed from the culture they no longer influence it or keep an eye on things, thus leaving only the disrespectful and irresponsible elements unmonitored and unchecked. This is what the local tobacco Prohibition has done in my local bars.

For some reason, the more mature and responsible people also smoked. Their calming and all-seeing presence kept the environment safe and enjoyable. Without them there is no one to show those new to drinking and tobacco that these are social aids meant to enable comfort and conversation and joy; not meant to be consumed as quickly and cheaply as possible and to such an excess that one doesn't remember socializing at all.

Without the responsible element there are no manners and the crowds have become more violent. It used to be that if a young man shoved a girl or was rude to her, another man would see this and step in and reprimand him and tell him he was too drunk. Now, there is no one to reprimand the drunk young men and no one to defend the girls. Usually, at live music shows the area near the stage is a wall of males who bar the females from seeing around them and won't let them near the front. This never used to be. It was an unspoken rule that the girls, especially if they were shorter than average got the area nearest the stage and the men gave way and stood back a couple rows. Since the Tobacco Prohibition this has all changed.

Violence increases dramatically with Prohibition. One reason for this is that if one is at a speakeasy, or involved in black market tobacco they cannot very easily report a crime because they will be fined or imprisoned if it is revealed that the violence occurred as a result of involvement with a prohibited item or establishment. If tobacco and alcohol are legal one is not afraid to report a violent crime because they will not be penalized or treated as less human. Crime syndicates have power over individuals when an item is illegal because they know law enforcement will not protect victims or their family. You suddenly become a citizen with fewer rights if you use a prohibited product.

Supposedly, Tobacco Prohibition protects the children from the effects of tobacco smoke. It is often claimed that increased tobacco taxes make it more difficult for minors to buy tobacco. It is also claimed that increased tobacco taxes offset health costs caused by tobacco use. In my state the state run children's health program is run on the backs of smokers. Every cigarette pays for another child's ADHD meds.

But does Tobacco Prohibition and increased taxes really protect the children from tobacco? No.

Tobacco Prohibitions actually make tobacco more harmful to young people. In Ireland and other European countries with strong tobacco prohibitions it is very common for minors, especially females to be the ones recruited to transport black market cigarettes into the country. These young women, mostly teens from poor neighborhoods are lured by spending money and plane tickets. They fill their suitcases with cigarettes and arrive in smaller airports. There are stories now, of entire planes full of these "Ants" each carrying small amounts of cigarettes, which alone don't mean much, but together equal millions and millions of dollars.

These young women may not be inhaling second hand smoke, but they're still exposed to tobacco. Now, instead of inhaling smoke, these women are exposed to the violence and abuse of their handlers. They are at risk of being beaten, raped, abandoned in foreign countries, and given jail sentences if caught. These young women put their relatives, friends, and neighborhoods at risk of violence and retribution should they offend their handlers. Is it really worth it to protect children from tobacco smoke when it increases violence against them?

With passage of the PACT Act we can see another problem with Prohibition. The PACT Act was supported by the anti smoking lobby and by the large tobacco companies. The reason the big tobacco companies support a prohibition upon U.S. Postal Service shipments of tobacco products is that many of these products are made by small companies and shops. People are dissatisfied with tobacco products manufactured by the well-known large tobacco companies. They don't like the price and they really don't like the quality.

In the past few years with the ease of online shopping people have been searching out better quality tobacco at discount prices, or even more expensive tobacco made by small businesses. People want tobacco, not chemicals and toxic and stinky additives. I myself can no longer stand the taste of big name cigarettes and haven't smoked them in years. It's not merely a habit, it really is like a good beer or coffee. Addicts don't care about taste or experience and want a fix, which is what the large tobacco companies and the Pharma Phascist NRT products supply.

All of this competition cuts into the monopoly of the large tobacco companies. They don't like those Indian brands, they don't like loose tobacco used for hand rolled cigarettes and pipes. They don't like foreign shops sending over specialty tobaccos.

Tobacco is like many other consumable items, or even like musical instruments, or like Colonel Sander's secret fried chicken recipe. A family or a geographic region may possess "secret" knowledge and produce a tobacco product that cannot be gotten from anyone else. These types of special tobaccos, many traditional, can only be bought and shipped through the U.S. Postal Service because they are unobtainable through any tobacco outlet in the country. The large tobacco companies don't like these products and would like to put them out of business.

Believe it or not Tobacco Prohibition increases the monopoly power of the few large tobacco companies and eradicates the small businesses and causes the loss of very old and proudly produced varieties of tobacco.

This happened during Alcohol Prohibition. Many of America's vineyards and special wine grapes were destroyed. A few of these rare grapes survived and are only now being rediscovered by the public who are again tasting wines that have not been experienced in nearly a hundred years. And who knows how many wonderful beers were lost to Prohibition?

The large tobacco companies thrive during periods of excessive taxation and prohibition because they are able to use black market channels to get their product into the region. I will not name names, but two of the large tobacco companies have been dealing with groups such as Hezbollah, TRIAD of Asia, the Irish Republican Army, U.S. Mafia, and Italian Mafia for years. These terrorist organizations traffic the black market tobacco, pass all tax barriers, and use the money to fund their political causes. And they shut down the small and better quality tobacco producers.

I have wondered if the Volstead Act was not in fact a monopoly takeover of the lucrative alcohol industry by the large producers. Before the Volstead, beer was a local product, produced by families.

Quite a few entrepreneurs knew that the Volstead Act was a government sanctioned monopoly takeover of the alcohol industry and bought up the bankrupt breweries and distilleries for pennies, holding them until the act was repealed, then got rich.

It's possible too, that Prohibition caused the Dust Bowl. It's only a speculation of mine and I'm no farmer, but I've listened to locals and others when they talk about farming and irrigation, and I've come to wonder if those giant dust clouds that blackened the sky during the 1930s were the result of Prohibition.

From what I've learned from listening, irrigation ditches are very important to the level of the water table. The irrigation ditch takes water from a large stream or river, which lowers it's volume, but at the same time this diverted water raises the underground water levels in the areas that it flows through. Irrigation ditches keep the surrounding land moist and make it easier to dig wells. The water is not wasted, only moved around from the river to the land. It doesn't deplete anything. In fact, it improves the ecosystem and protects it.

When irrigation stops because the land is no longer farmed the water table drops and things dry up rather quickly. When things are excessively dry they repel moisture, rather than retaining it. Grass and foliage begins to die. Summer heat worsens conditions and winter snows blow across the land, rather than settling down because there is nothing to hold it. The land and climate become desert. We can currently observe this desertification process taking place in formerly fertile valleys in California where irrigation has been banned to "protect" the environment. The orchards and farmland are parched and it's destroying the environment as well as essential foods depended upon by American children for good health.

When the Volstead Act went into effect it dramatically cut down on how much grain needed to be produced, for alcohol is a grain product. Many farmers held on, but it became more and more difficult since their crops were no longer in demand for alcohol production. Many farmers could not afford to plant their fields and left them to go fallow. No longer did they need as much irrigation.

The prairies began to dry up after the Volstead Act and the rains stopped coming after years of plentiful moisture. It's entirely possible that the irrigated land had actually attracted that rain and that after the Volstead, with less irrigation, the ecosystem was altered and no longer attracted the rains. The unworked fields along with less irrigation caused a drought. No longer was the soil held down by crops or moist soil, and by the 1930s large clouds of dust were rolling from the Western prairies all the way to the cities of the East Coast, blocking the sun, turning day to night.

But, of course, we read that the Dust Bowl was the fault of greedy and uneducated farmers that practiced negligent farming practices and depleted the soils. I doubt this. We always blame the individual and the victim in this country. I surmise that the poverty-stricken farmers could not afford to properly maintain the land as a result of the Volstead Act. But unless one has been very poor they will never understand this, and how impossible it is to maintain things and do things the right way without money to do it with.

