bloggity-blog-log entries

garbage can

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:15:43 GMT

there's a small bamboo trash basket underneath my desk where I store all of my outgoing mail for recycle, letters with my name still on the label and other identifiers that I have to shred. It's a weird little game that I tend to play likened to the one where I keep snapping the snooze button on my 5am alarm clock. maybe you know that one. anyway, every time I empty out the thing there's one piece of garbage that always gets stuck inside the lip of the basket and each time i let it fall back down to the bottom. I look at it, lovingly, a picture of my ex-boyfriend that I downloaded off the internet one time when we first started dating. It had been in a tiny frame for about four or five months next to my bed before he started cheating on me. then i threw it in the basket one day after one of our biggest break-ups following thanksgiving weekend one year, another very long long story. anyway, the photo has been sitting at the bottom of the basket for nearly three years. Every time I think that it's going to fall out it stays in there...today it finally slipped into the bin for re-entry into mainstream recycle. I guess this is it. Some things seem to linger on for years before they finally move back into circulation, like overdue library books or something like that. There are a lot of things that just take a little time. This one just made me laugh.

I'm looking for an out.

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 02:55:31 GMT

"I think younger workers—first of all, younger workers have been promised benefits the government—promises that have been promised, benefits that we can't keep. That's just the way it is."—Washington, D.C., May 4, 2005 with the recent appraisal of our country's economic fitness, I'd like some options, alternatives for retirement. anyone?? where to go... there's no way I'm staying in this country another ten years even. this is really getting serious. as of Jan 1, 2008, our baby-boomers are hitting up the system for cold, hard cash and their portion of pharma benies promised to them on Bush's watch, a bill that cost our country trillions of dollars that we will never be able to afford, according to the comptroller of the U.S. Treasury. This puts us in pre-bankruptcy status. This may not seem like a scare to one who's unfamiliar with the emergency clause. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_emergency I'm not worried, but annoyed that we are in this situation because of something stupid that george w. bush did.

the paper towel

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:42:33 GMT

During the latest environmental crisis I've grown a certain fondness for the paper towel. It has long been a commodity, a prominent member of the paper product family, that I have grown to trust and admire for its functional durability and selfless disposability. Over the years I've come to rely on the towel for my everyday household needs. Its strength and light-weight portability makes it so convenient for transport on long trips. I often carry along a few of them, moistened, in a Ziplocs sandwich bag with my lunch pack when I'm traveling. And, for just the light cleaning jobs around the house, they do come in handy. For instance, after I scrub around the toilet bowl, I like to take one of my all-purpose Brawny brand paper towels and sweep neatly around the lip of the bowl, making sure that all of the pubic hairs and other remnants of debris are carefully wiped away as I sacrifice one more. This way I know that my personal toilet is completely safe and tidy. It saddens me deeply to know that everyday now the precarious lifespan of the ever loyal paper towel hangs in the delicate balance of a now grimly fated future. If only we could clone them. The way things are going, this may be our only option if this species is to withstand another brutal attack. My personal economy and lifestyle will also suffer. I kneel with the Bush Administration and family, now, in prayer, and hope for a miracle. I hope for a brighter future for everyone, for humanity, and for paper towels everywhere.

huh?

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:57:26 GMT

"A lot of times in the rhetoric, people forget the facts. And the facts are that thousands of small businesses—Hispanically owned or otherwise—pay taxes at the highest marginal rate."—to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce; Washington, D.C., March 19, 2001 George W. Bush

from my friend, Anton

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 01:49:38 GMT

...Two men raised an orphan lion cub, but they raised it with the intention of releasing it back into the wilds. So they did their best to not just feed and take care of it, but to teach it to hunt like it's mother would have. When the lion got big enough, it was let go deep in the savannah and left to fend for itself. Later the two young men started to wonder if the lion they had released had survived or not, and because of the deep personal attachment they had to it they hired a tracker to see if he could find this one lion out of thousands in the protected area and see if it had survived. Remarkably, the tracker did find their lion, and reported he was still alive, and had joined forces with a group of unattached male bachelors that had formed a hunting pack. Well, hearing that "their lion" was alive wasn't good enough, they had to see for themselves. So they had the tracker take them up close to this particular group of male lions, and saw their lion. The young men thought, "lets walk closer and see if he recognizes us". This video is what happened next. When you're watching this, bear in mind, "their" lion hasn't seen them in over a year and a half. And all the other lions in the video are TOTALLY WILD. Look at THEIR reaction. And last, check out the tracker...he's the older guy with no shirt on...you can see he's NEVER seen anything like this in his life! Check it out!...love, A. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=036_1186245897

My date with Gavin Newsom and the greater part of an evening in San Francisco

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 23:29:39 GMT

My date with Gavin Newsom and the greater part of an evening in San Francisco Thu, October 4, 2007 - 4:29 PM The lucky caller of Ruby Rod's 98.7 KISS fm radio contest last week, Gavin 10-10 Newsom, a modest gentleman and Mayor of San Francisco, won a date with me for a romantic escape throughout the city, a fundraising endeavor supporting my favorite local charities and humanitarian efforts. And it was quite a dating adventure. I have to admit. Originally, Mr. Newsom, or as he prefers I call him, Gavy, was to send his driver, Biff, to escort me to our meeting place. But as it happened, Gavy had been running late due to a sudden plumbing problem and some other kind of mundane business at his home and so we made an alternate plan to meet at the Starlight Room for an apéritif. Gavy arrived, producing himself as an ex man in drag, but to his bemusement it was not the usual Sunday soirée. That is to say it was not the usual night of uncensored conduct. So this left him the only cross-dresser at the place. A precarious social situation and somewhat uncomfortable, enough cause for us to seek our entertainment at more favorable houses. And since Gavy is on a specific diet, we made a concerted effort to render the evening activity a special creation. The driver pulled around to the back entrance for us. I managed to sneak away with a wooden peppermill that was placed in the window sill presumably for the convenience of the wait staff. It slipped right into my elongated clutch, one for my personal collection. As we drove about the city lights, everybody going downtown, crowds bustling, the clicking heels along the concrete sidewalks, and the bass pounding the car ten stades away, all of this combined to overwhelm my senses. I felt a sudden emptiness making its way unerringly into my stomach. The need for something to eat became evermore present. We just had to make a quick stop on our getaway. Gavy asked the driver to swing by Taco Bell for a seven-layer burrito, the vegetarian meal. As we made our way up the drive to the cashier window, it turned out that Gavy had mislaid his wallet back at the Starlight Room. He reached into his pockets hoping to find at least some loose change and a bill of some kind. AHA! Gavy exclaimed, with an elevated sigh of relief as he pulled out a two-dollar bill and some change from his pocket handing it to the cashier. Under closer inspection, the cashier looked up at us with a suspicious sneer and then told us to wait a few moments while he stepped away from the drive-thru window. On his return the cashier brought the manager of Taco Bell who rejected the bill and refused us the seven-layer burrito. “I’m sorry, this is nothing more than a piece of paper with some words printed on it...'two dollars' ...means absolutely nothing.” holding the bill up to the overhead lights, “we can’t accept this.” He asked if we had any other money to pay our tab. “There must be some mistake. I just paid you for our order.” Gavy replied. “Oh? You mean with that 'two-dollar bill'? We only accept cash here. What do I look like to you?” the manager remarked with a profusion of slang and then called for security back-up. The night watchman intervened at the drive-thru window from inside the building, tucking the back of his shirt into to his pants and stood beside the cashier. “what’s going on here?” he questioned with a wheezing drawl while scrawling something into his pad. He continued to wipe the tips of his fingers onto the front side of his pant leg as if he'd been eating greasy potato chips. Gavy said, in a poised and reserved manner, still in drag, “good-evening sir. We ordered a seven-layer burrito. Apparently there is a problem with our money. We’re paying in cash.” “Oh, with a 'two-dollar bill'? What do you think this is, some kind of game- pass and go- collect two-hundred dollars? This establishment only takes real money. You either pay or leave. As you can see, there are several witnesses…” Just as we were about to pull away, the watchman exclaims, “hey, you, you’re Newsom, the Mayor of San Francisco? It is! Hey everybody, look who it is! it’s Gavin Newsom! Make him a burrito on the fly!” As you can probably imagine, I was utterly exhausted after having to sit through this trial and could not wait to get into a dimly lit booth where I could finally relax with my date in drag. But Gavy really wanted to explore a warm raspberry soufflé with chocolate sauce and some karaoke action at this exclusive corner cafe across town. It was a dark spot, lots of guys crowding the place bucking for the mic. Once we got ourselves nestled in there and placed our dessert order, Gavy looked at me with a glowing smile. “I’m feeling evil” he said, crinkling his nose. Whispering into my ear, he told me that he just wanted to make up for the rough start by singing a little something, “it’s best that I alter my costume slightly. If you’ll excuse me while I take my place…” And off he went to the right of the stage. There was a pregnant pause in the crowd, followed by a lot of whispering while the seats were arranged to make a clear space for the performance. A pretty jug of water and some tumblers were placed on each table, and cigars, matches, and ash trays were set towards the door to the cloak room where the men helped themselves. It was an unusually warm and balmy night in the city. Things began to heat up a bit. I felt thirsty suddenly. The waiter took it upon himself to offer me a gratuitous martini, chilled and shaken, as if he were able to read my mind, a nice, smooth cool-down. The room filled up to maximum capacity and so the maître d', a bald man in uniform, opened all of the doors to the sidewalk to allow a passage of air to flow through the room and invited the diverted pedestrians into the fringes of the place. The piano keyed abruptly. Out came Gavy sliding clear across the stage, gripping an erect microphone stand in stripped-down-Risky-Business fashion, looking like Tom Cruise, only taller, in his white socks and briefs… -Just enough edge to crack an egg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6UJZtCz1-c “Just take those old records off the shelf I'll sit and listen to 'em by myself Today's music ain't got the same soul I like that old time rock 'n' roll” The crowds overflowed out onto the curbside, blocking traffic through the intersection crosswalk. Some amateur footage was instantly uploaded to YouTube.com. by a small parade of frat boys who were also filming themselves in raw, collegiate activity, kicking a Frisbee about, up and down the street and up along the walls of the cafe. What a spectacle. Then it was my turn to sing the only sensible thing that popped into my mind just then: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYfoj4IGrr4 As we strolled down the walk late in the evening, we mused the following day’s activities, a possible meeting for banana breakfast at Gavy's rooftop garden as the Blue Angels soar above the bay. Just then Gavy stopped and took a deep breath of air as if something were weighing on his mind. He looked up into the night at the stars spread out across the sky, likened to neoned confetti sprinkled into a cupula of black ink. “Do you see that?” pointing up into five directions in sky. “Right there…that’s my star. that is my star.” “You mean to say, it watches over you even when you cannot see?” “Ya. Even when I can’t see a thing” he paused, inwardly mentating. There was a pleasant breeze. “will you dance with me now under the canopy of these stars…?” “For you… a happy birthday dance. A very happy birthday, indeed. Truly, Mr. Newsom! Truly.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7e-CpDQdac&mode=related&search= The next morning I was greeted by Biff, who drove me over to Gavy’s place for an idyllic, late morning banana breakfast on the rooftop lawn while the Blue Angels soared above the city spelling out F-I-A-T L-U-X across the misty sky, and right then a double-rainbow appeared. fiat lux

