I wish there was a way that somebody could make North Korea stop.
Just.
Stop.
And let us help the innocent people who just want to live their lives in peace and security. What kind of government does to its own people what is being done there? It's enough to break a person's heart, it is.
Saturday, October 28, 2017
Friday, October 27, 2017
Those Deplorable Barbarians, I Tell Ya ...
This is not specifically about the books of SONG - except that it really is ... because all of the generations, all of the centuries, all of the battles represented in the series They Are My Song are leading in the same direction: TODAY. And TOMORROW. So today's events really do have a heck of a lot to do with SONG after all I reckon.
I’m still seeing references to ‘why
people voted for Trump’ couched in terms of the increasingly evident botches of
the other side.
You know what?
None of that stuff really had all
that much to do with my vote, although it’s nice to see it all finally coming
into the light.
But no.
I would bet money if I had any
that I’m not the only American who actually voted FOR somebody.
I said at the time and I’ll say
it again now: I waited, and Waited, and WAITED for the democrats to come up
with something, ANYTHING, that focused on issues that were important to me, on
some kind of plan to address and alter the direction their political party had
been taking our nation toward. It never happened. I’m still waiting.
In the meantime, hope from that
front gone, this Independent Voter had also been paying attention to what was
coming out of the republican front. And it made sense to me. The message Donald
Trump was presenting made sense, especially as it was filling the vacuum the
democrats were creating by not having ANY message. “It’s my turn” is not a
message. “The other guy is a jerk” is not a message. “This is YOUR nation; it
belongs to You, to We the People” is a message. Hearing ‘us’ and ‘we’ and ‘our’
and ‘choice’ and ‘security’ and ‘God Bless America’ and ‘Constitution’ and ‘Proud
to be an American’ and ‘a return to Rule of Law’ and ‘YOU matter’ … all
messages. Proven financial capability, also a message. The presentation of
concrete, viable plans of action – a message. Lots and lots of messages, and
they make sense.
So please don’t try to tell me or
any of us that we voted ‘against’ Hillary.
Hillary who?
I voted FOR Donald Trump. Me, an
Independent who hasn’t seen a presidential candidate I actually wanted to vote
into office in decades.
By all means, continue to expose
and prosecute what has needed to be exposed and prosecuted for a long time. Maybe
it will make those folk think twice before they try it again.
But please note that those are
not the things that are making me smile and wanting to say “I told you so”.
Frankly, it was pretty much a given, as soon as the guy who believes in Rule of
Law got into office, that those things were going to be tended to.
No, it’s not those things that
either swayed my vote or now make me smile.
It was the promise of hope borne
in the message; and it is the promise, the message, the hope fulfilled – the
word given and kept.
Against all the odds, fighting an
uphill battle, swimming against the current … all of those clichés and a bunch
more all fit. Even so, what mattered last year at this time and what matters
now is that feeling of Hope, coming on ever stronger. Through the stench of the
swamp-draining that’s going on, Hope rises like a breath of fresh air.
…
Me being me, and about half of my
life spent researching and writing about times much more ancient than these,
yes I’m going to draw a bit of a comparison here. The situation kind of reminds
me of when the legions of Rome finally gave up on ever conquering Scotland. It was
supposed to have been a rout, right? Just go into that little country, take it,
and be done with it. The odds were all in favor of Rome. All they had to do was
just do it. But the Scots weren’t having it. And … guess what.
When it comes to that, another
example of Rome underestimating what they were up against comes when the
(allegedly impossible and therefore never really happened) Barbarian Conspiracy
succeeded in taking down the Western Empire. Those Barbarians, in current
terms, might be referred to as Deplorables.
Just sayin’ … if the comparison
fits, use it.
Saturday, October 21, 2017
THEY ARE MY SONG SERIES TO DATE WITH LINKS TO ORDER
The Younglings of Dunnottar take the lead here, as they tend to do, because we cannot say them nay!
Here are their introductory books ... enjoy!!
Here is the updated version of THEY ARE MY SONG THE SERIES. As our fictional family makes its way through the generations they take us with them. And what a journey it is! As they struggle to Protect and Preserve their Legacy, their Destinies unfold ...
This the first of the Mamm Books is also the set's conclusion.
Not intended to become a book in the first place,
They Are My Song has nevertheless come to represent the Center Circle for the other Mamm Books.
They are irrevocably linked to one another and just as irrevocably linked to SONG.
It is in Mamm of Perth that the healing of our fictional family begins.
As the Voice of Mamm of Dunnottar begins the generational tales associated with an heirloom,
the south hearth of the roundhouse of Dunnottar become a focal point.
We listen in as the tragedies and triumphs of this family are related by the matriarch of the family.
In the second story line, we attend as this family goes about doing what it does.
As the Voice of Mamm of Dunnottar begins the generational tales associated with an heirloom,
the south hearth of the roundhouse of Dunnottar become a focal point.
We listen in as the tragedies and triumphs of this family are related by the matriarch of the family.
In the second story line, we attend as this family goes about doing what it does.
It is in Mamm of Tarnos that we get our first clear indication that not ALL of the Main Characters of SONG
are necessarily going to be human.
The horses Ordha and Rogue have minds of their own, no two ways about it.
When MammTwo and Ullin stop at Tarnos (in previous book) it is the unruly Rogue and the powerful Ordha
who keep them there while MammTwo and Ethan of Tarnos fight it out.
In Mamm of Tarnos, the pairs (human and horse) establish the beginnings of a powerful branch of the family.
Meanwhile, on Dunnottar, events are unfolding as the healing of that generation continues.
are necessarily going to be human.
The horses Ordha and Rogue have minds of their own, no two ways about it.
When MammTwo and Ullin stop at Tarnos (in previous book) it is the unruly Rogue and the powerful Ordha
who keep them there while MammTwo and Ethan of Tarnos fight it out.