And because of the Volstead Act and its destruction of the land and of farms, this lead to the government takeover during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration, of many farms. Roosevelt doled out paltry sums of money to destitute farmers if they would give their lives and independence to farm as he instructed. Roosevelt implemented massive hog and cattle-killing programs in which farmers turned in their livestock in return for money to feed the kids. Then, the government killed these animals, wasting them like a giant sacrifice upon the land.

If we look back at a time in history that occurred not so long ago we can see that there is not one good or healthy aspect of Prohibition. It causes crime, monopoly, poverty, despair, immorality, and even ecological disaster. Prohibition harms most those it is said it will protect: Women and children.

image: Dust Storm, Stratford, TX, 18 April 1935, NOAA George E. Marsh Album

Russia Says Smoke More For Healthy Economy, While U.S. and E.U. Tell People To Chew Coal Tar Candy To Help Weaken Economy

That's it, I'm going to Russia.

Russia's finance minister, Alexei Kudrin is telling "people to smoke and drink more, explaining that higher consumption would help lift tax revenues for spending on social services" ("'People Should Smoke and Drink More,' Says Russian Finance Minister," Telegraph, 1 Sep 2010).

According to the Telegraph article Kudrin says, "People should understand: Those who drink, those who smoke are doing more to help the state."

Really? Tell that to Europe and the Unites States of America, land of pharmaceutical phascism.

Those dumb Russians. They must be stuck in the Stone Age. Don't they know that the Western world all chews or sucks scabs of coal tar now? Haven't they heard of Chantix, which boosts the health of society and the economy by turning sane people into suicidal maniacs and diabetics? Jeepers, where's Nikon and his anti-tobacco league of nose-slitters when you need them?

I hear that tobacco use is popular in China too. China's government grows the stuff since they don't like importing it or relying upon the U.S. for their supplies.

If Russia's finance minister says that buying tobacco and alcohol helps the economy and even "[upholds] birthrates" (Telegraph), then conversely not buying these must harm the state coffers and the economy.

Kudrin would say that a ban upon these items and others is harmful and unpatriotic.

Hypothetically speaking, if you wanted to undermine another country's morale, economy and peace what would you do? You'd send out the agents of dissent and fear to propagandize and create confusion and panic so as to immobilize, paralyze, and silence.

Hypothetically speaking, how would you invade another country and move in right under their noses and never let them know what was happening so that they would not retaliate against you because they had no idea that they were even under attack, instead pointing fingers at each other?

Instead of openly invading the enemy country, instead of sending hundreds of thousands of troops across the ocean to attempt a new Normandy invasion, instead of dropping bombs and other expensive and finite devices you would buy people. You'd pay out several million, or billion dollars to a few experts and highly respectable personalities and let them spread ideas and false beliefs. These false beliefs would spread across the land and many would fall in line spreading the lies and hate, never realizing that they were helping the enemy agenda, never getting paid for their work.

This has occurred before, especially within Communist movements. There are a few paid subversives and many unpaid and ignorant adherents that spread the ideas until they become mainstream and no longer recognizable as dangerous. This is why joining any mass movement, be it religious or political is highly dangerous, perhaps nearly suicidal.

What I am trying to get at is that hypothetically speaking, smoking bans may actually be propaganda campaigns planted by foreign states to undermine the strength and stability of Europe's and America's economies as well as unity of their peoples.

No smoking ban has ever benefited a city, state, or country. Billions of dollars in revenue and taxes have been lost, unemployment increased, guilt increased, and hatred of fellow citizens increased.

A tobacco or alcohol ban keeps the populace busy blaming each other, wasting millions of dollars in enforcement, and divides them against each other. A tobacco or alcohol ban causes large segments of society from gathering together, removes them from benefiting society with money, ideas, or courage. The enemy wants us afraid of each other, separated, hidden, and guilt-ridden.

If smoking tobacco is healthy for Russia, then why nowhere else?

Do Europe, the United States and Canada really believe that undermining their own morale and economies with tobacco and alcohol prohibitions is healthy or wise? Do we really believe that forcing at least 25% of the population into hiding is good for the economy and for health? Do we really believe that forcing 25% of the population onto toxic and foreign coal tar-derived gums, candies, and patches is good for society? Do we really believe the delusion that prescribing varenicline to war veterans with shell shock, making them into homicidal maniacs at home is better for health and family than using tobacco products?

We know that most Nicotine Replacement "Therapy" is produced in foreign countries. We know that states, such as Ohio are spending 3 million dollars to collect 1 million in fines. We know that the states are pushing million dollar add campaigns to force people onto toxic NRT products and drugs. We know that children are being recruited in schools to spread the campaign of hate and fear. We know that tobacco farmers are being reduced to poverty, and millions have lost their jobs due to the trickle-down affect of tobacco bans.

What we know is that to "save" lives and money lost to tobacco use, our states are spending even more on enforcement and dangerous NRT promotions. How many of our state and federal representatives are agents of foreign governments? Who is paying them? Where is the money coming from? It makes no sense to undermine E.U. or American stability unless one is working specifically to do so with the purposeful intention of destroying us. I.G. Farbenindustries worked to subvert American strength throughout the 1920s and 30s in preparation for war.

It will be shown in future years that the tobacco bans along with the pushing of dangerous NRT products was a deliberate attack upon America and Europe. It will be shown that these bans were enacted to waste our money, to stop the flow of money, and to divide the people. All tobacco and alcohol restrictions benefit the enemy, whoever they may be. All tobacco and other bans are deliberate distractions and propaganda campaigns.

There is only one way to protect one's self from being duped by any kind of propaganda campaign, be it foreign, religious, or political -- Grace.

Because one can never know what the truth is at any one time, because one can never have all the information or knowledge, there is only one way to prevent one's self from being used against their own country and friends. Grace.

When we stand back and look objectively at things we can see a larger picture and see that those who incite us to hate others or fear them are the true enemies. It is un American to live in fear of food, tobacco, alcohol and other common parts of life. If a society is paralyzed by fear of the common, noncriminal, the ordinary parts of life how will it ever stand against real enemies and evils?

If a cigarette makes a "strong" Christian quake, if a chubby child is repulsive to the First Lady, if a stumbling drunk has the power to endanger a town's safety then we must be the most spineless and softest people that has ever walked the face of the earth. I'm embarrassed.

I'll be visiting Russia before I visit California. If Russia's not afraid of me, then I'll be boosting their economy and sunbathing in Red Square on a beach of snow and slathered in a heavy coat and hat as I watch the waves of tanks roll past on their way out towards the sea of Western arrogance and atrophied muscle. C'mon America, spit out the coal tar candy. Man up and light up before it's too late.

Rosh Hashanah, A Great Time To Be A Graceful Smoker

The Jewish Holy day of Rosh Hashanah has passed this week, and although, I am only Jewish by blood and not practice (haven't been for centuries), I do like to keep informed on these things.

Rosh Hashanah is announced by the blowing of the shofar, a wonderful ram's horn trumpet which announces the beginning of the New Year, which begins upon the seventh month of the Hebrew calendar, Tishrei. Last year, even though I live many miles away from the synagogue, I could hear the shofar.

Rosh Hashanah is the beginning of a period of time in which God goes through His accounts and sets the records in order for the coming year. At this time, He takes on the role of Judge and House Keeper. He has three books up there, the most famous being the Book of Life. According to tradition, the days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are a time of reprieve in which one still has some leniency and can have their case expunged from the death roles and moved onto the roles in the Book of Life.

It's difficult to comprehend, but only the name and the good works of each individual are listed in the Book of Life. Before God even opens it up He dons his Heavenly Hazmat suit and collects all of the sins into a filthy volume which He refuses to open and is barely able to touch. This he tosses out before He opens the Book of Life. But being written in the Book of Life is not enough. Even without one imperfect or evil record listed under one's name it does not guarantee reprieve or that one's soul is saved from damnation.