thanks giving

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 06:51:54 GMT

Thanksgiving Prayer "To Jack Dillinger and hope he is still alive. Thanksgiving Day November 28 1986" Thanks for the wild turkey and the passenger pigeons, destined to be shit out through wholesome American guts. Thanks for a continent to despoil and poison. Thanks for Indians to provide a modicum of challenge and danger. Thanks for vast herds of bison to kill and skin leaving the carcasses to rot. Thanks for bounties on wolves and coyotes. Thanks for the American dream, To vulgarize and to falsify until the bare lies shine through. Thanks for the KKK. For nigger-killin' lawmen, feelin' their notches. For decent church-goin' women, with their mean, pinched, bitter, evil faces. Thanks for "Kill a Queer for Christ" stickers. Thanks for laboratory AIDS. Thanks for Prohibition and the war against drugs. Thanks for a country where nobody's allowed to mind his own business. Thanks for a nation of finks. Yes, thanks for all the memories-- all right let's see your arms. You always were a headache and you always were a bore. Thanks for the last and greatest betrayal of the last and greatest of human dreams. - William S. Burroughs thanks bill. and now for the audio/video portion of our program click tbelow and then click the video link in the first paragraph: http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2005/11/a_thanksgiving_.html

Fleet Week October 4th

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 02:35:07 GMT

http://www.fleetweek.us/fleetweek/

what he meant when he said...

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 23:54:37 GMT

"The Senate needs to leave enough money in the proposed budget to not only reduce all marginal rates, but to eliminate the death tax, so that people who build up assets are able to transfer them from one generation to the next, regardless of a person's race."—Washington, D.C., April 5, 2001 George W. Bush

“to wit, three hundred and seventy-one and one-quarter grains of silver.”