In Mamm of Tarnos, the pairs (human and horse) establish the beginnings of a powerful branch of the family.
Meanwhile, on Dunnottar, events are unfolding as the healing of that generation continues.
LittleMamm is the daughter of MammTwo and Ethan of Tarnos.
This Powerful little girl brings us what is perhaps the most mystical of the Mamm Books.
As she and her mate David of Chattan grow to adulthood they must battle a Call,
one that will ultimately win, as it is their Destiny
to go to the Far Western Lands.
But first ... they have a family to produce - one that is of vital importance
to the future.
And on Dunnottar?
The Story Mamm tells is coming full circle.
As Mamm of Dunnottar reaches the time to tell her own Story, we and our fictional family wonder -
will she be able to tell this part of the tale?
Mamm of Dunnottar is the longest, and perhaps the hardest of the Mamm Books to write
and to read.
Mamm and her husband Alaric of the Visigoth Getae have Choices to make
and so they do.
Back on Dunnottar, in the other story line, events are still unfolding
as the family grows to include another generation.
Mamm of Dunnottar might make you cry.
It will almost surely make you laugh.
The Mamms thank you.
DANANN carries us into a future where Earth is at peace - or is she? A malignant 'something' is taking root.
Have Danann and Sidhelagh returned in time to help the Peoples of Earth?
Family
to family
Friend
to friend
Free
to the free
Faithful
to the faithful
From
future to future
Foe
to foe
Until
the end of eternity
My
oath on it.
ORDER HERE
As the writing of HELL AND HIGH WATER began I found myself constantly
researching an even more ancient past than I had considered to be relevant
to the book series I was in the middle of getting written, yet there I was -
in a past so ancient I could barely wrap my head around it.
A friend had urged me to include 'science fiction' in my work,
but what has 'science' to do with such ancient times?
Enter Mamm of Phi.
Oh.
The HELL AND HIGH WATER set is the Alianora Books of SONG.
The HELL AND HIGH WATER books of SONG take us into a far distant past.
As DANANN carried us into the future, so Alianora and Drustann
carry us to an even more unexpected time.
They are searching for the truth of the Faith that is so important to them.
The find it has deeper roots than they thought.
Stranded in the ancient past they
find what they seek.
And they bring it home with them.
As the writing of HELL AND HIGH WATER began I found myself constantly
researching an even more ancient past than I had considered to be relevant
to the book series I was in the middle of getting written, yet there I was -
in a past so ancient I could barely wrap my head around it.
A friend had urged me to include 'science fiction' in my work,
but what has 'science' to do with such ancient times?
Enter Mamm of Phi.
Oh.
The HELL AND HIGH WATER set is the Alianora Books of SONG.
The HELL AND HIGH WATER books of SONG take us into a far distant past.
As DANANN carried us into the future, so Alianora and Drustann
carry us to an even more unexpected time.
They are searching for the truth of the Faith that is so important to them.
The find it has deeper roots than they thought.
Stranded in the ancient past they
find what they seek.
And they bring it home with them.
As the research and the writing of HELL AND HIGH WATER progressed
the two story lines at first seemed unrelated.
What could the Extinction Level Event (ELE) of the far-away past
possibly have to do with the AD 500s?
the two story lines at first seemed unrelated.
What could the Extinction Level Event (ELE) of the far-away past
possibly have to do with the AD 500s?
The Younglings of Dunnottar are, in HELL AND HIGH WATER, now the Elders
of the family and are scattered all over the place.
Rua and Dothann are in Branxton of Britannia.
Brann and his wife Andras are in Cornwall.
Diann and Corrbed are on the Continent.
Merri rides and fights with the Fienne.
Their younger cousins, The Young Ones, are coming of age
with the help of Dedan and Saba.
of the family and are scattered all over the place.
Rua and Dothann are in Branxton of Britannia.
Brann and his wife Andras are in Cornwall.
Diann and Corrbed are on the Continent.
Merri rides and fights with the Fienne.
Their younger cousins, The Young Ones, are coming of age
with the help of Dedan and Saba.
ORDER HERE
As our fictional family expands, so do the adventures our Characters get themselves into.
In between living out their respective Destinies, they must look to the future
and plan accordingly for a time that they know will come.
As Ullin of Iona says:
The wheel goes 'round and 'round ...
As our fictional family expands, so do the adventures our Characters get themselves into.
In between living out their respective Destinies, they must look to the future
and plan accordingly for a time that they know will come.
As Ullin of Iona says:
The wheel goes 'round and 'round ...
The Realms and Dimensions of Earth must unite for one final showdown
against something so Powerful nobody is sure they can defeat it.
Just when everyone is breathing again
comes another assault.
And another.
against something so Powerful nobody is sure they can defeat it.
Just when everyone is breathing again
comes another assault.
And another.
And here we have an introduction to many Short Stories to come!
Faith, Family, Friends, Freedom, and the Future
Thank you for helping the Younglings of Dunnottar (current batch) meet their goal of helping others.
100% of on-line royalties go to them to donate to a charity of their choice!
LITTLEMAMM OF IONA
DANANN
DANANN takes us far into the future ... as the lineage of this family copes with an unexpected and unusual kind of attack. He and Sidhelagh return from their three thousand year Atonement in the nick of time as our old buddy Aduan is up to his old tricks.
Thursday, October 19, 2017
Globalism: An Opinion Piece
George W regarding globalism:
“We cannot wish globalism away”
“recover our own identity”
“Our identity as a nation, unlike many other nations, is not
determined by geography or ethnicity, by soil or blood,” he said. “Being
American involves the embrace of high ideals and civic responsibility.”
Dear W,
No we can't wish globalism away. By the same token you cannot wish it into the heart and soul of the very nation you are encouraging to recover her own identity.
You can't have it both ways.
On the one hand you're pushing an agenda that will take away our identity.
On the other hand you're telling us to recover it.