Perfect isn't good enough for God. This means that no matter how much money one gives to charity, no matter how many old widows one helps across the street, how many awards for saving drowning children, or how many jungle people one has converted and brought Bibles to they still aren't safe from the fire and brimstone.

Why bother being good if this is the case? Personally, I believe it evens the playing field in a very graceful way. This means that a person that has lived in a vegetative state for the last 20 years and has not been able to save the world with their good-deed-doing has as much chance at eternal life as a genetics researcher that has spent their life trying to isolate and eradicate certain dangerous and unrighteous populations that carry restriction markers for tobacco and coffee use (usually, Abrahamic populations). This means that the guy smoking around the corner at your local Baptist church has as much or more of a chance of getting a good write up as the pastor preaching inside.

After getting rid of all the sins, the next step is getting rid of all the good records too. In the end, all that's left is names. One's name is all they'll need to get into those Pearly Gates.

During the season of Rosh Hashanah, each page in the Book of Life is opened and sprinkled with blood. When the blood lands upon the page it completely blots out every good deed and many of the names. Some names are brightened up and show clearer, but not one other piece of information shines through the blood. Then, the cleaned names are sealed with a beautiful blue star.

But what is it that causes some names to be blotted out while others are made to shine more brilliantly and be sealed?

It's called Grace and it can't be obtained by being perfect. Usually, one must be a sinner or a stumbling fool to receive Grace. You can stand by a stream and cast symbolic stones of sin into the current, or recite Torah, or build neighborhoods of white stucco to represent purity, or prostrate yourself five times a day towards the east and fast every day for a month; or do as Americans do and chew coal tar/ Nicotine Replacement gums and candy, volunteer, diet, donate, recycle, and look pretty -- but it's all Hevel, nothing without Grace.

It doesn't matter who controls the Temple Mount or Mecca if there is no Love or Grace. These are only names and geographic locations of historic significance. Grace is larger than them and goes where it will -- usually as far away as possible from the arrogant and self-righteous ones in control of these locations, and as close as possible to those who cannot afford the price of admittance charged to be a member of most religions. If one can't afford their synagogue fees, or zakat, or tithes; chances are that this is a good time of year for them and their name if they'll accept Grace rather than guilt.

If one has a difficult time accepting Grace, then it's a great time to take up smoking cigarettes or the pipe. Back in the old days it was a well known fact that smoke created a protective barrier between God and the sinner, shielding them from view and allowing them to enter into the Holy of Holies. And the ashes represent sin turned to nothing. And some may recall that God liked to travel around in a cloud of smoke and envelope entire mountain peaks in it, or that it exudes from His nostrils on occasion, or that the smell of it is pleasant in Heaven as it represents the prayers of the saints. That old time smoke represented Grace and the covering it provides.

So, instead of casting sins away, this season, perhaps, it would be nice to emulate God by extending Grace to sinners and idiots. There are all kinds of ways to extend Grace to others. One way would be to let someone know their fly is unzipped, or to drive defensively, or smile kindly at that miserable smoker that looks guilty as they sneak a puff outside (smokers, stop looking so guilty and nervous in public! SMILE when you're smoking, and look pleasant and relaxed, for you are an emissary for the rest of the grace-puffers), be less serious around your children, be patient when waiting upon others, and never expect to be noticed or thanked.


Note: Grace doesn't mean being a spineless pushover. It means overlooking, not ignoring. It means looking forward and up, not backwards and down.

Kid, Inc: Are We Raising Our Nation's Children Like Animals?

It's that time of year -- autumn. The birds have quit twittering and the children have stopped playing. The last couple of years I have noticed a strange thing which I never used to notice. Perhaps, my hearing is more astute, but this sound of absolute silence in the air the week that the kids are herded back into their holding pens and fattened up for slaughter after a few years of corporate corn and antibiotics is nearly like a death.

One doesn't notice the sounds of the children ringing in the air up and down the streets while the robins are training up their young ones until it's gone. I swear I could hear a pin drop from down the street this week. I don't see these children or know them, but somehow, their activity and sound fills the air.

And I wonder, how is it that the very air, nature itself seems to know the children are gone?

A few months ago, when watching Robert Kenner's documentary Food, Inc (http://www.foodincmovie.com/ ) I was struck by the similarities between the way we raise much of our food and the way we raise our children. If it's not humane or healthy to raise chickens in a windowless and crowded shed, then how is it acceptable to treat humans with souls this way?

Food, Inc shows one chicken grower that is broken in spirit because she has been forced out of tobacco farming due to our nation's biases and fears which are reminiscent of those that incited tobacco and alcohol prohibitions earlier in the last century. She now spends her days in the sheds clearing out the bodies of the chickens that die every day. Her sheds had windows in them at the time of filming, but the company she was contracted with was fighting her on this, wanting her to get rid of them. Without sunlight animals die -- so do children.

Where I live we have some formerly beautiful Art Deco schools built in the 1920s and 30s. Even back then, people were concerned about energy use and thus, these schools were specifically designed to absorb as much solar heat as possible and to allow the class rooms to be well-lit because, according to the research of the architects and school system, children learned better with more sunlight.

Not only did the architect want the children to absorb light while in their classrooms, but aesthetic beauty and grandness. The classrooms were designed with very high and beautiful ceilings and fine materials. Back in the old days we knew that Creativity Class is everywhere and in everything, and that inspiration is embedded even in the floors we walk upon and the windows we look out of.

But we have lowered the ceilings, placing false panels in. We have blocked up the grand and beautiful windows, leaving only a few small sections open. Our idea of energy use is one of not using any, rather than of absorbing and using more in wise ways. And as we have hidden the high ceilings that invite children's minds to soar, as we have blocked out the light coming in and the ability to see out, so we have also done to our children -- blocking the light of inspiration from getting in or the ability to see out.

Our children are like those chickens, no longer allowed to run loose in the sun. Those chickens die in the dark, are over crowded and diseased. Those chickens can't stand up on their own legs. They peck at each other and kill each other because they have nothing else to do. And those that raise them have no pride or dignity in what they do because they are told they must do this or loose their contract. How many teachers are in similar situations?

And then, there is a farmer interviewed in Food, Inc, that raises his animals in a more traditional and humane way. He has joy in his eyes even though he works hard and is not rich. His cows and pigs love him when he comes around and he loves them even though he will one day kill them. But think of it, wouldn't you rather the farmer loves his animal and the animal loves him, for when the day of slaughter comes, that farmer is going to make sure this animal is slaughtered as humanely and cleanly as possible, for he respects it and the life it provides for him.

Are we feeding our children the right "food" in school, or only a false and indigestible diet? Are we making them fat and weak, unable to stand with dignity and joy, by penning them in dark sheds and muddy pens? Are we injecting our children with pharmaceutical drugs and treatments because we've overcrowded them, rather than letting them loose on the range?

We don't want our food genetically engineered by giant foreign corporations, nor do we want our livestock and poultry treated inhumanely. So, why is it acceptable to treat our children this way? It's not.

[Note: It is stated in Food, Inc, several times that if Big Tobacco can be beat so can Big GMO companies. Obviously, there is an anti-tobacco bias and some ignorance in the documentary. Those same giant companies that have pushed genetically modified corn and soybeans upon us are the exact same companies that have fought to ban tobacco production and use. Were it not for our ignorance of how exactly important tobacco farmers and tobacco production are to the United States of America's dignity, health, and economic prosperity we would not be spiting the very hand that feeds us in favor of foreign nicotine replacement "therapy" and grains with terminator technology. Every single ban on tobacco adds money and dictatorial control of our country to a giant foreign interest or U.S. corporation with strong links to foreign interests. These foreign corporations have eaten up U.S. corporations and states, and think of U.S. citizens as swine, not as humans.

Most tobacco farmers are very conscious of the land and possess hundreds of years of farming knowledge, which has been erased by the hatred of their main money crop. As illustrated in Food, Inc, most tobacco farmers have been reduced to extreme debt and poverty and now raise animals in a way that turns their stomachs and is anti-American and immoral. Because we have fallen for the fear of propaganda we have gotten rid of one of America's most important crops and allowed foreign corporations to dictate to us and our politicians what we can and can't eat.