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:05:43 GMT

What Is A "Dollar"? An Historical Analysis Of The Fundamental Question In Monetary Policy by Edwin Vieira, Jr. Foreword Today, all thinking, informed Americans know their country is in trouble. Many haven't a clue as to what went wrong with their government, while others can recite a litany of reasons for their country's distress. Of course, no one reason is paramount; but surely a debased, corrupt, and inflationary monetary system must be placed near the top of the list of causes of America's woes. What To Do About It? This Monograph presents, in irrefutable fashion, the legal and economic history of the "dollar,” and of the "dollar's" role in America's monetary system, as originally devised by the Founding Fathers. It also analyzes the Coinage Act of 1792, signed into law by President Washington, which put into effect the monetary system the Founders had previously outlined in the Constitution. This system helped make the United States "dollar" the safest, most sought-after currency in the world, leading to the well-known saying "sound as a dollar.” However, in 1913, Congress - in an unconstitutional act - relinquished its constitutional power and duty to "coin Money and regulate the Value thereof" to a private banking cartel, the Federal Reserve System. The ensuing years witnessed a gradual abandonment of the Founding Fathers' system (based on silver and gold coins) and the insidious substitution of a paper-currency system based on irredeemable, fiat Federal Reserve Notes, which continue to circulate today only because of the public's misplaced confidence. What to do about it? is the question. Obviously, the Federal Reserve System's experiment with fiat currency has failed. But we cannot have a sound economy without sound money. That means we must return to a monetary system based on silver and gold coins - as the Founding Fathers wisely specified. This will require action by Congress to rectify its mistake of 1913, by abolishing the Federal Reserve System and reaffirming the "dollar" as a coin containing 371.25 grains (troy) of fine silver. We know that Congress will take no such action on its own initiative. Congress will move only when the general public becomes aware of, and incensed by, the monetary mess Congress and the Federal Reserve System have created. Therefore, everyone concerned with "the money issue" must bring the facts to the attention of as many Americans as possible. This Monograph contains more than enough documentation to convince anyone of good faith and an open mind of what a "dollar" is. This documentation should be used in every possible way to generate public debate on the money issue: letters to the editor, call-ins to radio talk shows, local citizens' meetings, and so on. All these offer opportunities to present powerful arguments for a restoration of the constitutional monetary system, and to wrest the initiative in the public forum away from the Federal Reserve System and its apologists. As the Monograph concludes, "modern money has become a means for the total confiscation of private property by the government.” It is, therefore, incumbent on those of us who understand this issue to make the truth known to others. Nothing could be more vital than to restore the monetary system with a proven track record: the one devised by our Founding Fathers! Richard L. Solyom, Chairman Sound Dollar Committee What Is A "Dollar"? Introduction The question "What is a 'dollar'?" may seem trivial. Everyone knows what a "dollar" is - or, at least almost everyone thinks he does. In fact, however, very few people could correctly define a "dollar.” And even fewer know why a correct definition is vital to their continued economic and political well-being. Analysis 1. Why is a correct definition of the term "dollar" important? The United States has a highly advanced free-market economy. In a free- market economy, the prices of almost all goods and services are stated in units of money. Under present law - and, as will be described below, from the very beginnings of this country - "United States money is expressed in dollars * * * .”1 Moreover, all "United States coins and currency (including Federal Reserve Notes * * *) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes and dues.”2 Thus, all "coins and currency (including Federal Reserve notes * * * )" that are "expressed in dollars" are both money and legal tender. For this reason, accurately defining the noun "dollar" is mandatory, in order to know what is supposedly the official "Money" of the United States and what constitutes "legal tender for all debts, public charges. taxes and dues.”3 2. Do the present monetary statutes intelligibly define the "dollar'"? Unfortunately, the present monetary statutes do not define the "dollar" in an intelligible fashion. a. Federal Reserve Notes. Most people associate the noun "dollar" with the Federal Reserve Note ("FRN") "dollar bill,” engraved with the portrait of President George Washington. This association is mistaken. No statute defines - or ever has defined - the "one dollar" FRN as the "dollar,” or even as a species of "dollar.” Moreover, the United States Code provides that FRNs "shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States * * * or at any Federal Reserve bank.”4 Thus, FRNs are not themselves "lawful money" - otherwise, they would not be "redeemable in lawful money.” And if FRNs are not even "lawful money,” it is inconceivable that they are somehow "dollars,” the very units in which all "United States money is expressed.”5 People are confused on this point because of the insidious manner in which FRNs "evolved" - actually, degenerated is a more appropriate verb - from the late 1920s until today. FRNs of Series 1928 through Series 1950E carried the obligation "The United States of America will pay to the bearer on demand [some number of] dollars.” Prior to 1934, the notes carried the inscription "Redeemable in gold on demand at the United States Treasury, or in gold or lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank.” After 1934, the notes carried the inscription "this note * * * is redeemable in lawful money at the United States Treasury, or at any Federal Reserve Bank" (post-1934). Starting with Series 1963, the words "will pay to the bearer on demand" no longer appear; and each FRN simply states a particular denomination in "dollars.” With and after Series 1963, the promise of redemption also vanished from the face of each note.6 Thus, on their faces FRNs became, in the apt description of banking expert John Exter, an "I.O.U. Nothing" currency. This change in the mere language printed on FRNs could not transform their legal character, however. If FRNs were not "dollars" when they explicitly promised to pay in gold or "lawful money,” they did not magically become "dollars" when they stopped explicitly promising to pay in anything at all.7 b. United States coins. The situation with coinage is more complex, but equally (if not more) confusing. The United States Code provides for three different types of coinage denominated in "dollars": namely, base- metallic coinage, gold coinage, and silver coinage. (1) The base-metallic coinage consists of "a dollar coin,” weighing "8.1 grams,” "a half dollar coin,” weighing "11.34 grams"; "a quarter coin,” weighing "5.67 grams": and "a dime coin,” weighing "2.268 grams.”8 All of these coins are composed of copper and nickel.9 The weights of the dime, the quarter, and the half dollar are in the correct arithmetical proportions, the one to each of the others.10 But the "dollar" is disproportionately light (or the other coins disproportionately heavy). In this series of base metallic coins, then, the questions naturally arise: Is the "dollar" a cupro-nickel coin weighing "8.1 grams"? Or is it two cupro- nickel coins (or four or ten coins) collectively weighing 22.68 grams? Or is it both? Or is it neither, but something else altogether, to which the weights of these coins are irrelevant? (2) Similarly, the gold coinage consists of "[a] fifty dollar gold coin" that "weighs 33.931 grams, and contains one troy ounce of fine gold"; "[a] twenty-five dollar gold coin" that "contains one-half ounce of fine gold"; "[a] ten dollar gold coin" that "contains one fourth ounce of fine gold"; and "[a] five dollar gold coin" that "contains one tenth ounce of fine gold.”11 The "fifty dollar,” "twenty-five dollar,” and "five dollar" coins are in the correct arithmetical proportions each to the others. But the "ten dollar" coin is not. Therefore, is a "dollar" one-fiftieth or one-fortieth of an ounce of gold? Or both? Or neither? And what is the logical, economic, or other relationship between a "dollar" that contains "8.1 grams" of copper and nickel, and a "dollar" that consists of 0.679 grams of gold alloy?12 (3) Finally, the silver coinage consists of a coin that is inscribed "One Dollar,” weighs "31.103 grams,” and is supposed to contain one ounce of .”999 fine silver.”13 What is the rational relationship between this "dollar" of "31.103 grams" of ".999 fine silver,” a "dollar" containing 0.679 grams of gold alloy, and a "dollar" containing "8.1 grams" of base metals? Obviously, these are not the amounts of the metals that exchange against each other in the free market - that is, the different weights of different metals do not reflect equivalent purchasing powers. So, on what theory are each of these disparate weights, and purchasing powers, equally "dollars"? c. Currency of "equal purchasing power" The United States Code provides no answer to this perplexing question. Indeed, it mandates that the question should not even be capable of being asked. For the Code commands that "the Secretary [of the Treasury] shall redeem gold certificates owned by the Federal reserve banks at times and in amounts the Secretary decides are necessary to maintain the equal purchasing power of each kind of United States currency.14 One need be no expert in currency transactions to know that a "fifty-dollar" gold coin has significantly more purchasing power than a "fifty-dollar" FRN or than fifty cupro-nickel "dollars,” and that a "one-dollar" silver coin has significantly more purchasing power than a "one-dollar" FRN or one cupro-nickel "dollar.” Thus, one need be no expert in administrative law to realize that the Secretary of the Treasury has defaulted on his obligation to keep allforms of "United States currency" at parity with each other - that is, to maintain a "dollar" of the same purchasing-power, whether it be composed of gold, silver, or base metals. The Secretary's default cannot be traced to a lack of power to perform his duty. For example, "With the approval of the President, the Secretary of the Treasury may - (A) buy and sell gold in the way, in amounts, at rates, and on conditions the Secretary considers most advantageous to the public interest; and (B) buy the gold with any direct obligations of the United States Government or United States coins and currency authorized by law * * *."15 "The Secretary may buy silver mined from natural deposits in the United States that is brought to a United States mint or assay office within one year after the month in which the ore from which it is derived was mined."16 "The Secretary may sell or use Government silver to mint coins * * * . The Secretary shall sell silver under conditions the Secretary considers appropriate for at least $1.292929292 a fine troy ounce."17 "Except to the extent authorized in regulations the Secretary of the Treasury prescribes with the approval of the President, the Secretary may not redeem United States currency (including Federal reserve notes * * *) in gold. * * * When redemption in gold is authorized, the redemption may be made only in gold bullion bearing the stamp of a United States mint or assay office in an amount equal at the time of redemption to the currency presented for redemption."18 Thus, the United States Code simply presents another unanswered question: "Why has the Secretary of the Treasury failed 'to maintain the equal purchasing power of each kind of United States currency'?" In sum, the present monetary statutes of the United States do not define the noun "dollar" in an unique way. Instead of monetary law - which, by hypothesis, requires clearly defined terms and rational relationships among those terms - the country's present monetary code smacks of political psychosis - in which completely different things have the same name, things unequal to each other are treated as equivalent, and things that should have the same characteristics (e.g., "equal purchasing power[s]") are quite different. 