If that makes sense to anybody, I'd sure like to hear how.
ps: was that reference to soil and blood accidental?
The above are some thoughts shared by a past President, and a few of my thoughts on his words.
If you've read DANANN you likely picked up on some of my thoughts on issues related to globalism.
While I'm not overly fond of the concept and hope to not see it happen any time soon, part of me is sad to realize that we may well drive ourselves to it - and then have to cope with the consequences.
It will not work.
Which is neither here nor there because it will be forced upon us eventually regardless.
Anybody who thinks they're going to come out ahead during or after the process is wishful dreaming.
NOBODY is going to 'win' the war that will go along with it.
I, of course, have no idea what's going to happen. I write fiction for pete's sake.
But in the course of writing fiction I also take a good long hard look at what is real. What is real today and what has been real in the past (so far as we know it) of humanity.
The people who are pushing for world-wide communism, or at least socialism, are chock full of baloney. Neither one of them works. And democracy only works on a limited scale.
Yet, what is going to happen when finally we push ourselves over the edge, or are pushed there by forces beyond any human control?
Whoever survives with the most resources is likely to try to dominate all of the other survivors.
And they'll likely succeed for the most part.
Survival of the fittest ...
And the survivors aren't going to get along any better than anybody does now.
So ...
Not to give my story line away or anything, but someone will rise, try (for good or ill) to impose one form of government, fail utterly, and ultimately each survivor will choose, in the time between the crisis and that of DANANN the book, to which of four closed societies they will go. Closed as in CLOSED. Like sending kids to their separate rooms only on a very big scale, and permanently. For our purposes, those who will not choose are granted the Isles of Earth and can roam at will. Everyone else is happily ensconced in whichever closed culture their survivor ancestors chose at the time of choosing. Except, of course, those who have gone Hiving in the stars.
Yeh.
I write fiction.
I also don't see any great big hope for success in getting everybody in the whole wide world on the same page any time soon.
The kicker, the irony, as I see it is that the very folk who are pushing 'identity politics' are the self-same ones who are pushing a globalist government that would effectively erase any identity at all. How is that supposed to work? Can you not make up your mind, are you of two minds about it, have you lost both of said minds and are you trying to find them? Helpful hint: the stronger mind will survive, hide from you for eternity, and you will remain mindlessly questing for a utopia that does not exist forever and ever amen.
Tuesday, October 17, 2017
Honestly ... Zero Imagination
If you're going to spin lies about someone else, it shows a distinct lack of creativity when the only thing you can think of is something you don't want anyone to know about your own self.
Did I not say a while ago, but not all that long ago, that if you want to find out what some people have been up to all you have to do is pay attention to what they're accusing others of?
Not only is it non-creative, it's not all that smart.
Indeed.
Russian collusion, for example ...
That's but a symptom of a much larger, more widespread, mindset.
Mine own mindset being a mite peculiar compared to most, the pattern emerges and expands before my very eyes (not literally) to encompass a whole range of behaviors exhibited by a great number of folk. Most of those people likely haven't got the faintest idea in this world what they are saying about themselves ... but the rest of the world, if we've been paying attention at all, recognizes it for what it is.
Being accusatory and condemning others (who may or may not be guilty - more frequently turning out to be the latter) for this that and the other thing, on whatever scale and to whatever degree - might draw the attention of the general public to the targets of your vitriol. So momentarily it may appear that you're accomplishing your goal.
Unfortunately for you, once attention is drawn to a certain line of thought, it's not all that uncommon for said line of thought to extend beyond where you want it to stop - which would be on your target.
As the instances of 'coincidence' increase, the pattern is likely to show itself to a whole lot of other people besides folks like me whose minds have already been noticing it for quite a while.
It makes a person wonder, it surely does, why people can't be more imaginative about stuff. If you consistently use your own experience as a guide to making accusations about others, it will inevitably draw attention to your own sphere of interest in the 'issue' at hand.
And it doesn't really take the larger population all that long to figure it out.
It applies to lots of things besides Russia, and significantly impacts more people than a person would think possible.
Who's racist?
Who's intolerant?
Who's misogynous?
Who's war-mongering?
Who's been lying to everyone?
All things considered, it might be easiest to identify such folk by simply watching and listening to the ones who are raising issues, bringing stuff up in the first place, starting the accusatory narrative. No wonder some people are still touchy about the unexpected results of November 2016, huh? What else is going to be exposed? At least we know where to begin looking - all we have to do is take them at their word, so to speak.
Did I not say a while ago, but not all that long ago, that if you want to find out what some people have been up to all you have to do is pay attention to what they're accusing others of?
Not only is it non-creative, it's not all that smart.
Indeed.
Russian collusion, for example ...
That's but a symptom of a much larger, more widespread, mindset.
Mine own mindset being a mite peculiar compared to most, the pattern emerges and expands before my very eyes (not literally) to encompass a whole range of behaviors exhibited by a great number of folk. Most of those people likely haven't got the faintest idea in this world what they are saying about themselves ... but the rest of the world, if we've been paying attention at all, recognizes it for what it is.
Being accusatory and condemning others (who may or may not be guilty - more frequently turning out to be the latter) for this that and the other thing, on whatever scale and to whatever degree - might draw the attention of the general public to the targets of your vitriol. So momentarily it may appear that you're accomplishing your goal.
Unfortunately for you, once attention is drawn to a certain line of thought, it's not all that uncommon for said line of thought to extend beyond where you want it to stop - which would be on your target.
As the instances of 'coincidence' increase, the pattern is likely to show itself to a whole lot of other people besides folks like me whose minds have already been noticing it for quite a while.
It makes a person wonder, it surely does, why people can't be more imaginative about stuff. If you consistently use your own experience as a guide to making accusations about others, it will inevitably draw attention to your own sphere of interest in the 'issue' at hand.
And it doesn't really take the larger population all that long to figure it out.