Not everyone has to smoke, but everyone has to eat, and banning tobacco is actually affecting the health of our children who are forced to eat the unhealthy crops and unhealthy animals that now replace tobacco. Bring back tobacco farming and we will weaken these giant foreign corporations and their power over our nation's leaders and food supply. Banning tobacco will actually increase cancers and autoimmune disorders in the coming years because the replacement crops are usually genetically engineered (with your tax dollars at the local university for a foreign pharmaceutical or agricultural corporation) with proteins foreign to the human body that cause inflammation of soft tissue (such as lung tissue) over time.]

Arizona's New Law: A Strike Against Slavery and Corporatism?

Several years ago my boss returned from a business trip in sunny California, most of which he spent golfing with a business owner there. The California businessman had a thriving business and didn't have to work much. My boss was impressed by his wealth and by the fact that the man could hire two employees for the wages he had to pay one employee in my state.

I remember standing there with my fellow employee who had run the business while the boss was away, listening as the boss was saying how easy it is in California to hire Asians and Mexicans to work for next to nothing. All of this was to insinuate that we were damn lucky to be getting such good wages. I was irked, but at the same time I understood the boss, a generally great guy.

The boss was barely making it sometimes. He wasn't rich. His house was small and plain, set in one of those new subdivisions where every house is cheaply made and doesn't have a yard. His cars were old, really old. Finally, his wife's little econo car from the 1980s died and he went out to get her a new one, ending up getting himself one too.

And so, it must have hurt a bit and made my boss jealous to see how easily one can hire employees in California, make them work so hard and pay them nothing, and make enough money to golf in the sun all day.

I wonder if this is how those in the 1850s felt when they saw plantation owners living the life while their slaves worked diligently, making the money? Even if one didn't believe in enslaving a fellow man, it must have made them jealous when they saw how small and simple their own life was, how small, and how expensive labor and time was.

We are living in interesting times, a combination of so many other times. The states and politicians are arguing and boycotting in regard to the Mexican worker issue. This doesn't seem entirely dissimilar to the arguments between slave states and free states that began broiling in the 1850s, eventually ending in the Civil War, fought to bring the Confederacy back into the Union.

There is a bit of a difference from the 1850s and 1860s in that the Mexican workers don't seem as afraid or sedate as the slaves of the Confederacy. They don't quite seem to comprehend that they are being used as the frontal assault to fight a battle for their "masters," who send them out to protest and ask for rights, rile them up and send them in to take the blows. The Mexican Marxist movement has no idea that they are slaves. They really believe they are free. If they are so free why don't they stop the drug cartels that make them look so bad, why don't they go home to Mexico?

If the Mexicans are free enough to gather in protest why are they not free enough to gather in protest against the inhumane and dangerous working conditions their fellows often work under? Who exactly are these protesters? Are they who they say they are or do they get paid to protest? I ask this, because, historically in the United States of America slave revolts are rare and are failures. This causes me to question whether these groups of angry Mexicans are Mexican or enslaved at all, or only paid provocateurs.

In the United States of America minority groups don't simply rise up and change culture with anger. It takes time, and is done in a very intelligent, educated, and legal manner. It takes time because the minority group has to break ground, rise above the odds and show that it is part of the culture, not separate, not less entitled, not more entitled. Most importantly, even though each of us is individual and unique, we each are part of this country called America and assimilated to it. All civil rights movements have tried to prove this: that we are all part of the same culture, that we are not separate, not different.

Racism is founded upon the belief that another group of people is different, separate, not assimilated. And here, in our time, we have lost sight of this and of the older civil rights movements. Now, the many groups crying for equal rights in America claim that it is equal rights to not assimilate, not be part of the greater culture, and continue being separate--yet equal. Now, people wear religious costume as badge of pride that tells everyone they are not part of the community, nor do they want to be. And Mexican protesters spout words such as "Latina" and speak in another language to show how separate they are.

Modern civil rights movements actually want "Separate But Equal" laws reinstated. This is an insult to those that worked so hard, who lost their lives to achieve equality and acceptance everywhere based upon individual character and merit, rather than on appearance and religion.

And so I question the honesty of the modern Mexican worker movement. There really are enslaved immigrants in this country. There really are abuses, but I doubt these people have any voice and that they have much to do with any of the current anger in the streets. I doubt the street marchers care too much about the down trodden who have no energy or freedom to march anywhere.

It's as if someone is trying to wind the American watch backwards, back to the beginning before Martin Luther King, Jr, before the Civil War, before the American Revolution. It's as if the fabric, the great patterned and stared and striped fabric of America is being unraveled.

People actually want to be defined as separate, as foreign, as slaves. We are banning certain groups, separating them out as less humans; and then demanding that other groups be given the right to be citizens, yet kept separate. Before the American Revolution British colonists brought slaves into America to work the land because they were easier to deal with than indentured servants who had to be housed and fed, then released, not to mention hard to keep from running away. A black slave was marked as different by skin color, making it hard for them to run away and assimilate into the general population.

In the years leading up to the Civil War when new territory was being settled, the slave question began tearing up the nation because one settler would move in with his family and work the land on his own, while another would come in with his slaves and set up a giant operation and get rich without putting as much into the local economy. The slave owner could make a profit hiring his slave out for wages to another too. But the land owner who owned no slaves had to pay someone to work his land. The settler that owned no slaves and needed extra money or work couldn't find work when it was taken by a slave. It wasn't fair to the settler who owned no slaves. It felt as if he was being stolen from and paying more for everything.

If one has grown up in an area where there is no cheap labor, where there are no slaves, it is very difficult to change that sick and dishonest feeling in one's stomach and buy a slave or to hire someone to work for less-than honest wages. It's not a good feeling knowing that your employee is starving because you don't pay them enough to get by. And so, the northerners moving into the new territories of America couldn't accept slavery because it was not honest and didn't make one proud of themselves as a provider.

Finally, the Civil War broke out because the spineless politicians in Washington had compromised over and over again, not wanting to say one way or the other that slavery was right or wrong. Too afraid to step on Southern toes they had drawn a geographic line, making slavery legal below, and illegal above. They had compromised with the Southern landowners, criminalizing anyone in a free state from aiding runaway slaves as they traveled to Canada. A family caught harboring a slave could lose everything they owned. This is why it was called The Underground Railroad, because it had to go underground to protect the property of the Operators. This law, criminalizing what had formerly been a fairly common and open act, caused an uproar amongst the Free States and lead to the writing and popularity of Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin. When a person's property and livelihood are threatened it activates people.

There were many factors that lead the Southern states to secede from the Union. One was slavery, but there were other issues too. In a way, it was a war for monetary power. The North was where the money, population, banks, and manufacturing were located. The South was agricultural and old fashioned. The South felt that the Northern money was monopolizing things a bit and wanted out.

Abraham Lincoln eventually declared emancipation for the slaves, although it was more an act of weakening the power base of the Southern plantation owner than anything. The slaves were "free," but had no rights. And instead of being valuable property to an owner, they were now no one's property, and free to be abused by any and all with no loss to anyone other than to loved ones. The competition with Northern powers was broken, and a group of people found themselves indebted sharecroppers, manual labor, factory workers, and strikebreakers. The newly freed slaves were perhaps, more enslaved than before. It took another hundred years for them to be accepted as part of American culture, not separate.

Now, there is a lot of talk about "freeing" the Mexican immigrants and about amnesty, whatever that is. This is talk. President Obama will neither control the border, nor will he give full citizenship to the Mexicans. The reason for this is that his administration is funded and friended by large corporations and others who cannot afford to lose their cheap labor, either to citizenship or deportation. These illegal immigrants must be left in limbo, in a place where they have no rights, but don't leave the country. It's also important to keep the Mexicans in limbo because they make a great bone of contention in this country and keep us riled up against each other.