3. What do American history and the Constitution identify as the "dollar"? Reference to history clears away the confusion of present-day politics, by showing beyond cavil that the "dollar" is a specific coin, containing 371.25 grains (troy) of fine silver, and nothing else. a. The "dollar" in the Constitution. Both Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1 of and the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution refer explicitly to the "dollar" - in the one case, permitting "a Tax or duty * * * not exceeding ten dollars for each Person" the States saw fit "to admit" prior to 1808; and, in the other, guaranteeing trial by jury "[i]n suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars.” The Constitution does not define this "dollar.” But, in the late 1700s, no explicit definition was necessary: Everyone conversant with political and economic affairs knew that the word imported the silver Spanish milled dollar. Indeed, had not such an understanding been catholic, powerful contending forces might never have agreed to support the Constitution at all. For example, the traditional interpretation of Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1 is that it elliptically refers to the slave-trade, and represents a compromise between pro- and anti-slavery forces that was vital to ratification of the Constitution.19 Self-evidently, those in the pro-slavery faction would never have accepted the "Tax or duty" phrase unless they already knew that the "dollar" identified as the measure of the "Tax" had a fixed value, and what its value was. Otherwise, by monetary manipulation aimed at increasing the purchasing-power of the "dollar,” anti-slavery forces in Congress might have eliminated the slave-trade altogether. Similarly, the proponents of the fundamental right to jury-trial in the Seventh Amendment would never have accepted the "dollar"-limitation on jury- trials unless they already knew that the "dollar" had a fixed value, and what its value was. Otherwise, monetary manipulation might have eliminated common-law juries altogether. Yet both these groups also were aware of the doctrine that, if Congress had discretion to change the value of the unit of money, there could be no legal limits to the changes it might make.20 Therefore, their support of these provisions inferentially establishes what a literal reading of them straightforwardly suggests: to wit, that the noun "dollar" refers, not to a mere name applicable to whatever Congress whimsically might decide thereafter to call a "dollar,” but instead to a particular coin so familiar in American experience as to be beyond political transmogrification. An interpretation of the term "dollar" as signifying merely the label the Constitution gives to whatever Congress decides to make the unit of money, if consistently applied to other undefined terms in the document, would render the Constitution nonsensical. For example, the noun "Year" appears repetitively in Article I - particularly in Section 2, Clause 1 ("The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year"), and Section 3, Clause I ("The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years"). Self-evidently, the Framers used this term with the presumption that everyone would implicitly understand it to mean the time the earth actually requires for one complete revolution around the sun - rather than a mere empty shorthand for a unit of time within the discretion of Congress to adopt or change. Yet, if the word "dollar" need have no fixed, historically ascertainable meaning, neither need the word "Year.” The principle of constitutional interpretation is precisely the same in both cases. And if the noun "Year" need have no meaning more fixed than the noun "dollar" does in present-day monetary statutes (as discussed above), then Congress could enact laws "redefining" the "Year" so as to extend, for instance, the terms of the House and Senate to ten, twenty, one hundred, or any other number of earthly revolutions. Of course, Congress may, with constitutional propriety, appoint astronomers, physicists, and other qualified experts to determine with scientific precision what the "Year" actually is. Congress lacks authority, however, to decide for itself what the "Year" ought to be, or to declare the "Year" to be whatever Congress may arbitrarily desire from time to time. Analogously, Congress may, with constitutional propriety, appoint economists, monetary historians, and other experts to determine with clinometric accuracy what the "dollar" actually was in the late 1700s. In fact, this is what Congress did do, under both the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution (as described below). Congress has no authority, however, to decide for itself what the "dollar" ought to be. Besides constitutional history and logic, economic analysis and history support an interpretation of the noun "dollar" as referring to a specific thing the character of which was an ascertainable historical fact that Congress was obliged to determine, rather than as constituting merely a political label that Congress could assign to whatever it deemed expedient. The nominalistic view that would treat the term "dollar" as simply a convenient, historically vacuous term for whatever Congress chooses to declare to be "money,” and set up as the "unit of value,” is incapable of answering the question: "What is an abstract 'unit of value'?,” and passes over in silence the question: "Before ratification of the Constitution, was the 'dollar' something that it ceased to be thereafter?" Economically, of course, "abstract" (or "objective") value does not exist, in monetary matters or elsewhere. In general, the notion that value is objective is "[a]n inveterate fallacy"; and the allied concept that value is measurable in terms of some definedly fixed unit is a "spurious idea.” Simply put, "[t]here is no method available to construct a unit of value.” More specifically, "money is not a standard for the measurement of prices; it is a medium whose exchange ratio varies in the same way * * * in which the mutual exchange ratios of the vendible commodities and services vary.” Furthermore, money can never arise ex nihilo. "The acceptance of anew kind of money presupposes that the thing in question already has, previous exchange value on account of the services it can render directly to consumption or production."21 In short, no governmental edict can make something with no previously existing purchasing power either a "unit of value,” or "money" in the economic sense. Prior to ratification of the Constitution, no one conversant with economics and commercial practices conceived of monetary values as abstractions. Rather, "money" was generally synonymous with known weights of the precious metals, gold and silver, and (to a lesser degree) the base metals, such as copper. In particular, Anglo-American monetary history records that merchants traditionally tendered and accepted coins, the standard monetary instruments of the times, not by tale without consideration of those coins' qualities. but only as pieces of precious metal of specific weights and fineness. Where commercial practice accepted payment of coins by tale, it was always with the definite belief that those coins' stamps assured them to be of the correct weights and usual fineness for their types. Absent grounds supporting this assumption, merchants regularly resorted to weighing and chemical analyses. Thus, commercial practice always insisted that the "value" of coins was not their face-values as abstract governmental tokens, but only their market-values as pieces of actual metal. And whenever circumstances indicated that a stamp no longer reflected a coin's physical content, merchants ceased relying on the official monetary "value,” and substituted their own system for measuring the coin's market-worth in precious metal. From an early day, the law applicable to America conformed to this age- old commercial understanding. Queen Anne's Proclamation of 1704, for example, spoke not of abstract values, but of "the value of * * * coins which usually pass in payment in our said plantations [in America], according to their weight, and the assays made of them in our mint,” and specifically referred to the "Sevil, Pillar, or Mexico pieces of eight" (various forms of Spanish silver dollars) as having "the full weight of seventeen penny-weight and an half" - thereby recognizing that the value" of a coin lay in its "weight" and "assay" according to a fixed standard, or "full weight.”22 Thus, at the time of ratification of the Constitution, no person with any understanding of law and monetary affairs would have attributed to the noun "dollar" a meaning other than (for example): "a silver coin with a value of such-and-so grains of precious metal when at full weight.”23 b. Adoption of the "dollar" as the unit of money prior to ratification of the Constitution. The actions of the Continental Congress itself prove that the foregoing analysis is correct. The Founding Fathers did not need explicitly to adopt the "dollar" as the national unit of money or to define that noun in the Constitution - because the Continental Congress had already performed that task. I. Use of the dollar as a standard coin and monetary unit did not begin with the Continental Congress, however. Monetary historians generally first associate the dollar with one Count Schlick, who began striking such silver coins in 1519 in Joachim's Thai, Bavaria. Then called "Schlickten thalers" or "Joachimsthalers,” the coins became known simply as "thalers,” which transliterated into "dollars.” Interestingly, the American Colonies did not adopt the dollar from England, but from Spain. Under that country's monetary reforms of 1497, the silver real became the Spanish money-unit, or unit of account. A new coin consisting of eight reales also appeared. Variously known as pesos, duros, piezas de a ocho ("pieces of eight"), or Spanish dollars (because of their similarity in weight and fineness to the thaler), the coins quickly achieved predominance in financial markets of the New World because of Spain's then-important commercial and political position.24 Indeed, by 1704, the "pieces of eight" had in fact become a unit of account of the Colonies, as Queen Anne's Proclamation of 1704 recognized, when it decreed that all other current foreign silver coins "stand regulated, according to their weight and fineness, according and in proportion to the rate before limited and set for the pieces of eight of Sevil, Pillar, and Mexico.”25 By the War of Independence, the Spanish dollar was, for all practical purposes, rapidly becoming the monetary unit of the American people as a matter of economics. Not surprisingly, the Continental Congress first used, and then took formal steps to adopt, that dollar as the nation's standard of value. On 22 May 1776, a Congressional committee reported on "the value of the several species of gold and silver coins current in these colonies, and the proportions they ought to bear to Spanish milled dollars.” And on 2 September of that year, a further committee-report undertook to "declar[e] the precise weight and fineness of the * * * Spanish milled dollar * * * now becoming the Money-Unit or common measure of other coins in these states and to "explai[n] the principles and establish the rules by which * * * the said common measure shall be applied to other coins * * * in order to estimate their comparative values.”26 Meanwhile, Congress and its agents were carefully exploring the basis of, and possible structures for, a national monetary-system. In his letter to Congress of 15 January 1782, Robert Morris, Superintendent of the Office of Finance, commented that, "[a]lthough most nations have coined copper, yet that metal is so impure, that it has never been considered as constituting the money standard. This is affixed to the two precious metals [i.e., silver and gold], because they alone will admit of having their intrinsic value precisely ascertained.” "Arguments are unnecessary to shew that the scale by which every thing is to be measured ought to be as fixed as the nature of things will permit,” wrote