It applies to lots of things besides Russia, and significantly impacts more people than a person would think possible.
Who's racist?
Who's intolerant?
Who's misogynous?
Who's war-mongering?
Who's been lying to everyone?
All things considered, it might be easiest to identify such folk by simply watching and listening to the ones who are raising issues, bringing stuff up in the first place, starting the accusatory narrative. No wonder some people are still touchy about the unexpected results of November 2016, huh? What else is going to be exposed? At least we know where to begin looking - all we have to do is take them at their word, so to speak.
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
Don't Shoot The Messenger
Some or none.
This is what I've been picking up on for a while now.
On the one hand, the folks who deeply want our nation completely cleared of all illegals, and not let any more in from anywhere for quite a while, are willing to meet somewhere in the middle.
On the other hand, the folks who want all illegals to remain and to automatically and immediately become full citizens are not the least bit willing to even talk about it.
The irony is that if it were put to the current American citizens as a whole in a nation-wide referendum the folks on the one hand would allow the DACA folk, and likely the rest too, to remain so long as they aren't felons or some such, get them started on the citizenship path that already exists, and go with border control and some guidelines for application and quotas (already existing) for any new immigrant applications.
If the folks on the other hand block it out of spite, we're all stuck with a situation nobody at ALL wants. With compromise out the window, it will be not some illegals being allowed to stay, but none. Because that's our current law. Illegals are ... well ... here illegally - and subject to deportation.
Here's a bit from a legal site:
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 defines an alien as a person who is not a citizen or national of the United States. In other words, an alien is anyone born in a country other than the United States to parents who are not United States citizens.
An illegal alien is someone who is living in the United States illegally; either without the correct legal documentation or by violating the terms of documentation, such as overstaying the time period specified on a tourist or student visa. Illegal aliens have no legal status in the United States. Among other things, illegal immigrants cannot vote, receive social services from federally funded programs, social security benefits, or hold United States passports.
Illegal aliens are subject to detainment and deportation at any time, as are legal aliens if they commit and are convicted of a crime. In many cases however, unless an illegal alien has committed a crime and been convicted, most are not detained or removed from the U.S. simply because they cannot be identified as illegal aliens.
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/becoming-american-understanding-legal-and-illegal-immigration
Here's an excerpt from an Allen B West article:
71 percent call on companies to offer jobs to Americans before foreign workers.
82 percent of voters support a law that would strengthen sentencing penalties for illegals who had previously been deported and strengthens laws against illegal immigrants who commit crimes in the U.S.
76 percent want more ICE officers.
75 percent support Trump’s focus on jailing MS-13 members
73 percent believe immigrants must be able to support themselves financially.
By a 2-to-1 margin, voters support limiting the number of immigrants who are seeking to live here just because their relatives do, so-called “chain migration.”
59 percent said new immigrants should be required to speak English.
64 percent back legislation that would create a point system based on factors such as English-speaking ability, education levels and job skills to rank applicants for the 140,000 employment-based green cards that are granted annually by the United States.
If the nation is (hypothetically) evenly divided among democrat, republican, and independent folk there are more people represented by some of the above numbers than all of the republicans and independents combined. The democrats have some of their own siding with the compromise.
As it stands right now, from my perspective, if the democrats alone block compromise, yes they can do it, but it will cost them voters from their own ranks likely getting almighty sore at them - because if there is no compromise, guess what.
If democrats want to protect the Dreamers, that's fine by the other side - but if they attach a caveat that includes ALL illegals to the wagon of the Dreamers, it flat will not fly. It will not even roll along a flat road.
DACA expires in March of next year (2018), in just a few months, and all 800,000 of the Dreamers will have to go to the homelands of the parents who brought them here.
You can bet your bottom dollar that ICE will up the ante and, together with every other agency, will become a lot more aggressive in locating and deporting (first) every violent offender they can.
Unless the democrats cooperate in changing existing laws, enforcing said existing laws rather than ignoring them is going to become 'the way it is'. No exceptions for anybody. If you're here illegally, home you go immediately as you are in violation of our current immigration laws and subject to immediate deportation. Say there are 20 million illegals currently within our borders. That's a whole lot of deportations taking place all of a sudden.
So ... what will happen?
There will be a compromise; the illegals will understand that the democrats sold them out for political purposes; those who remain will NOT be happy about it, and they'll switch their allegiance to the folks who worked to get them the compromise - as opposed to those who resisted it and put all 20 million of them at risk for immediate deportation.
The same will go for a hefty hunk of democrats who would be in favor of a compromise. Down the hatch go the democrats - and for what? It's like throwing a game by carrying a weapon onto the field to sack and shoot the other team's quarterback - and the sack totally fails anyway because your own team-mates block you from committing murder, the very attempt being more than plenty to get the whole team pulled for all eternity.
The democrats have already lost this particular hand. If they're willing gamble everything on a hand that ain't got a chance, that's all on them. At this point the republicans/independents are holding all the aces, and tag-teaming the democrats.
As the democrat party 'leadership' balks at compromises that their own constituents want, those constituents know where to turn.
It almost kind of reminds me of when Honorius had the families of 30,000 of his Getae soldiers slaughtered, just to make a pointless political point. Did he REALLY expect his soldiers to stick with him after that? They went straight to Alaric is what they did, and that was the end of Honorius' empire. (short version)
That seems to be exactly the direction the democrats are heading. I doubt they'll be any more successful than Honorius was. If they're willing to sacrifice the Dreamers, not to mention 20 million (or so) others, on the altar of making a pointless political point, what does that say about them? That they will not be allowed to do any such thing is moot - that they are willing to, and will try to, is the message that's going to stick like cockle-burrs in your socks.
At least those are the impressions coming to me from all directions.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Also, Canada get ready because come spring of 2018 they'll be heading your way to get out of having to go south.
You know what really irks me about this whole thing?
