What Effect Will it Have?

What Effect Will it Have?

I was talking with artist, a real paint and canvas painter, friend of mine at lunch today. I poised a question to him, maybe it was more of an experiment. When a person poises for a portrait, do You talk to them? If so about what? The thought (experiment) being if an artist would get different result based upon the mood set by the conversation one was having with the subject and by extension the artist himself.

I knew he was planning to make a portrait of his wife and I that he might consider the question (experiment). His approach to painting is, as many artists do, to do “studies”[1] before the final work. This would provide the opportunity to look into my premise and to add this, another, layer of complexity to his work. If he dose, the approach should be; in one instance talk about “back home” and in the next “the children” and so on. In each, to examine the actual study to see if there are any differences of note. To use the information to achieve the most desirable final result. If he dose accept this idea then I will have something to talk about later, If not this stops here. (or dose it?)

[1]“Study(ies)” A practice painting. In art, a study is a drawing, sketch or painting done in preparation for a finished piece, or as visual notes. Studies are often used to understand the problems involved in rendering subjects and to plan the elements to be used in finished works, such as light, color, form, perspective and composition.

What is Slavery?

What is Slavery?

Slav´er`y

n.	1.	The condition of a slave; the state of entire subjection of one person to the will of another.
	2.	A condition of subjection or submission characterized by lack of freedom of action or of will.   These are the dictionary definitions of slavery but what truly is slavery?   The old saying “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, but teach a man to fish and he can feed himself forever” is at the heart of my thought.   When a person becomes dependent on that which is given or provided by another is that not also slavery? The street level drug dealer will “give” someone the “fix” until that person becomes dependant “hooked” on their drug of choice. That is when the trouble begins. There is never enough drug(s) or money to feed an insatiable appetite. Dose not the same axiom apply to many other dependant relationships? “We” in our misguided attempt to be kind have inadvertently created a dependant class. People who are all too willing to take everything “we” are willing to give, and more. Again an insatiable appetite for everything free. To the point of feeling “entitled” to everything they need, want, and more. Has our willingness to “help” made these people “slaves”? Not only the first person but the generations that follow. How long and how deep do we tread into the morass that we have created for them and for ourselves and all of our future generations?   I don’t know how we are to extricate ourselves from this misguided situation. But exit it we must! If not for the simple fact that it is unsustainable from an economic perspective but from a moral point too. Don’t get me wrong I’m all for helping a person or family when they run on hard times. To aid the child who will go hungry if no help is given is noble. To sublimit the elderly when the meager pension or the insurance policy (Social Security) they have been paying into for their entire working life is just not enough to make it to the end of the month. All these things are good and necessary and have been a part of humanity since the beginning of time.   The problem I have is when physically & mentally able individuals have been taught to sit and wait for the next “free” ride to come by and let everyone else pay their way. That to me is slavery both of those receiving and those forced to give, willingly or not!

Constitution & Amendments, the supreme law of the land!

Our Constitution & Amendments, the supreme law of the land!

            Our founding fathers knew what they were doing in the formation of our government and the supreme laws in the form of our Constitution. First let’s clear up a misconception. Our nation is not a Democracy. Surprised? We are a Republic:  a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (per Merriam-Webster) for me, and many others, the key words here are “according to LAW”. That is to say the law is above all elected and appointed individuals within the government. That includes, but is not limited to, The President, Supreme Court Justices, Senators and Representatives. The founders wanted, and were right in, that it should be difficult to amend (revise) the constitution. Don’t misunderstand the constitution can be changed. The sole example of this is the 18th amendment (prohibition) and the repeal (undoing) of the 18th amendment, the 21^st amendment.

             For someone who follows the goings-on in Washington D.C. it is apparent that attempts to undermine the Constitution and amendments occur on a daily basis. I’m sure those who are behind these attacks would claim they are exercising there right to represent a segment of the electorate. If indeed this were the case they would advocate for repeal of some or part of individual amendments. Instead they are attempting an “end run” around the rules. The First Amendment was usurped during the “Bush 43^rd Pres” administration by implementing “First Amendment Zones” (for protesters) located some great distance from the actual location of the people or events they were protesting. This is America! Our “Free Speech Zone” stretches from the Atlantic to the Pacific and from the Canadian border to the Mexican border. Not some square painted on the pavement of a parking lot surrounded by yellow tape and armed guards!

            Now the Second Amendment is under attack by the “Obama” administration. The U.N. small arms treaty (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/07/robert-farago/full-text-draft-u-n-arms-trade-treaty/) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-weisser/un-small-arms-treaty_b_4337810.html) if ratified by the US senate would, in theory, render part of the Second Amendment null and void by putting the “Right to Bear Arms” in the hands of non Americans. The willingness of both the right (conservative) and left (liberal) tell that the “Political Class” doesn’t care about what “We the People” want or what rights our founding documents reserved for all the people of The United States of America.

What has happened to “We the People”?

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. (Preamble to the Constitution)

It would seem that “We” have traded our liberty for the perception of tranquility and welfare doesn’t mean the same thing it did when this, our, constitution was written. What will we leave or posterity (children & grandchildren)? Liberty is freedom!? To go & to do, to say those things each of us wants and holds in our heart. The place our great nation holds, or is it held, in the world as a beacon of hope that everyone everywhere can be can reach the fullest potential of our talents and efforts. Will “We”, Can “We” continue down this path? Why should “We” want to? More importantly, WHO would want us to?