Morris, concluding that"[t]here can be no doubt therefore that our money standard ought to be affixed to silver.” Although Morris personally favored creating an entirely new standard coin, he recognized that "[t]he various coins which have circulated in America, have undergone different changes in their value, so that there is hardly any which can be considered as a general standard, unless it be Spanish dollars.”27 In a plan first published on 24 July 1784, Thomas Jefferson strongly concurred that "[t]he Spanish dollar seems to fulfill all * * * conditions" applicable to "fixing the unit of money.” "Taking into our view all money transactions, great and small," he ventured, "I question if a common measure, of more convenient size than the dollar, could be proposed." "The unit, or dollar," he wrote equating the one with the other, "is a known coin, and the most familiar of all to the minds of people. It is already adopted from south to north: has identified our currency, and therefore happily offers itself as an unit already introduced. Our public debt, our requisitions and their apportionments, have given it actual and long possession of the place of unit."28 Yet Jefferson recognized the necessity of certain practical steps to adopt the dollar as the "Money-Unit": "If we determine that a dollar shall be our unit, we must then say with precision what a dollar is. This coin as struck at different times, of different weight and fineness, is of different values." This, though, Jefferson saw as a problem for economic science to solve through objective measurement, not as a matter for politics to dictate according to arbitrary policy. "If the dollars circulating among us be of every date equal, we should examine the quantity of pure metal in each, and from them form an average for our unit. This is a work proper to be committed to the mathematicians as well as merchants, and which should be decided on actual and accurate experiments." "The proportion between the value of gold and silver,” he added, "is a mercantile problem altogether.” Given "[t]he quantity of fine silver which shall constitute the unit,” and "the proportion of the value of gold to that of silver,” Jefferson went on, "a table should be formed * * * classing the several foreign coins according to their fineness, declaring the worth * * * in each class, and that they should be lawful tenders at those rates, if not clipped or otherwise diminished.”29 Concluding, he encouraged Congress: To appoint proper persons to assay and examine, with the utmost accuracy practicable, the Spanish milled dollars of different dates in circulation with us. To assay and examine in like manner the fineness of all the other coins which may be found in circulation within these states. To appoint also proper persons to enquire what are the proportions between the values in fine gold and fine silver, at the markets of the several countries with which we are or probably may be connected in commerce; and what would be a proper proportion here, having regard to the average of their values at those markets * * * . To prepare an ordinance for establishing the unit of money within these states * * * on the * * * principle[:] That the money-unit of these states shall be equal in value to Spanish milled dollar, containing so much fine silver as the assay * * * shall shew to be contained on an average in dollars of the several dates in circulation with us.30 Jefferson's cogent and straightforward analysis of the problem of selecting and defining a unit of money should be compared - contrasted, really - with the present mishmash of monetary statutes that leave the definition of the "dollar" in a state of hopeless confusion today. First, for Jefferson, the "unit" was to be "a known coin" that was "familiar" to the people because it was "already adopted" in the marketplace. None of the coins that Congress now authorizes - be it of silver, gold, or base metals - was (before its authorization) a "known coin" "familiar" to anyone in the United States, even in terms of its content of metal. Second, having settled on the "dollar" as the "unit,” for Jefferson the problem of fixing the standard "unit" reduced to determining "what a dollar is" in terms of "the quantity of pure metal" [i.e., silver] contained in "an average" coin that actually circulated in the marketplace. Thus, for Jefferson it was not the prerogative of Congress to create the "dollar" ex nihilo, but the responsibility of Congress to determine what the "dollar" in common use among the people actually was. Today's Congress assumes that it may declare anything a "dollar,” and then impose that ersatz, political pseudo- "dollar" on the people whether they want it or not. Third, for Jefferson, to settle the relative values of silver and gold coins was also a matter of studying actual economic relationships in the marketplace: to wit, "the proportion of the value of gold to that of silver" in the various coins in circulation. For today's Congress, economic relationships between silver and gold are irrelevant. And, of course, there is no rational economic relationship between the coins of base metals and the coins of precious metals, either. Moreover, even within the sets of gold and base-metallic coins themselves, rational economic relationships are irrelevant to Congress! Obviously, Jefferson's free-market, scientific approach is a world apart from the arbitrary way in which Congress has set up the mutually incompatible and internally irrational sets of silver, gold, and base- metallic coins that exist today. On 13 May 1785, a committee presented Congress with "Propositions Respecting the Coinage of Gold, Silver, and Copper,” which referred to the "Plan which proposes that the Money Unit be One Dollar.” "In favor of this Plan,” the committee reported, is "that a Dollar, the proposed Unit, has long been in general Use. Its Value is familiar. This accords with the national mode of keeping Accounts.” Later, the report referred to the "dollar" as the "Money of Account,” thereby equating that term with the term "Money-Unit.”31 On 6 July 1785, Congress unanimously "Resolved, That the money unit of the United States be one dollar.”32 Almost another year elapsed until, on 8 April 1786, the Board of Treasury reported to Congress on the establishment of a mint: Congress by their Act of the 6th July last resolved, that the Money Unit of the United States should be a Dollar, but did not determine what number of grains of Fine Silver should constitute the Dollar. We have concluded that Congress by their Act aforesaid, intended the common Dollars that are Current in the United States, and we have made our calculations accordingly. * * * * * The Money Unit or Dollar will contain three hundred and seventy five grains and sixty four hundredths of a Grain of fine Silver. A Dollar containing this number of Grains of fine Silver, will be worth as much as the New Spanish Dollars.33 Shortly thereafter, on 8 August 1787, Congress adopted this standard as "the money Unit of the United States.34 Again, stark and striking is the contrast between how the committee of the Continental Congress - composed of the Founding Fathers - approached the problem of fixing the unit of money, and how the modern Congress deals with the same matter. The committee determined that an American"dollar" should contain a known, unchangeable weight of silver, and would be "worth as much as the New Spanish Dollars" because it actually contained this weight of precious metal, not simply because Congress said it was a "dollar.” Today's Congress, however, assumes that the "dollar" need have no rational relationship to a weight of silver, of gold, or even of base metals. Thus, today's Congress assumes that the value of money has nothing to do with the substance that composes a coin, but is merely the product of a political decree. In today's Washington, D.C., might not only makes right, but also creates economic value! Many of the same people who served in the Continental Congress participated in the Federal Convention that drafted the Constitution. And even those members of the Convention who had not served in the Continental Congress knew what that Congress had done. Therefore, when the Convention used the noun "dollar" in Article 1, Section 9. Clause I of the Constitution, it was with the tacit understanding of all the history surrounding that noun. Thus, the lesson here is clear: The constitutional "dollar,” the constitutional "Money-Unit" or "Money of Account" of the United States, is an historically determinate, fixed weight of fine silver in the form of a coin - in essence, a unit of measure - adopted, not created, first by the American market and then by the Continental Congress well before ratification of the Constitution. c. Adoption of the "dollar" as the unit of money immediately after the ratification of the Constitution. Upon ratification of the Constitution. Congress and the Executive began work on a national monetary system. (1) Alexander Hamilton's Report on the Mint. On 28 January 1791, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton presented to Congress his Report on the Subject of a Mint. "A plan for an establishment of this nature,” he wrote, "involves a great variety of considerations intricate, nice, and important." Indeed, the erection of a mint was essential to the continued integrity of the nation's coinage: The dollar originally contemplated in the money transactions of this country [i.e., the silver Spanish milled dollar], by successive diminutions of its weight and fineness [in the Spanish mints], has sustained a depreciation of five per cent, and yet the new dollar has a currency in all payments in place of the old, with scarcely any attention to the difference between them. The operation of this in depreciating the value of property depending upon past contracts, and * * * of all other property, is apparent. Nor can it require argument to prove that a nation ought not to suffer the value of the property of its citizens to fluctuate with the fluctuations of a foreign mint, or to change with the changes in the regulations of a foreign sovereign. This, nevertheless, is the condition of one which, having no coins of its own, adopts with implicit confidence those of other countries. * * * * * It was with great reason, therefore, that the attention of Congress, under the late Confederation, was repeatedly drawn to the establishment of a mint; and it is with equal reason that the subject has been resumed * * * .35 To form "a right judgment of what ought to be done,” Hamilton posed two questions, "lst. What ought to be the nature of the money unit of the United States?,” and "2d. What the proportion between gold and silver, if coins of both metals are to be established?"36 Recognizing that "[a] pre-requisite to determining with propriety what ought to be the money-unit of the United States" is "to form as accurate an idea as the nature of the case will admit, of what it actually is,” Hamilton referred to the resolutions of the Continental Congress on the subject, noted that they had resulted in "no formal regulation on the point,” and concluded that "usage and practice * * * indicate the dollar as best entitled to that character.” As to "what kind of dollar ought to be understood; or, * * * what precise quantity of fine silver,” he surveyed the various pieces in circulation over the years, and recommended that "[t]he actual dollar in common circulation has * * * a much better claim to be regarded as the actual money unit.”37 Hamilton recognized that "[t]he suggestions and proceedings hitherto have had for object the annexing of [the title of 'money unit'] emphatically to the silver dollar.” Yet, his personal view was that "a preference ought to be given to neither of the metals for the money unit" - at least "[i]f each of them be as valid as the other in payments to any amount.” He realized, of course, that adopting equivalent, interchangeable "money units" of both silver and gold would pose practical problems "from the fluctuations in the relative [market-]value of the metals"; but he suggested that this could be overcome "if care be taken to regulate the proportion between them with an eye to their average commercial value.”38 Turning to "the proportion which ought to subsist between [gold and silver] in the coins,” Hamilton proposed two "option[s]": namely, "[t]o approach as nearly as can be