Millions of folks in our nation are on tenterhooks because the democrats have been using them as a population of pawns and will not tend to what has to be done to give them some peace and security. That, in my opinion, is just plain hateful meanness. Pretend you're doing somebody a favor and then leave them holding the bag out of spite because somebody else ticks you off ... it's a really mean thing to do.
It's like saying, 'Here, leave your poor home to help me rob this bank and you'll get most of the loot.' And then run out the back door as the law comes in the front to arrest your recruits - who not only don't get any of the loot but have to go to jail before they go back to their poor homes. That's a dirty trick to pull, I have to say.
This is what I've been picking up on for a while now.
On the one hand, the folks who deeply want our nation completely cleared of all illegals, and not let any more in from anywhere for quite a while, are willing to meet somewhere in the middle.
On the other hand, the folks who want all illegals to remain and to automatically and immediately become full citizens are not the least bit willing to even talk about it.
The irony is that if it were put to the current American citizens as a whole in a nation-wide referendum the folks on the one hand would allow the DACA folk, and likely the rest too, to remain so long as they aren't felons or some such, get them started on the citizenship path that already exists, and go with border control and some guidelines for application and quotas (already existing) for any new immigrant applications.
If the folks on the other hand block it out of spite, we're all stuck with a situation nobody at ALL wants. With compromise out the window, it will be not some illegals being allowed to stay, but none. Because that's our current law. Illegals are ... well ... here illegally - and subject to deportation.
Here's a bit from a legal site:
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 defines an alien as a person who is not a citizen or national of the United States. In other words, an alien is anyone born in a country other than the United States to parents who are not United States citizens.
An illegal alien is someone who is living in the United States illegally; either without the correct legal documentation or by violating the terms of documentation, such as overstaying the time period specified on a tourist or student visa. Illegal aliens have no legal status in the United States. Among other things, illegal immigrants cannot vote, receive social services from federally funded programs, social security benefits, or hold United States passports.
Illegal aliens are subject to detainment and deportation at any time, as are legal aliens if they commit and are convicted of a crime. In many cases however, unless an illegal alien has committed a crime and been convicted, most are not detained or removed from the U.S. simply because they cannot be identified as illegal aliens.
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/becoming-american-understanding-legal-and-illegal-immigration
Here's an excerpt from an Allen B West article:
71 percent call on companies to offer jobs to Americans before foreign workers.
82 percent of voters support a law that would strengthen sentencing penalties for illegals who had previously been deported and strengthens laws against illegal immigrants who commit crimes in the U.S.
76 percent want more ICE officers.
75 percent support Trump’s focus on jailing MS-13 members
73 percent believe immigrants must be able to support themselves financially.
By a 2-to-1 margin, voters support limiting the number of immigrants who are seeking to live here just because their relatives do, so-called “chain migration.”
59 percent said new immigrants should be required to speak English.
64 percent back legislation that would create a point system based on factors such as English-speaking ability, education levels and job skills to rank applicants for the 140,000 employment-based green cards that are granted annually by the United States.
If the nation is (hypothetically) evenly divided among democrat, republican, and independent folk there are more people represented by some of the above numbers than all of the republicans and independents combined. The democrats have some of their own siding with the compromise.
As it stands right now, from my perspective, if the democrats alone block compromise, yes they can do it, but it will cost them voters from their own ranks likely getting almighty sore at them - because if there is no compromise, guess what.
If democrats want to protect the Dreamers, that's fine by the other side - but if they attach a caveat that includes ALL illegals to the wagon of the Dreamers, it flat will not fly. It will not even roll along a flat road.
DACA expires in March of next year (2018), in just a few months, and all 800,000 of the Dreamers will have to go to the homelands of the parents who brought them here.
You can bet your bottom dollar that ICE will up the ante and, together with every other agency, will become a lot more aggressive in locating and deporting (first) every violent offender they can.
Unless the democrats cooperate in changing existing laws, enforcing said existing laws rather than ignoring them is going to become 'the way it is'. No exceptions for anybody. If you're here illegally, home you go immediately as you are in violation of our current immigration laws and subject to immediate deportation. Say there are 20 million illegals currently within our borders. That's a whole lot of deportations taking place all of a sudden.
So ... what will happen?
There will be a compromise; the illegals will understand that the democrats sold them out for political purposes; those who remain will NOT be happy about it, and they'll switch their allegiance to the folks who worked to get them the compromise - as opposed to those who resisted it and put all 20 million of them at risk for immediate deportation.
The same will go for a hefty hunk of democrats who would be in favor of a compromise. Down the hatch go the democrats - and for what? It's like throwing a game by carrying a weapon onto the field to sack and shoot the other team's quarterback - and the sack totally fails anyway because your own team-mates block you from committing murder, the very attempt being more than plenty to get the whole team pulled for all eternity.
The democrats have already lost this particular hand. If they're willing gamble everything on a hand that ain't got a chance, that's all on them. At this point the republicans/independents are holding all the aces, and tag-teaming the democrats.
As the democrat party 'leadership' balks at compromises that their own constituents want, those constituents know where to turn.
It almost kind of reminds me of when Honorius had the families of 30,000 of his Getae soldiers slaughtered, just to make a pointless political point. Did he REALLY expect his soldiers to stick with him after that? They went straight to Alaric is what they did, and that was the end of Honorius' empire. (short version)
That seems to be exactly the direction the democrats are heading. I doubt they'll be any more successful than Honorius was. If they're willing to sacrifice the Dreamers, not to mention 20 million (or so) others, on the altar of making a pointless political point, what does that say about them? That they will not be allowed to do any such thing is moot - that they are willing to, and will try to, is the message that's going to stick like cockle-burrs in your socks.
At least those are the impressions coming to me from all directions.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Also, Canada get ready because come spring of 2018 they'll be heading your way to get out of having to go south.
You know what really irks me about this whole thing?