There are cities such as Los Angeles, California that have boycotted Arizona. And the Catholic priests are riled up, saying this is racism and not different than Nazi Germany. I think, it is actually more similar, at least right now, to the time between the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement. There is money, not love of mankind, behind much of this rhetoric. What exactly has Arizona done? They have threatened a monetary power base. Arizona's stricter immigration policy may not be perfect, and may lead to abuses, but it may have been a kick in the pants to quite a few greedy and dishonest power interests.

People don't get angry and stirred up until their money and property are threatened. The Catholic church has a large Mexican attendance. If Mexicans leave the state, or the country, so too does the money in the offering plate. Now, why is California threatened by tough immigration laws? And why are they willing to risk money to boycott Arizona? Why is Utah telling Mexicans to stay within it borders where they're "safe" as non citizens? Because these states are "slave" states and Arizona has essentially announced that it's not.

If a Northern state had announced more stringent enforcement against illegal workers this would not be as big an issue. But Arizona is a border state, a corridor for illegal non-citizen workers, as well as an entry for illegal monopoly drug mafias who are the modern slave drivers that push the bodies. The pre-Civil War slave drivers were the lowest of the low, cruel and heartless criminals, and black themselves, which made them more despicable to whites and blacks. The modern slave drivers are generally Hispanic, but the cruelest of the cruel, loving only to destroy the lives of their own people. The slave owners hated their slave drivers, but depended upon them and the fear they instilled in the slaves.

If one has ever traveled in Utah and California they will see that these states rely heavily upon non-citizen workers. These people allow business, state, and corporations to reap huge amounts of money and to keep things looking pretty as a southern plantation. While the giant corporate and government monopolies get rich by using these bodies, the citizens pay taxes into this false economy and get poorer.

California is like one of those American territories where one person earns and sweats for everything they have, while the guy next door has a perfect and easy life because he has 50 slaves out doing the work for nothing. Contrary, to what people say, California government makes a "profit" off of non-citizens. Each non-citizen equals a new Social service worker, new teacher, new bureaucracy that needs more money. The government keeps itself busy with all these bodies, never really doing anything to help them, and pockets the taxes taken from the citizens. It's a transfer of wealth, from the citizens to the State.

California needs non-citizens to work the fields, service industry, and whatever else. The State needs them for employment. If every Mexican was made a citizen and properly educated in English, the language that the laws and Constitution are written in, California and its corporations would soon be in trouble. They already are. The other solution is to send the non-citizens home and close the border. Mexicans are big business in California and Utah.

Why do you think California and other states don't teach Mexican students in English? It's not because they care about the students. It is actually to prevent them from becoming assimilated to American culture and from being able to learn their rights as American citizens. It's extremely important to read and write in the language of one's country. Before the Civil War there were laws on the books preventing slaves from reading, and especially from learning to write. This kept the slaves separate and unable to realize their power as humans. In America of the early 1900s there were a great deal of children born to foreign immigrants that never spoke English until their first year of school, and somehow, they caught on quickly with barely a problem.

It is wrong to prevent people from speaking their native language, but it is also wrong to keep them ignorant of the common language of the land, which is the language of laws and business and rights and literature. All people need to know how to get along with and understand the culture they live in or be outcasts and despised. It would be disrespectful to move to Japan or Russia and never learn the language or the social rules of the culture. Language is power.

Arizona has provoked a kind of war, a first shot. And the opposition is sending out the troops--the very people they enslave, because those with the power are too good to dirty or bloody themselves. And so, they make movies like "Machete" to invoke the slave troops into violence against the "enemy." And they pay a few loud voices to rally the troops, telling them to pick up their hoes, shovels, toilet brushes, and hamburger flippers and revolt.

There are only two solutions, neither perfect. Give the Mexican workers full citizenship, or prohibit them from working in the country. Arizona could not give them citizenship, and so made it a law that they cannot work without proper proof of permission. I'm not sure this is a solution either. Those in the slave states and in the federal government may make it easier to get papers. And how will this be enforced? Perhaps, it is the message that matters more than the actual enforcement.

What Arizona has done is similar to what Abraham Lincoln did when he freed the slaves. He pulled the rug out from underneath the power structure of the Southern land owners. Arizona has threatened the power structure of the neighboring states and business. Soon, we will see more states choosing sides in the same manner as Southern secession. Instead of seceding to be a slave state, the states will "secede" to be Free States. And like the slaves during and after the Civil War, the average Mexican will be caught in the middle. Do they go back to their slave master in Mexico, which has essentially hired them out to the U.S.?

I myself, am inclined to make most Mexican workers full citizens and encourage assimilation into the culture. If their country would rather hire them out, and gain corporate payoffs, then I'd rather cut Mexico off from its source of income. If I could prohibit money from going back into Mexico I would. And if I could cut off Mexican trucking, drivers, dirty diesel, and untrained drivers I'd do that too. But there is no easy solution, and it will take more than Arizona's law to solve this. I hope we don't have to go through another Civil War.

At any rate, this is contentious, and I hope that Americans can see past the mobs and that this is like North versus South, American money versus giant Corporate and State money. Perhaps, America could have avoided the Civil War by allowing escaped slaves to be full citizens in Free States, until the South was completely cleaned out of cheap/free labor. Compromising, being neither hot nor cold, leads to war and death of innocent people.

Carry A. Nation: Addicted To Spirits

"Ignorance is not innocence, but it is the promoter of crime" (Carry A. Nation, The Use and Need of the Life of Carry A. Nation).

And darling Carry, "your loving home defender," would know all about the way ignorance promotes crime.

Carry A. Nation was as drunk as they come, a violent whiskey drinker at heart. She was so obsessed with spirits, and with "dives" that she made a career and reputation out of finding every hole-in-the-wall bar, then tearing up the town, leaving the business owners to clean up and pay for her barroom brawls, and intoxications. She was as intemperate as they came and damn proud of it. She'd think about going to town for days before setting out on one of her binges which she called "hatchetations."

Sometimes, the urge would begin as a soft voice telling her to "Go to Kiowa," rip it up girl! And she'd quietly begin collecting bits of brick and stone, wrapping them in paper and placing them in a box. These were her "smashers." Without them she couldn't have a proper good time. Then, when she could stand it no longer, she'd hitch up the wagon and head to town and get higher than a kite. As time went on, she found that the hatchet worked as good, or better than the "smashers." But the best tools of all were the Bible, the female body, hymns, and sobbing.

"I have never had so light a heart or felt so well satisfied as since I smashed those murder mills," Carry declares in chapter 7 of her autobiography, The Use and Need of the Life of Carry A. Nation.

The first time she painted the town red was June 7, 1900 at Dobson's and two other "dives" in Kiowa, Kansas. It was wonderful. She broke as many windows, and mirrors as she found glaring at her. When she was finished there was beer running in the streets. After that, she was addicted and no man was going to stop her. If there was any alcohol to be had, she was entitled to every last drop, and as God was her witness, she'd prevent those greedy men from drinking it all.

Carry admitted she was a bit of a nuisance, leaving steaming piles of refuse in the wake of her hatchetations, saying she was "a bulldog running around about the feet of Jesus, barking at what he doesn't like," but that didn't stop her. As far as she could tell, from her readings, Jesus doesn't mind wiping feet, and even enjoys this task. She was doing Him a favor, giving Him something to do.

"I would rather have my son sold to a slave-driver than to be a victim of a saloon. I could, in the first case, hope to see him in heaven; but no drunkard can inherit eternal life" (Nation, ch.1). That's why Jesus made wine at the wedding and served it up at Passover--to prevent them from eternal life, since they wouldn't submit to slavery on earth.

Carry A. Nation, had a daughter (not a son) that she dearly loved. Of Charlien she writes endearingly:

"My precious child seemed to have taken a perfect dislike to Christianity. This was a great grief to me, and I prayed to God to save her soul at any cost; I often prayed for bodily affliction on her, if that was what would make her love and serve God. Anything for her eternal salvation.