ascertained, the * * * average proportion * * * in * * the commercial world"; or "[t]o retain that which now exists in the United States.” The first alternative "requir[ing] better materials than are possessed, or than could be obtained without an inconvenient delay,” he recommended instead the domestic market-ratio of "about as 1 to 15.” "There can hardly be a better rule in any country for the legal than the market proportion,” he explained, "if this can be supposed to have been produced by the free and steady course of commercial principles. The presumption in such a case is that each metal finds its true level, according to its intrinsic utility, in the general system of money operation.”39 In the course of determining the method by which the government would defray the expenses of coining silver and gold brought to the mint byprivate parties (the system of "free coinage"40), Hamilton restated the traditional policy against monetary debasement in emphatic terms: [R]aising the denomination of the coin [is] a measure which has been disapproved by the wisest men in the nations in which it has been practiced, and condemned by the rest of the world. To declare that a less weight of gold or silver shall pass for the same sum, which before represented a greater weight, or to ordain that the same weight shall pass for a greater sum, are things substantially of one nature. The consequence of either of them is to degrade the money unit; obliging creditors to receive less than their just dues, and depreciating property of every kind. * * * * * The quantity of gold and silver in the national coins, corresponding with a given sum, cannot be made less than heretofore without disturbing the balance of intrinsic value, and making every acre of land, as well as every bushel of wheat, of less actual worth than in time past. * * * [A debasement would cause] a rise of prices proportioned to the diminution of the intrinsic value of the coins. This might be looked for in every enlightened commercial country; but, perhaps, in none with greater certainty than in this; because in none are men less liable to be the dupes of sounds; in none has authority so little resource for substituting names for things. A general revolution in prices * * * could not fail to distract the ideas of the community, and would be apt to breed discontents as well among those who live on the income of their money as among the poorer classes of the people, to whom the necessaries of life would * * * become dearer. Among the evils attendant on such an operation are these: creditors, both of the public and of individuals would lose a part of their property, public and private credits would receive a wound; the effective revenues of the Government would be diminished. There is scarcely any point, in the economy of national affairs, of greater moment than the uniform preservation of the intrinsic value of the money unit. On this the security and steady value of property essentially depend.41 In sum, Hamilton recommended two equivalent statutory money-units based on weight, a gold coin of 24.75 grains of fine gold, and a silver coin of 371.25 grains of fine silver. "[N]othing better,” he wrote, "can be done * * * than to pursue the track marked out by the resolution [of the Continental Congress] of the 8th of August, 1786."42 Hamilton's Report thus restated the traditional monetary principles of American law, as the Continental Congress applied them, and as the Federal Convention embodied them in the Constitution. Congress, Hamilton urged, should adopt silver and gold as the nation's monetary substances, at an exchange-ratio representing the average proportionate value between the metals in the domestic free market. Congress should continue on "the track marked out" under the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution by employing the "dollar" as the "money-unit,” or "money of account" - a silver "dollar" derived directly from the Spanish milled dollar, and a new gold coin containing a silver-"dollar's" worth of gold. The government should provide "free coinage" of both silver and gold for the public. And it should guarantee the preservation of the intrinsic value of the coinage. Of enduring importance is Hamilton's admonition that "[t]here is scarcely any point, in the economy of national affairs, of greater moment than the uniform preservation of the intrinsic value of the money unit. On this the security and steady value of property essentially depend" Apparently, however, although Hamilton's statue stands before the Department of the Treasury, his words have been forgotten in contemporary Washington, D.C. (2) The Coinage Act of 1792. Little more than a year after Hamilton's Report, Congress enacted its principles into law. The Coinage Act of 179243 initiated a new statutory system embodying the constitutional principles that Hamilton had reaffirmed. First, Congress followed consistent American common-law tradition by continuing the use of silver, gold, and copper as "Money.”44 Second, it reiterated the judgment of the Continental Congress and the Constitution that "the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units,”45 and defined the "DOLLARS OR UNITS" in terms of weight, as "of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure * * * silver.”46 Recognizing that to adopt Hamilton's suggestion of a "gold dollar" would cause confusion and require constant governmental supervision to "regulate * * * Value[s],"47 Congress created no such coin, instead mandating the coinage of "EAGLES,” "each to be of the value of ten dollars or units,”48 that is, of the weight of fine gold equivalent in the marketplace to 3,712.50 grains of fine silver. Following Hamilton's recommendation, though, it fixed "the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which shall by law be current as money within the United States" at "fifteen to one, according to quantity in weight, of pure gold or pure silver.”49 And it made "all the gold and silver coins * * * issued from the * * * mint * * * a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever, those of full weight according to the respective values [established in the Act], and those of less than full weight at values proportional to their respective weights.”50 Thus, Congress did not establish a "gold dollar,” or enact a "gold standard,” as the popular misconception holds. For example, the Encyclopaedia Britannica erroneously reports that the "dollar * * * was defined in the Coinage Act of 1792 as either 24.75 gr. (troy) of fine gold or 371.25 gr. (troy) of fine silver.”51 The Act did no such thing. It explicitly defined the "dollar" as a fixed weight of silver, and "regulate[d] the Value" of gold coins according to this standard unit (or money of account) and the market exchange-ratio between the two metals. Nowhere did the Act refer to a "gold dollar,” only to various gold coins of other names that it valued in "dollars.”52 Congress also provided free coinage "for any person or persons,”53 and affixed the penalty of death for the crime of debasing the coinage.54 Thus did the first Congress - which knew what the Constitution meant if any Congress ever did - rigorously apply the Constitution's mandate: It determined as a fact "the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current,” and thereby permanently fixed the constitutional standard of value, or "money of account,” as a unit of weight consisting of 371.25 grains of fine silver in the form of coin. It coined American "dollars" as "Money,” containing this intrinsic value of silver. It coined American "eagles" as "Money,” containing a fixed weight of pure gold - and regulate[d]" their "Value" at so-many "dollars" by comparing their intrinsic value in (weight of) fine gold to the market-equivalent of silver. It gave both the silver and gold coins legal-tender character for their intrinsic values in all payments. It opened the mint to free coinage of the precious metals. And it outlawed debasement of the nation's new "Money.” The handiwork of the statesmen who drafted and approved these measures is more than a merely coincidental embodiment of the traditional principles of Anglo-American common law, the experiences of the Continental Congress, and the explicit provisions of the Constitution. Rather, taking into account the vicissitudes of the time, the Coinage Act of 1792 perfectly reflects what the common law and the law under the Articles of Confederation had been before ratification of the Constitution, and what the constitutional law was then and remains today.55 It is a definitive interpretation, elaboration, and application of the Constitution - with, in some of its sections at least, a clearly constitutional character of its own: in particular, Sections 9 (definition of the "dollar"), 14-15 (free coinage of silver and gold), 16 (legal-tender character for silver and gold coins),56 and 20 ("dollar" identified as the "money of account").57 Most importantly, Congress' determination of the proper weight of the "dollar" is, for all practical purposes today, a statement of constitutional law unalterable except by amendment of the Constitution itself. For, at the remove of almost two centuries, to check the accuracy of the conclusion that 371.25 grains (troy) of fine silver best represents an average weight of the various Spanish milled "dollars" in circulation in the United States in 1792 is most probably impossible. Conclusion In the light of this history, the present monetary provisions of the United States Code demonstrate that official Washington, D.C., has no conception of what a "dollar" really is. The reason for this self-imposed ignorance is obvious. By reducing the "dollar" to a political abstraction, the national government has empowered itself to engage in limitless debasement (depreciation in purchasing power) of the currency. A "dollar" that contains - and must perforce of the Constitution contain - 371.25 grains of fine silver cannot be reduced in value below the market exchange value of silver for other commodities. A pseudo-"dollar" that contains no fixed amount of any particular substance per "dollar" can be reduced in value infinitely. As debasement of currency amounts to a hidden tax, Congress' silent refusal to recognize the constitutional "dollar" amounts to the usurpation of an unlimited power to tax through manipulation of the monetary system. Thus, modern "money" has become a means for the total confiscation of private property by the government. More ominously, this scheme of surreptitious confiscation remains hidden from the vast majority of Americans, who seem blissfully unconcerned about the issue most important to the soundness of the country's monetary system: namely, the character of the monetary unit. One need not be overly pessimistic to predict that misuse by politicians of the fictional, constantly depreciating pseudo-"dollar" to expropriate unsuspecting citizens will continue until an economic crisis finally shocks an increasingly impoverished American people out of its slumber, and forces the people to ask the simple question: "What is a 'dollar'?" At that time, the answer will be no different from what it is today, and has been since 1704 - but the opportunity to use that knowledge to prevent a catastrophe may be long gone. Therefore, those few who do know what a "dollar" is, and why that definition is important, need to inform as many of their fellow-citizens as possible. If time has not already run out for re-education of the American people in this area, it is racing towards the historic exit. Under these circumstances, silence by the friends of sound money and honest government is not "golden,” but potentially fatal. Appendix Excerpts from the Coinage Act of 1792 Act of 2 April 1792, 1 Statutes at Large 246 [246] CHAPTER XVI. - An Act establishing a Mint, and regulating the Coins of the United States. SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, and it is hereby enacted and declared, That a mint for the purpose of a national coinage be, and the same is established * * * . * * * * * [248] SEC. 9. And be it further enacted, That there shall be from time to time struck and coined at the said mint, coins of gold, silver, and copper, of the following denominations, values and descriptions, viz., EAGLES - each to be of the value of ten dollars or units, and to contain two hundred and forty-seven grains and four eights of a grain of