Millions of folks in our nation are on tenterhooks because the democrats have been using them as a population of pawns and will not tend to what has to be done to give them some peace and security. That, in my opinion, is just plain hateful meanness. Pretend you're doing somebody a favor and then leave them holding the bag out of spite because somebody else ticks you off ... it's a really mean thing to do.
It's like saying, 'Here, leave your poor home to help me rob this bank and you'll get most of the loot.' And then run out the back door as the law comes in the front to arrest your recruits - who not only don't get any of the loot but have to go to jail before they go back to their poor homes. That's a dirty trick to pull, I have to say.
SHAME.
SHAME.
SHAME.
MELODY OF PHI ... COMING RIGHT UP ... THE QUEST BEGINS
For now I'm just pleased as punch to have gotten myself a little toy keyboard ... what I wouldn't give to have that old piano back that I had so very long ago!
Even so, just getting the melody planted into my head, at least the order of the notes, is a step in the right direction.
It's been a long time since I've done anything musical (it's not my forte) except sing along when there's a song playing that I know and like, so it's a change of pace for me. Will I even remember full, half, quarter, eighth notes? Hopefully it will all come back to me as I go along.
At any rate, lest I lose my train of thought, and the sequence of the notes, here are the introductory 'notes' of PHI, with 1 being middle C just because it's easiest for me ... they're also arranged, for the moment, into sets of four, for the same reason.
1618
0339 8874
9894
8482 0458
6834
3656 3811
*laughing*
I found a site and copied the sequence as far as said site took it - 37 pages solid of random numbers, barely a drop in the bucket of the infinity of PHI.
I'll be doing good just to get these first 36 memorized, along with the notes I've assigned to them.
Then will come the fun part - arranging them in a melody with variations in tempo and note lengths and all that stuff I don't have the right language for but will recognize the combination/s when I hear it/them.
Trust me on that.
Rather, trust our Characters because this after all THEIR SONG. They might be MY song, but even that isn't a given as the Mother has first claim always. Either way, the Song of PHI is the Song of our Characters, and of our world when it comes right down to it.
My sister reminded me that according to archaeological and historic records the musical instruments of 'back in the day' would not have had our eight note musical scale ... but for our purposes that doesn't matter. For one thing it's fiction and our Characters are clever souls. Plus the only instrument we ever have involved in the Song is the Queen Harp whose strings can produce any sound she wants. And vocals have always had a huge range. So there you have it. The Song of Phi is timeless.
We're going to do our best to weave it into something that's hauntingly beautiful, and dangerous.
The only thing that's not negotiable is the order of the notes - because that's like the most immutable Law of our world.
For the rest, we shall see what we shall see.
For the SONG itself, the arrangement has to lend itself to being a repeated melody suitable for being sung in rounds by eight different Voices.
Mamm's Voice begins with her Song of Choice. She is a soprano.
Next comes Danann with the Spiral. He is a bass.
Sidhelagh Sings of Peace. Her Voice is second soprano.
Alianora and Drustann Sing of Faith - first soprano and tenor.
Sass Sings of Healing - she is a contralto. When Thann comes into the Story Line, he's a bass.
Caileen and Talorc Sing of Hope - alto and whatever's between tenor and bass.
Aine and Kalann sing of Love - they are second soprano and tenor.
Ullin of Iona Sings of Unity with the Queen Harp - his Voice is bass; hers is whatever she wants it to be.
So we've got all these Voices coming into the round as the SONG progresses.
That there are no words helps. All we have to do is make sure the notes don't clash.
AND we can range the Voices per part by octave. Mamm will go an octave above middle C while Danann will be an octave below. Hypothetically. Once I get my hands on a full piano keyboard I can at least do some fiddling and see if it's going to even be possible. Because the notes repeat randomly, it might be *difficult* to find a place for the Voices to come into the melody without causing discord.
Ah well.
The quest is on for a Theme Song for SONG.
Sunday, October 8, 2017
FOLLOWING THE NEWS
Once upon a time in a life now long past I worked for a charitable gaming organization, dealing blackjack in the local bars (pubs) of Small Town USA. It was one of the best jobs I've ever had for people watching, I tell you true. People are maybe 'more themselves' when they've tucked a couple under their belts, so to speak.
At any rate, during my night shifts I've taken to having the television news on.
As it turns out, doing my work with the news channels in the background kind of reminds me of that job I had once upon a time.
On the one hand there's a group of people who tend to do nothing but whine and complain and gossip about other people in a nasty way, often at the tops of their lungs and always with a hateful twist to everything.
On the other hand are a whole different group who only get far enough into their cups to be able to vociferously voice their opinions in sometimes loud discussions. They've had enough to drink to be open and honest, but not enough to come to blows about anything.This group will argue anything until the cows come home, never convince each other to change their minds, agree to disagree until the next time, and head for home still friends.
Not surprisingly, I'm finding the dynamics of the media group on the one hand to be just as annoying and disgusting as I did their counterparts back in the day.
The folks on the other hand just make me smile (even when the topics are deadly serious) because ... well ... because it just reminds me of Small Town USA, the way it's supposed to be.
On the one hand I'm not going to name names, because I don't have to. Small Town USA always knows who's who.
On the other hand, I will name one : FOX NEWS.
I'm still adept at tuning out the folks on the one hand as best I can (although their obnoxious voices still penetrate now and then) while tuning in to the folks on the other hand who can present their points of view without being hateful about it.
Friday, October 6, 2017
Some MUCH Better Research on Gun Control Laws
READ THIS
Some great research done here, just looking for the facts.
If restrictive gun laws were going to be effective, we'd know it by now.
The gun control horse is dead. We can stop beating it any time now.
Cited in the article are three 'populations' at risk:
Potential Suicides
Young Males
Women with Violent Partners
Instead of continuing to beat a dead horse, maybe we ought to walk away from the carcass and put our time, energy, and money into some preventive/protective measures instead.
It's wishful thinking on my part, most likely.