"Her [Charlien] right cheek was very much swollen, and on examination we found there was an eating sore inside her cheek. This kept up in spite of all remedies, and at last the whole of her right cheek fell out, leaving the teeth bare. My friends and boarders were very angry at the physician, saying she was salivated. From the first something told me this is an answer to prayer" (Nation, ch. 4).

Evidently, Charlien's cheek falling off when she was 12, leaving her deformed and with a jaw locked shut was a wonderful sign of God's mercies upon the "infidel" little creature. Really, Charlien's problem was her father, Charles Gloyd, who passed down a curse: "Oh, the curse that comes through heredity, and this liquor evil, a disease that entails more depravity on children unborn, than all else, unless it be tobacco" (Nation, ch. 4).

Somehow, and modern geneticists will agree because science has advanced so much since the late 1800's, Charlien's suffering and dislike of Christianity was due to her deceased father's liquor drinking, which contaminated her DNA. If only he had lived long enough to experience real intemperance with Carry. But alas, he left that to another, David A. Nation.

Carry A. Nation had a real soft spot in her heart for black citizens, a "kindly feeling":

"The race question is serious one. The kindly feeling between black and white is giving place to bitterness with the rising generations. One reason of this seems to be jealousy of the whites for fear the negroes will presume to be socially equal with them. The negro race should avoid this, should not desire it, it would be of no real value to them. They are a distinct race with characteristics which they need not wish to exchange. When a negro tries to imitate white folks, he is a mongrel. I will say to my colored brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus; Never depart from your race lines and bearings, keep true to your nature, your simplicity, and happy disposition--and above all come back to the 'Oldtime' religion, you will never strand on that rock" (Nation, ch 2).

That's right. Whenever anyone tries to "imitate" the freedoms that others have, when one forgets their place and forgets to fake a "happy disposition" to their superiors, rises above "simplicity" and irks the jealousy of another they are "a mongrel," not a bulldog.

Carry A. Nation right into hell and intemperance on a level never seen before. Thanks to women like her, unafraid to tear up the town, America got the Mafia and the Saint Valentine's Day Massacre. Now, that's what I call real intemperance.

Americans Prefer the Taste of Corporatism (Fascism) to Communism

"Generally, fascism has come to mean a military dictatorship built on racist and powerfully nationalistic foundations, generally with the broad support of the business class (distinguishing it from the collectivism of Communism.)" (Kenneth C. Davis, "Boom to Bust to Big Boom," Don't Know Much About History:Everything You Need to Know about American History but Never Learned).

"It was rather easy, especially in the case of Germany and Italy, for demagogues to point to the smoldering ruins of their countries and the economic disaster of the worldwide depression and blame their woes on foreigners" (Kenneth C. Davis, Don't Know Much About History).

I see a very interesting repeat of history occurring in the United States of America, which has been steadily growing in size and becoming clearer in shape. The U.S. is steadily moving towards fascism, but the parties doing the moving don't see it that way, and most often believe they are fighting against fascism.

America's ruling classes have nearly always divided themselves into two factions: the liberal-progressive Marxist/Communist; and the conservative-right Socialist/Fascist. The rest of us, down on the ground are neither one or the other, but are easily and often gulled into leaning one way or the other and labelling ourselves as such and arguing all of the points of what we've been taught to say honestly and passionately, believing we are right and everyone else is wrong.

It cannot be helped that, generally, we are ignorant and unaware pawns. We're all guilty and have no idea of having ever committed a crime because we're told that we are on the correct side of things and that we are righteous and care for others. And we do, but those who lead us don't really give a damn about anyone other than themselves and their position of power. Because we are ignorant, and most of all, because we do care about others; these two qualities are used to guide us to think, say, and do things we would never have thought of left to our own devices. We only want to be free.

America has gone right of right. We have gone far right and are in the land of fascism. A liberal, Marxist movement only goes so far in the United States. It burns bras, protests on colleges campuses, has free love, and works in communes and fights for equal rights, then fizzles out for lack of substance. And one day, the equal rights Communist wakes up and looks in the mirror and sees they are old, bitter, and tired of free love. In fact, it's rather annoying that the free love turns into a free for all with all kinds of people wanting a piece of your love. The kids, the ex, the state, the gas pump, the church offering plate and everyone else wants a piece and it feels as if one is being taken advantage of.

Someone, something must be blamed for all of this giving away of one's self, which increasingly feels like taking, grabbing, and stealing.

And this is when the tough love fascist voice steps in and tells the people that the cure is found in limiting everything. All of that free love and pleasure must be replaced with good solid child-bearing wives, good religion, lots of kids, cleanliness, order, discipline, genetic purity, and ridding the government of poorly run programs that waste money on trying to help those that are burdens upon society.

In essence, fascism is a change from spineless political correctness to the opposite: harsh cruelty. It becomes a harsh, Spartan-like world, where only the fittest are deemed worthy of life, where babies are laid out in the elements after birth, where a mother's love is weakness, and men worship men. Fascism loves to use hard-core, fundamentalist religions. It doesn't care what the religion is: Islam, Christian, Jew, Mormon, etc, etc. Fascism hates all religions, and will bend them and twist them to serve its purposes. It has no regard for them other than as tools twisted into righteous skewers for disseminating austerity and hate.

Truthfully, neither Fascism or Marxism love anyone, and neither is able to operate responsibly with our money or time. They each fail on different levels. The Marxists go overboard with their political correctness and over complications, while the Fascists go overboard on their oversimplification and exterminations. Both are sure they're right. Both are wrong and harmful to the happiness and dignity of a people. They travel down different paths which always end up intersecting at the same place: Death and destruction.

Somehow, people forget that an earthly utopia is not a place where everyone thinks, looks and acts alike, or perfectly, or correctly. Ah, if only everyone would get along with us. What's wrong with everyone else? Why are they so dumb and blind to the "truth"? Why are they making my life so hard? Why are they so irresponsible, and why don't they work as hard as me? Why must I foot the bill for them?

It is easy to get angry at another group when one is unable to accrue any kind of wealth or happiness due to a government demanding more and more of an individual. This leads to jealousy when it is perceived or pointed out that another individual or group seems to never work while they receive welfare or, conversely, are very wealthy. If we were not so burdened by our governments we could not be made to hate others as easily. We may even say, "Ah, who cares if they're getting handouts. I've got plenty to go around."

And so, the United States is having a dramatic pendulum swing due to the years of allowing ourselves to be taken advantage of. We are swinging right. So far right that if events don't alter the movement we may knock ourselves out, sending the works out of the casing.

The thing about Fascism in America is that it has more power and popularity as a force than Communism. America considers itself a Christian country, although it is often decried from the pulpits that it is godless and needs saving. America is not godless. We have many gods, all claimed by their adherents as the ONE, the right one. If anyone seriously studied their Bible, rather than listening to others, they would find that the One God is nothing like what they've been told and doesn't very often go to church. If we knew this God, we wouldn't be so easily moved by Fascist leaders or Communist leaders, nor be so arrogant as to believe we can make the earth a utopia, free from evil.

But we don't often know this God, and so believe in angry and self-righteous movements against other angry and self-righteous movements, or against the defenseless. And this makes those at the top of the power class laugh in delight as they pull our strings and make us hop across the stage where we collide in violence against another puppet. Rather than looking up and getting angry at the person holding the strings, we focus on the other puppet and want to destroy or ban them for hitting us, when it is not their fault that they are being manipulated against us.

Another interesting sign that America is moving far right, mirroring Germany of the 1930's and 1940's is our fear of foreigners, our fear that they are invading our lands and taking our livelihoods, and will cover the land with their children, "tainting" our culture. America, along with most of the Western industrialized world, is at a zero or less population growth. We simply aren't reproducing, and many populations are predicted to decline dramatically in the next hundred years. This is also what was occurring in Germany when the Nazi Party took power. Somehow, subconsciously, we are aware of this and feel threatened by those of different races, cultures, and socioeconomic status who are having children.