pure, or two hundred and seventy grains of standard gold. HALF EAGLES - each to be of the value of five dollars, and to contain one hundred and twenty-three grains and six eights of a grain of pure, or one hundred and thirty five grains of standard gold. QUARTER EAGLES - each of be of the value of two dollars and a half dollar, and to contain sixty-one grains and seven eights of a grain of pure, or sixtyseven grains and four eights of a grain of standard gold. DOLLARS or UNITS - each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver. HALF DOLLARS - each to be of half the value of the dollar or unit, and to contain one hundred and eighty-five grains and ten sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or two hundred and eight grains of standard silver. QUARTER DOLLAR - each to be of one fourth the value of the dollar or unit, and to contain ninety-two grains and thirteen sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or one hundred and four grains of standard silver. DISMES - each to be of the value of one tenth of a dollar or unit, and to contain thirty-seven grains and two sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or forty-one grains and two sixteenth parts of a grain of standard silver. HALF DISMES - each to be of the value of one twentieth of a dollar, and to contain eighteen grains and nine sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or twenty grains and four fifth parts of a grain of standard silver. CENTS each to be of the value of the one hundredth part of a dollar, and to contain eleven penny-weights of copper. HALF CENTS - each to be of the value of half a cent, and to contain five penny-weights and a half penny-weight of copper. SEC. 12. And be it further enacted, That the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which shall by law be current as money within [249] the United States, shall be as fifteen to one, according to quantity in weight, of pure gold or pure silver; that is to say, every fifteen pounds weight of pure silver shall be of equal value in all payments, with one pound weight of pure gold, and so in proportion as to any greater or less quantities of the respective metals. SEC. 12. And be it further enacted, That the standard for all gold coins of the United States shall be eleven parts fine to one part alloy; and accordingly that eleven parts in twelve of the entire weight of each of the said coins shall consist of pure gold, and the remaining one twelfth part of alloy; and the said alloy shall be composed of silver and copper, in such proportions not exceeding one half silver as shall be found convenient; to be regulated by the director of the mint, for the time being, with the approbation of the President of the United States, until further provision shall be made by law. * * * SEC. 13. And be it further enacted, That the standard for all silver coins of the United States, shall be one thousand four hundred and eighty-five parts fine to one hundred and seventy-nine parts alloy; and accordingly that one thousand four hundred and eighty-five parts in one thousand six hundred and sixty-four parts of the entire weight of each of the said coins shall consist of pure silver, and the remaining one hundred and seventy- nine parts of alloy; which alloy shall be wholly of copper. SEC. 14. And be it further enacted, That it shall be lawful for any person or persons to bring to the said mint gold and silver bullion, in order to their being coined; and that the bullion so brought shall be there assayed and coined as speedily as may be after the receipt thereof, and that free of expense to the person or persons by whom the same shall have been brought. And as soon as the said bullion shall have been coined, the person or persons by whom the same shall have been delivered, shall upon demand receive in lieu thereof coins of the same species of bullion which shall have been delivered, weight for weight, of the pure gold or pure silver therein contained: Provided nevertheless, That it shall be at the mutual option of the party or parties bringing such bullion, and of the director of the said mint, to make an immediate exchange of coins for standard bullion, with a deduction of one half per cent, from the weight of the pure gold, or pure silver contained in the said bullion, as an indemnification to the mint for the time which will necessarily be required for coining the said bullion, and for the advance which shall have been so made in coins. * * * * * [250] SEC. 16. And be it further enacted, That all the gold and silver coins which shall have been struck at, and issued from the said mint, shall be a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever, those of full weight according to the respective values herein before described, and those of less than full weight at values proportional to their respective weights. SEC. 17. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the respective officers of the said mint, carefully and faithfully to use their best endeavours that all the gold and silver coins which shall be struck at the said mint shall be, as nearly as may be, conformable to the several standards and weights aforesaid SEC. 19. And be it further enacted, That if any of the gold or silver coins which shall be struck or coined at the said mint shall be debased or made worse as to the proportion of fine gold or fine silver therein contained, or shall be of less weight or value than the same ought to be pursuant to the directions of this act, through the default or with the connivance of any of the officers or persons who shall be employed at the said mint, for the purpose of profit or gain, or otherwise with a fraudulent intent, * * * every such officer or person who shall be guilty of any * * * of the said offenses, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and shall suffer death. SEC. 20. And be it further enacted, That the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dismes or tenths, cents or hundredths, and milles or thousandths, a disme being the tenth part of a dollar, a cent the hundredth part of a dollar, a mille the thousandth part of a dollar, and that all accounts in the public offices and all proceedings in the courts of the United States shall be kept and had in conformity to this regulation. APPROVED, April 2, 1792. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES 1 31 U.S.C. § 5101 (emphasis supplied). See Act of 2 April 1792, ch. XVI, § 9, 1 Stat. 246, 248. 2 31 U.S.C. § 5103. 3 Use of the modifier "supposedly" is necessary, because not everything that Congress may declare by statute to be "money" may qualify as the "Money" Congress may "coin" or "borrow" under the Constitution. See U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cls. 2 and 5. 4 12 U.S.C. § 411. 5 31 U.S.C. § 5101. 6 See Hewitt-Donlon Catalog of United States Small Size Paper Money (M. Hudgeons ed., 14th ed., 1979), at 66-153. 7 The adverb "explicitly" deserves careful attention, because no matter what FRNs do not state on their faces, they are required by law to be "redeemed in lawful money.” 12 U.S.C. § 411. 8 31 U.S.C. § 5112(a)(1-4). 9 31 U.S.C. § 5112(b). 10 One half dollar equals five dimes. One half dollar equals two quarters. And one quarter equals two and one-half dimes. 11 31 U.S.C. § 5112(a)(7-10). 12 Based on this set of coins, a "dollar's"-worth of coined gold is one-fiftieth of the weight of the "fifty dollar" gold coin ("33.931 grams"), or 0.679 grams. 13 31 U.S.C. § 5112(e). 14 31 U.S.C. § 5119(a) (emphasis supplied). 15 31 U.S.C. § 5116(a)(1). 16 31 U.S.C. § 5116(b)(1). 17 31 U.S.C. § 5116(b)(2). 18 31 U.S.C. § 5119(a). 19 E.g., 2 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (5th ed. 1891), § 1335, at 211 & n.2. 20 See, e.g, McCulloch v. Maryland. 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 425-33 (1819). 21 L. von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics (3rd rev. ed. 1963), at 203-04, 351-52, 411. See also 1 M. Rothbard, Man, Economy, and State: A Treatise on Economic Principles (1970), at 237. 22 See An Act for acertaining the rates of foreign coins in her Majesty's plantations in America, 1707, 6 Anne, ch. 30, § I (emphasis supplied in part). 23 Cf NLRB v. Amax Coal Co., A Division of Amax, Inc., 483 U.S. 322, 329 (1981): "Where Congress uses terms that have accumulated settled meaning under * * * the common law, a court must infer, unless the statute otherwise dictates, that Congress means to incorporate the established meaning of these terms." 24 See Sumner, "The Spanish Dollar and the Colonial Shilling,” 3 Amer. Hist. Rev. 607 (1898). 25 Note 22, ante. 26 4 Journals of the Continental Congress, 1777-1789 (W. Ford ed. 1905), at 381-82; 5 id. at 725. 27 Propositions respecting the Coinage of Gold, Silver, and Copper (printed folio pamphlet presented to the Continental Congress 13 May 1785), at 4, 5. 28 "NOTES on the Establishment of a MONEY MINT, and of a COINAGE for the United States,” The Providence Gazette and Country Journal, Vol. XXI, No. 1073 (24 July 1784), in Propositions, ante note 27, at 9, 10. 29 Id. at 11, 12. 30 Id. at 12. 31 28 Journals of the Continental Congress, ante note 26, at 355, 357. 32 29 id. at 499-500. 33 30 id. at 162-63. After ratification of the Constitution, Congress made a more accurate determination of the value of the dollar, setting it at 371.25 grains of fine silver (as described post). 34 31 Journals of the Continental Congress, ante note 26, at 503. 35 Hamilton's observation that it requires no "argument to prove that a nation ought not to suffer the value of the property of its citizens to fluctuate with the fluctuations of a foreign mint, or to change with the changes in the regulations of a foreign sovereign" should serve as a warning to those who rashly advocate a new "one-world" currency-system in which the United States would participate. 36 2 The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States (J. Gales compil. 1834), Appendix, at 2059, 2060, 2061. 37 Id. at 2061-63. 38 Id. at 2064-65. This is the source of the (unfulfilled) modern duty of the Secretary of the Treasury "to maintain the equal purchasing power of each kind of United States currency.” 31 U.S.C. § 5119(a). See ante, pp. 5-7. 39 Appendix, ante note 36, at 2066, 2068, 2069. 40 See Act of 2 April 1792, ch. XVI, §§ 14-15, 1 Stat. 246, 249-50. 41 Appendix, ante note 36, at 2071-73. 42 Id. at 2082. 43 Act of 2 April 1792, ch. XVI, 1 Stat. 246. See the Appendix hereto. 44 § 9, 1 Stat. at 248. 45 § 20, 1 Stat. at 250. 46 § 9, 1 Stat. at 248. 47 See U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 5. 48 Coinage Act of 1792, § 9, 1 Stat. at 248. 49 § 11, 1 Stat. at 248-49. 50 § 16, 1 Stat. at 250. 51 Vol. 7, "Dollar" (1963 ed.) at 558. 52 For the correct interpretation of the Act, see, e.g., A. Hepburn, History of Coinage and Currency in the United States and the Perennial Contest for Sound Money (1903), at 22. 53 Coinage Act of 1792, §§ 14-15, 1 Stat. at 249-50. 54 § 19, 1 Stat. at 2.50. 55 Section 11 of the Coinage Act was clearly constitutional in 1792, representing as it did a reasonable means of "regulat[ing] the Value" of gold coins as against the (silver) "dollar" in an era in which financial data were uncertain and difficult to communicate with dispatch. Today, such a statutorily fixed exchange-ratio for the precious metals would be unreasonable. Given the technical sophistication of existing financial institutions, Section 11 of a parallel modern act ought to read, perhaps, "That the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which shall by law be current as money within the United States, on any particular day or days, shall be the proportion between pure gold and pure silver, according to quantity in weight, existing at the beginning of the business day or days in [here Congress would identify a financial market], or, if the particular day or days is or are not a business day or days, on the last preceding business day or days." Cf. H.R. 6054, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. (1982), § 4. 56 See U.S. Const. art. 1, § 10, cl. 1. 57 1 Stat. at 248, 249, 250-51. ©1994 - National Alliance for Constitutional Money, Inc. CONTACT INFORMATION Larry Parks, Executive Director FAME,501(c)(3) Box 625, FDR Station New York, New York 10150-0625 Phone:212-818-1206 Fax: 212-818-1197 LPARKS@FAME.ORG www.fame.org http://www.fame.org/HTM/Vieira_Edwin_What_is_a_Dollar_EV-002.HTM