These are much more difficult issues to address.
Some great research done here, just looking for the facts.
If restrictive gun laws were going to be effective, we'd know it by now.
The gun control horse is dead. We can stop beating it any time now.
Cited in the article are three 'populations' at risk:
Potential Suicides
Young Males
Women with Violent Partners
Instead of continuing to beat a dead horse, maybe we ought to walk away from the carcass and put our time, energy, and money into some preventive/protective measures instead.
It's wishful thinking on my part, most likely.
These are much more difficult issues to address.
Thursday, October 5, 2017
Give your tears to me
Uffda.
I’m down to
the last, most difficult, and probably the most important chapter of the whole
set of SONG.
I want to
get it done today because I’ve got a weekend of work coming up and am flat
running out of time.
SO.
Onward, b.
I know, but I
honestly don’t know how I’m going to be able to do it.
By beginning
says Sass.
Needs must
says Alia.
Don’t be an
idiot, just get it done says Aine.
Take a deep
breath says Caileen.
Here, I will
help you says Sidhelagh.
And I smile.
Help me, yes
… but I still have to be able to see what I’m doing. That’s not an easy thing
to do through tears.
Give your
tears to me says the Mother.
Okay, maybe I
can do this after all.
Pay your bills
first says Mamm.
COPPER INTO THE SEA: Danann and Sidhelagh of SONG
*laughing because they're laughing*
The above is one of my earliest sketches; there are very few of this couple (or of any of the Characters, now that I think of it ... hmmm ...).
Danann and Sidhelagh are the two 'first' Characters of SONG - Danann is the grandson of Mamm of Dunnottar and Sidhelagh is his wife.
The two of them are exactly the same age; having been born at the same in the same place of two different lineages, they are what in the books we refer to as 'Spirit Twins'. Inseparable from birth and bound for all time by one of those mysterious Sidhe things that eternally link two individuals, they marry as soon as they're old enough.
The four daughters they produce are Alianora, Sass, Caileen, and Aine - the Sisters of Dunnottar whose Stories we tell through the generations as they unfold.
Danann grows to be a good six and a half feet tall; Sidhelagh doesn't.
Even so they are well-matched.
The mystery of who Danann's father is and the identity of both of Sidhelagh's parents is never quite fully solved, although as the books progress we learn a bit more here and there.
They are on my mind at the moment because I'm finishing up the rewrite of They Are My Song, the first of this series of books.
I'm procrastinating is what I'm doing.
I've left the hardest part of this project until the end because I don't want to have to do it.
Knowing full well that I must and therefore I will, I still put it off as long as I can.
Because this couple dies.
In battle.
Writing it the first time shocked me half to death. I had no idea they were going to DIE when I started this whole thing, else I might not have started it.
But they do.
And I have to write it all over again.
The 'copper into the sea' title comes from the colors of their eyes. Danann's are copper while Sidhelagh's vary as much as the colors of the sea do. From dark dark green through the pale but brilliant blue of sun dancing off a wavelet, Sidhelagh's eyes mirror her emotions.
When I finish with this rewrite all of the books of SONG are going to get re-released with their updates and revisions and all that.
A part of finishing this is getting more and better sketches of all of our Characters done, including Danann and Sidhelagh.
Meanwhile, the one up top will have to get us through.
Wednesday, October 4, 2017
2nd Amendment
Once again, for those who are slow on the uptake.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Period.
It's written in English, grammatically proper, spelled correctly, and doesn't even use any words that are unclear in definition.
So what part of that one relatively short little sentence do people not understand?
The federal government does not have the authority to regulate, legislate, or any other kind of '-ate' anything to do with the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
The Constitution of the United States of America and the attached Bill of Rights (first ten amendments for those who might not know) delegates and restricts the powers of the branches of our federal government and it addresses those of the states and the People.
Here's a Legal Link to some background, going back to the Federalist Papers and the ratification of the Constitution itself.
Here's a bit of what you'll find:
[note: it's a bit like reading Shakespeare - you have to read it three times. Once just to get used to the language; once to get the general gist of it; and finally to understand. Be patient with yourself and take your time - it's worth it, trust me.]
The Federalist Papers
Alexander Hamilton in Federalist, No. 29, did not view the right to keep arms as being confined to active militia members:
What plan for the regulation of the militia may be pursued by the national government is impossible to be foreseen...The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution... Little more can reasonably be aimed at with the respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped ; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.
James Madison in Federalist No. 46 wrote:
Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments,to which the people are attached, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.
Here, like Story, Madison is expressing the idea that additional advantages accrue to the people when the citizens' right to arms is enhanced by having an organized and properly directed militia.
The Federalist Papers Continued – "The Original Right of Self-Defense"
The Founders realized insurrections may occur from time to time and it is the militia's duty to suppress them. They also realized that however remote the possibility of usurpation was, the people with their arms, had the right to restore their republican form of government by force, if necessary, as an extreme last resort.
"The original right of self-defense" is not a modern-day concoction. We now examine Hamilton's Federalist No. 28. Hamilton begins:
That there may happen cases in which the national government may be necessitated to resort to force cannot be denied. Our own experience has corroborated the lessons taught by the examples of other nations; that emergencies of this sort will sometimes exist in all societies, however constituted; that seditions and insurrections are, unhappily, maladies as inseparable from the body politic as tumors and eruptions from the natural body; that the idea of governing at all times by the simple force of law (which we have been told is the only admissible principle of republican government) has no place but in the reveries of these political doctors whose sagacity disdains the admonitions of experimental instruction.
Hamilton explains that the national government may occasionally need to quell insurrections and it is certainly justified in doing so.
Hamilton continues:
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.
Hamilton clearly states there exists a right of self-defense against a tyrannical government, and it includes the people with their own arms and adds:
[T]he people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress. How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized!