The Nazi Party encouraged good, "pure" men and women to have more children and was obsessed with the health of mothers, and that they not contaminate their unborn children's lives (Utah, earlier this year tried to make it murder if a woman miscarries and is a tobacco user). There is most definitely an undercurrent in America that is pushing for women to live as nothing more than breeders, and that castigates them if they don't spend every moment serving this higher purpose. This idea of the woman, born brainless and only to serve the man and the breeding program is everywhere in pop culture.

The vampirism of Stephenie Meyer's Twilight books and movies is born of an odd spiritualist fundamentalism usually seen in fringe cults. These books are touted as a return to good morals and purity. The idea behind them is that a woman is nothing until she is impregnated by a good vampire male, thus gaining eternal life, apotheosis through male worship. When vampires and morality are mixed and sold as good for young women, a culture is sick, no matter how polite the vampire is. When a culture adopts fundamental fringe cult beliefs, making them mainstream, they have become fascist.

There is a growing obsession with reality T.V. programing that features mega families with perpetually pregnant, smiling, over-achieving mothers and fathers. Notice, these are all very wealthy and often "perfect" Americans. But if a less wealthy person, a less perfect person has too many children it is a grave sin against the country and should be outlawed. Sure, it may be irresponsible for some to have more children than they can care for, but our media attacks them, as inferior genetic stock, while fawning over the perfect and good-looking wealthy that help replenish good American stock.

Another sign that we are going far right is our obsession with food and health rules, and penalizing as a crime all who don't live like religious fanatics under sharia law. Again, Utah, comes up, here with its mandatory electronic scanning of I.D.s at bars and clubs. It's as if they're collecting a list of who and where the sinners are. This also means, that a person that went out to a club can be accused of D.U.I. even before they get into their car. This means that a patron that only drank water is guilty by association.

We are nearly back at Prohibition where it was legal to drink alcohol, but not to procure it or have it anywhere on one's property. It is technically, illegal, in my state to even have one's car keys on their person if they have had a beer. It is even possible to get a D.U.I. while walking home or sleeping in one's car. It doesn't matter if one is a public nuisance or not, it only matters who is on duty and what kind of mood they're in when they cross a person's path. Where I live, every driver is actually considered guilty of being drunk the moment they get into their car. One must prove they are not. It's the law.

In my state, they want to put those who have harmed no one, but have been caught for multiple D.U.I into the state mental institution. Do you know what this means? It means an expensive, fascist pharma experimentation program that will only grow, requiring more money and more souls. A country has moved far right when it ships downtrodden alcoholics to the infamous state mental institution, in the middle of a desolate part of the state, away from friends, family, and anyone able to defend them from strange crimes. I don't understand alcoholism, but I also don't believe these people are expendable, or that they should be sent to the insane asylum. If they've committed a crime against the community, such as violence, murder, theft put them in prison; which is an excellent rehab program.

Thank goodness, most are ignorant of the laws. Even laying a pack of cigarettes on the bar or smelling strongly of tobacco smoke is enough to levy a large fine upon a bar around here. But most aren't aware of this and haven't snitched on offenders yet. Soon, it will be illegal to smoke outside. First, the Pharmaceutical industry gods are implementing outdoor bans at the Holy Shrine of Our Hospital, then the Pharma Seminary/University, then they will move into town. It's nice to see the women standing on the street, looking like hookers, because they can't smoke in the parking lot for fear of contaminating the holy asphalt and hygienic air.

America is moving far right. It's in the air. I've been sniffing it for a few years now, but the odor of it has grown stronger and quite foul. It was more difficult to smell it before the smoking bans and near Prohibition took place because the smoke covered up the smell and the alcohol made one too tipsy to notice or care.

Arizona's strict law that targets illegal immigrants has helped to expose the growing fears and ignorance of Americans and illegals. Whether the law is right or wrong, it is laying bare the battle between Communism and Fascism. Those that are not legal citizens of the U.S. are being controlled by the Communist power faction, while those that fear them are being controlled by the Fascist power faction. Both are wrong and so busy hating each other that they will cause death before they fix anything. Summer is nearly here. And historically, heat, cities, media, and racial tensions don't mix when that tried-and-true rumor of the woman being brutally raped spreads amongst the masses.

Are Mexicans really threatening American stability, or is it our version of the Taliban, the drug cartels that are the danger? Are Mexicans threatening us, or is it the dealers in human bondage that hold them prisoner in countless houses across the country? Are Mexicans a danger to our way of life, or is it the giant foreign-owned corporations that use them like disposable labor because Americans are still free enough to turn our noses up in disgust at such slavery?

Remember, the Nazis blamed the Jews for Germany's economic problems. We're doing the same to the Mexicans. It's claimed they don't pay taxes and send all their money back to Mexico. It seems nearly impossible not to pay taxes in America unless one has an expensive attorney or accountant. Everything we do in this country is taxed. And how do they send all their money back to Mexico? How do they send their money back when they don't make any? The average American doesn't have money left over after paying the bills to send anywhere. If a Mexican can figure out how to get past the American system, then U.S. citizens must be idiots, because we haven't figured out how to beat the system after all these years. Maybe, we need more Mexican accountants and legal professionals to help us.

If a mass of Mexicans can really topple the American economy, close hospitals, and slip past taxes and surveillance; then it means that a mass of Americans can topple the dishonest corporations funding our government into fascism, that we too can shut down hospitals and universities that become arms of Big Pharma, rather than places of healing and learning; that we too can cut down on over taxation, and surveillance. If the Mexicans have so much power, then we do too.

If Americans would take the same fear and hatred of Mexican illegals and turn it against the giant monopoly corporations that influence our governments, universities, scientists, and non-profits nearly every problem we have with illegal immigrants would be solved. And our problems with employment in general would automatically go away. And the MexAmerican Taliban drug cartels would disappear, because there is no profit in crime, drugs, or people when a culture is content, happy, and FREE. Drug abuse decreases of its own when the people are intoxicated on freedom and liberty. When a people are free they have fewer health and mental problems and have no desire to numb themselves, or to induce sensations because they have been numbed by a fascist culture. When people are free they work harder, they produce more, they employ more, pay more, and are free enough to forgive others.

If we'd let Lady Liberty loose to trample out the grapes of wrath and pour her cup of indignation upon the fascist corporations, most of whom descend from Nazi Germany's IG Farbenindustries or are joined by "marriage," we'd have more than enough room in our land and in our hearts for as many immigrants as we could seat at our Thanksgiving table.

Fascism is also called Corporatism. This is what happens when a government and a few giant corporations unite to dictate to a country. Communism is when everything is owned and operated by the government.

This time, rather than a lone Hitler preaching over the country, America has many voices of Hitler. We are being dictated to by very charismatic and seemingly religious and patriotic people on a daily basis. They spout Samuel Adams and Ben Franklin. They spout the Bible and other trusted sources. Lest we forget, a great deal of Nazi literature and preaching also espoused Christian ideals, and supported Christian morals, using the word "Christian" all the time. If something was "Christian," then it was a good thing and the reason for cleaning up the country. Communism is godless, Fascism appeals to every god fearing person it can. A Corporatist state has to appeal to religious rightness in order to sell itself and motivate the masses into buying its product of mass death in order to save itself. Fascism thinks "Christian," "Muslim," and "Jew" are brand names to slap onto a product. Fundamentalist religion loves the idea of sacrifice, sacrifice, sacrifice. Money must be sacrificed, freedom must be sacrificed, lives must be sacrificed. Everything must be sacrificed to redeem the country and save its soul.