Thus the militia is the ultimate check against a state or the national government. That is why the founders guaranteed the right to the people as opposed to only active militia members or a state's militia. But of course, via the militia clause, the Second Amendment acknowledges, as well, the right of a state to maintain a militia. (For more on militia see: http://guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html.)
Hamilton concludes, telling us the above scenario is extremely unlikely to occur:
When will the time arrive that the federal government can raise and maintain an army capable of erecting a despotism over the great body of the people of an immense empire, who are in a situation, through the medium of their State governments, to take measures for their own defense, with all the celerity, regularity, and system of independent nations? The apprehension may be considered as a disease, for which there can be found no cure in the resources of argument and reasoning.
Again, it is the recurring theme of the people's right to keep and bear arms as individuals, enhanced by a militia system, that (in part) provides for the "security of a free state".
See, THIS is what our education system seems to have been neglecting for a very long time. EVERY American citizen should know this stuff. It would avoid a lot of conflict if we all knew what the heck we were talking about.
Gun Control
Actually, in my know-nothing humble opinion, gun control is in the hands of the one holding the gun.
But that's just me.
The United States of America's Constitution, 2nd Amendment, guarantees American citizens the right to bear arms. This right cannot be infringed by the federal government, period.
That's a given.
However, local, county, and state regulations are definitely permitted. Many places have many different levels of gun rules on their books.
We are a big nation.
As citizens we have the right to choose where we will live.
Being as there are so many options open to us, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you oppose gun control you live where there isn't any. If you support it you live where regulations are strict.
Let's see how things stack up.
On the one hand you've got folks saying that more gun control is safer.
On the other hand you've got folks saying that less gun control is safer.
To me, it doesn't really appear that gun control actually has a whole lot of impact one way or the other, at least not without more to go on than the below numbers.
Which means that there are other factors at play, factors that carry more weight than the level of gun control.
At the moment I've got other things to do than look up all of those possible factors.
Violent Crime Rate By State
Rank U.S. State Rate per 100K population
1 Alaska 635.8
2 Nevada 635.6
3 Tennessee 608.4
4 New Mexico 597.4
5 Florida 540.5
6 Louisiana 514.7
7 South Carolina 497.7
8 Delaware 489.1
9 Arkansas 480.1
10 Maryland 446.1
11 Missouri 442.9
12 Alabama 427.4
13 Michigan 427.3
14 Oklahoma 406.0
15 Texas 405.9
16 Arizona 399.9
17 California 396.1
18 Massachussetts 391.4
19 New York 381.8
20 Georgia 377.3
21 Illinois 370.0
22 Indiana 365.3
23 Kansas 348.6
24 North Carolina 329.5
25 South Dakota 326.5
26 Montana 323.7
27 Pennsylvania 314.1
28 Colorado 309.1
29 West Virginia 302.0
30 Wisconsin 290.3
31 Washington 285.2
32 Ohio 284.9
33 Nebraska 280.4
34 Mississippi 278.5
35 Iowa 273.5
36 North Dakota 265.1
37 New Jersey 261.2
38 Hawaii 259.2
39 Connecticut 236.9
40 Oregon 232.3
41 Minnesota 229.1
42 Rhode Island 219.2
43 Utah 215.6
44 Idaho 212.2
45 Kentucky 211.6
46 Virginia 196.2
47 New Hampshire 196.1
48 Wyoming 195.5
49 Maine 127.8
50 Vermont 99.3
But that's just me.
The United States of America's Constitution, 2nd Amendment, guarantees American citizens the right to bear arms. This right cannot be infringed by the federal government, period.
That's a given.
However, local, county, and state regulations are definitely permitted. Many places have many different levels of gun rules on their books.
We are a big nation.
As citizens we have the right to choose where we will live.
Being as there are so many options open to us, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you oppose gun control you live where there isn't any. If you support it you live where regulations are strict.
Let's see how things stack up.
On the one hand you've got folks saying that more gun control is safer.
On the other hand you've got folks saying that less gun control is safer.
To me, it doesn't really appear that gun control actually has a whole lot of impact one way or the other, at least not without more to go on than the below numbers.
Which means that there are other factors at play, factors that carry more weight than the level of gun control.
At the moment I've got other things to do than look up all of those possible factors.
Here are some links for your perusing pleasure:
Those are the top ten in each category of 'most' or 'least' ... the other thirty states fall somewhere in between.
HERE is a link to statistics for crimes by state, going WAY back, for you to wend your way through if you want.
Rank U.S. State Rate per 100K population
1 Alaska 635.8
2 Nevada 635.6
3 Tennessee 608.4
4 New Mexico 597.4
5 Florida 540.5
6 Louisiana 514.7
7 South Carolina 497.7
8 Delaware 489.1
9 Arkansas 480.1
10 Maryland 446.1
11 Missouri 442.9
12 Alabama 427.4
13 Michigan 427.3
14 Oklahoma 406.0
15 Texas 405.9
16 Arizona 399.9
17 California 396.1
18 Massachussetts 391.4
19 New York 381.8
20 Georgia 377.3
21 Illinois 370.0
22 Indiana 365.3
23 Kansas 348.6
24 North Carolina 329.5
25 South Dakota 326.5
26 Montana 323.7
27 Pennsylvania 314.1
28 Colorado 309.1
29 West Virginia 302.0
30 Wisconsin 290.3
31 Washington 285.2
32 Ohio 284.9
33 Nebraska 280.4
34 Mississippi 278.5
35 Iowa 273.5
36 North Dakota 265.1
37 New Jersey 261.2
38 Hawaii 259.2
39 Connecticut 236.9
40 Oregon 232.3
41 Minnesota 229.1
42 Rhode Island 219.2
43 Utah 215.6
44 Idaho 212.2
45 Kentucky 211.6
46 Virginia 196.2
47 New Hampshire 196.1
48 Wyoming 195.5
49 Maine 127.8
50 Vermont 99.3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)