American talk radio has taken the opportunity of the dissatisfaction and corruption of our political system to begin a daily seminar of fear and religion. Glenn Beck, in particular is a dangerous orator. He cries, he talks religion, he has revivals, he's had revelations and messages from God. He pretends he speaks to the American Christian ideal. He talks revolution, yet says he doesn't. He authors poorly written books and paints. All faux intellectuals delve into art. This fact has fascinated me for years. Dictator types are jealous of artists and writers. They can't understand them and wish they could be them. They write horrible books and paint. It's a time-worn pattern.

Glenn Beck is what could be called "White Propaganda." This is when a person seems to be on the same side as the target audience and says what they think, or what they think they think. "Black Propaganda" is when it's obvious to the audience that the message is from the enemy. "Grey Propaganda" is exactly that, a bit blurry as to who it comes from and what the audience is supposed to think.

Glenn Beck is anti-Christian and warps the Bible every time he talks about it. For several years he has aired an Easter special with Pink Floyd's agonies screaming in the background while Beck narrates the crucifixion of Christ. Over and over he has crucified Christ, always stopping short of what happens after the crucifixion. The Romans and the Jews only crucified Jesus once. Beck does it every year and never lets Him conquer death. This is because it is a belief within his religion that one must pay for their own sins with sacrifice, and must work their own way to Heaven, and if they are good enough they will get to Heaven and be made a god. In Beck's world, in his religion Corporatism is a good thing.

Propaganda never lies. It always tells the truth. It is the intention behind the propaganda that lies. Any Christian that doesn't get the creeps after listening to Beck, may need to reasses their understanding and knowledge of God. I listen to him now, only for "inside" information. I use to listen to him regularly, but now, I find him a symptom of America's sickness, and he's always sick, always spouting fear.

Fascism loves religion, it loves conservatism and it has twisted these things into barbed weapons. Religion isn't bad. But when it lets hate and fear run it it's dangerous. When a religion teaches that one can become a god and have many wives in heaven, then it's dangerous (Islam, Mormon, and others espouse the harem teaching). When a religion teaches that certain genetic groups are inferior and collects a massive database of ancestry and genetics history it needs to be questioned.

When we have orators like Glenn Beck preaching and crying for our souls then it's time to get real and wonder where we are in history and how easily duped we can be. And people sure do get angry when their Beck is threatened. Why would anyone get angry, unless they really do believe in a world in which freedom of speech only applies to them?

Sure, America has quite a few illustrious orators right now. President Obama is said to be one of them, but he's not on the radio for hours and hours every single day. Obama lets the radio talk, kicks back with Big Pharma nicotine gums and candies, listens, and laughs to himself. All he has to do is make a speech and let the media voices work it out and stir up the masses. Viva la revolucion! It doesn't matter to our elected officials and their corporate backers how many Tea Parties are held. It only matters that they vote hard right in the coming elections, rather than investigating the donors to the political campaign--all of the donors. It only matters that the Tea Partiers are riled up, distracted, and manipulated for the purposes of further destroying freedom. It only matters that there is a massive movement to bounce the far left movements off of, in order to create a "Big Bang," and create the ultimate fascist security state in which everyone is enslaved.

So far, the Tea Party movement hasn't followed in the footsteps of their namesake event. The Boston Tea Party wasn't aimed so much at the political system and government officials as at the corporate monopoly money behind them. The Boston Tea Partiers were a small group of men dressed as Iroquois Indians because they admired the ideas of self-governance that the Iroquois had been encouraging the colonists to pursue. The orginal Tea Party was an attack upon the trade monopoly of the British East India Company control, against corporatism. The colonists understood the root of the problem. It doesn't look so good for our modern Tea Party. They haven't tossed out one monopoly product yet.

And as an aside....And how long has it been since we've had a President in office that knew how to use tobacco properly? Clinton banned tobacco in the White House, and had no idea what a cigar was for. Bush inhaled Laura's 2nd hand, and Obama thinks it's all about the addiction to free-base nicotine, rather than for pleasure. He really likes the gum. That's for kids hiding from Mom and Dad! Why doesn't he be the adult President and light up? Does he think he'll get banned from the Oval Office?

If I were President....If I were President the Oval Office would look like the Inklings at the Eagle and Child tavern. Being President is like having the Ring of Power in The Lord of the Rings. Good people with good intentions can be turned evil by such power. So, really, I'm not sure I could be trusted with such power. If the red phone rang at 3 in the morning would I answer it?

America and much of the world is moving far right into fascism. Fascism is Corporatism. Fascism is a religion. Fascism has many names and many hiding places, but it always has the same patterns. Fascism is like one of those multi-armed gods of the far East. It has one body, and many writhing arms. It is Sharia law, it is puritanical, it is Mormon, it is the Great Wall of China, it is the pater familias of Roman culture, it is the Spanish Inquisition, it is a ban upon everything that makes us human.

Fascism likes to remove citizenship from certain select groups of people, many of whom are native-born. Germany removed citizenship rights from the Jews and others. Many of the Jews in Germany were native-born. Many of Jewish ancestry had fled to Germany from other countries, such as Russia during its Bolshevik purges of Jews. There was a mix of native-born Jews and immigrant Jews, as well as many other groups of people displaced by the atrocities taking place around eastern Europe in the first years of the 20th century.

In America, we have in the past made certain native-born peoples into more or less non-citizens: Blacks, Indians, women, and others. Blacks, Indians, and women were not permitted to vote, freely travel, participate in business, own guns, go to schools and universities, and places of public gathering.

It must be wondered if the Mexican illegal issue is again going to create a way of making select groups of native-born Americans into non-citizens for the use and abuse of the fascist State. An identification system will have to be worked out in order to prove one's citizenship, to prove one is really an American citizen. It won't be adequate to prove one's family came over on the Mayflower and was the first to set foot on Plymouth Rock. No, the only way to prove one is a citizen will be to submit to being scanned, tracked, and branded. If one does not accept the identification system designed to keep non-citizens out, one will not be permitted to travel, work, shop, vote, or have legal representation.

And as in Nazi Germany, many native-born Americans will become non-citizens with no rights and will be the new slaves rounded up to work the jobs that citizens won't work. The German people rarely complained about this arrangement. I doubt American citizens will be any different.

America won't control the border or encourage Mexico to harness its resources to create wealth and jobs. America won't stop the MexAmerican Taliban drug cartel, nor the real foreign and native terrorist threats to security: Monsanto, Bayer, Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline and others that love fascism and want us to use their products religiously.

America's great symbols: The Statue of Liberty, The Declaration of Independence, and The Constitution, tobacco (the American Revolution was also known as the Tobacco Wars), open roads for free travel, the automobile, the farmer, the rancher, the immigrant starting new from nothing, rock'n'roll, and Paul Bunyan the greatest of loggers have all been derided as sinful and outdated symbols. Liberty, Independence, basic Constitutions, Tobacco, Travel, Farmers, Ranchers, Immigrants, Joyful Music, and Loggers are only destructive and harmful to the environments and morals of evil despots. And as long as we remember and know of these symbols and the meaning behind them, as long as they run in our blood America will live.

We do not choose the time we are born in, but we can choose who we will be in the time we have been alloted. Look at history, at myth, at fiction and decide who the heros are and why. Very often, that hero is a small, single person. Often, that person has no name, such as the silent operators along the Underground Railroad.

"In Germany, Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) made scapegoats not only of the Communists and foreign powers who he claimed had stripped Germany of its land and military abilities at Versailles, but also of the Jews, who he claimed were in control of the world's finances. The long history of anti-Semitism in Europe, going back for centuries, simply fed the easy acceptance of Hitler's argument" (Kenneth C. Davis, Don't Know Much About History)

"Prior to the American entry into the war, the Nazi treatment of Jews evoked little more than weak diplomatic condemnation. It is clear that Roosevelt knew about the treatment of Jews in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, and about the methodical, systematic destruction of the Jews during the Holocaust. Clearly, saving the Jews and other groups that Hitler was destroying en masse was not a critical issue for American war planners" (Davis, Don't Know Much About History)