30 years ago

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:46:52 GMT

NBC Evening News for Monday, Oct 17, 1977 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Headline: Nuclear Waste Experiment Abstract: (Studio) Experiment is underway in Pacific Ocean, west of San Francisco, dealing with disposal of nuclear waste in future. REPORTER: John Chancellor (San Francisco, California) Between 1946 and 1970, nuclear waste was dumped in pacific from research facilities near San Francisco. Details with regard to dumped waste noted. Scientists to examine sea life in area and bring up some drums. [MAN - notes they're trying to see if these methods can be used again, and how improvements can be made.] REPORTER: Rick Davis Begin Time: 05:41:30 pm End Time: 05:43:10 pm TVN Record Number: 490926 Copyright: Abstract and Metadata (c) 1977-2007 Vanderbilt University http://openweb.tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/1977-10/1977-10-17-NBC-11.html

$20

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 04:35:03 GMT

I was not completely convinced when my new dentist told me that my bill was only $20 (my co-pay). I'm so used to being told of the horrific doom that is soon to plague my life as I slide down into the depths of the reclining chair and feeling as though I'm only two feet tall, I have no objections. This has been the case of my consent to go ahead with the drills and what must take place in there, my mouth. But this time, after my cleaning and xrays and such, he says, ohh by the way there's a filling that seem to need a repair. I can fix it right now, no problem (all of this being spoken in Chinese). I nod with drooling mouth in angst and anticipation for the dreadful, usual news that there's a cracked tooth and some other problem and he wants to know when i'm going to schedule my visit to fix these problems that will cost a small family fortune. But he does't say anything. He finishes his three minute task and we're done here. "ok, so come back in six months for a cleaning." he says with a smile. I look up completely baffled. I'm begging him to tell me the bad news about all of the problems reported by the previous dentist who wanted me to pay seven thousand dollars for all sorts of needed crowns and laser gum surgeries to lengthen my gumline so it looks "better" and all of this nonsense. He kind of laughed and replied that there's nothing wrong with my teeth at all. He said that people can say whatever they want, especially if they are "cosmetic" dentists that provide things that insurance doesn't cover. It's cosmetic and it's only when you agree to it being needed that it becomes necessary. That's how they make their money.

Sharkville

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:40:21 GMT

what does this mean? fallacy: Sharks must roll over on their sides to bite - No! claim: Sharks attack their prey in whichever way is most convenient, and they can protrude their jaws to bite prey items in front of their snouts. I found this from a site on myths on sharks: http://new-brunswick.net/new-brunswick/sharks/myths.html what do they mean it can protrude its jaws? how far do they mean? an inch or two or four? what? I'm frightened of sharks so much that last year when there were three shark attacks on both Big and Little Makena Beaches, Maui, including one fatality, I had to leave the island. I just can't get in the water knowing that someone is out there keeping tabs on my flippers. I want to accept these critters, welcome them into my circle of trust, but it's stuff like this that keeps me a bit standoffish

Milton Friedman on consumption theory and legalization of drugs

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:51:00 GMT

http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2005/12/26/1/an-hour-with-nobel-prize-winning-economist-milton-friedman 31:38 Milton Friedman argues for legalization of drugs

retraction alert!

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:07:17 GMT

Retraction from the previous post on Apocalypse defined: Basically I was off my a few marks here. I was too lazy to look in my lexicon. So the power of meaning, carried in the word itself, is as it is defined below and context in which it was actually used by Greeks: ΑΠΟ=απο= Apo= from, away from (a preposition) Compounds with: ΚΑΛΥΨΩ=καλυπσο= Kalupso=verb; (its root is καλυβη= sounds like Kalubay; means 1. the cabin, hut, 2. the screen, the cover) literally, kalupso means: of a bride’s ‘veil’, what one wears to cover one’s head It is a compound verb in future tense which means…generally speaking, I shall disclose; idiomatically, which is the true interpretation it means: I shall reveal my whole mind, I shall disclose, Plutarch, Plato, N.T. As a verb, idomatically, it means the revealing of one’s whole mind. (Greeks spoke in idomatic speech acts, and indirect discourse; but what they mean to say is a direct statement.) used in the Ν.Τ. = revealing, uncovering In the noun form it is an -ews suffix noun form, an abstract noun of action. This is right from Liddell and scott's Greek- English Lexicon 7th edition. Oxford It's our holy biblion of Greek reference.

excuse me, I think I need to wake up from this nightmare. Somebody pinch me

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:30:03 GMT

I've changed. I've begun to watch Russian News channel instead of BBC. Here's something that came up today that struck me as rather uncanny: 'According to Artur Chilingarov, President of the Association of Polar Explorers of the Russian Federation and the current expedition leader, no money from the state budget was spent for the project. There are several private sponsors. Some of them paid for the right to participate in the expedition. There are two businessmen who paid a certain sum of money to be the first along with Artur Chilingarov to reach the bed of the Arctic Ocean.' Who might these private investors be? And the main objective is to prepare for the final stages of global warming? so that the businessmen can mine out the oil from the land now surfacing out of the now melting glacial veneers covering the continental shelf, the territory of which is seemingly up for grabs, and now in dispute. this is their stated goal on the t.v. broadcast of the story about the arctic expedition. In the online article they only make scant mention of it in loose terms of "economic advantage..." and, "further explorations..." I've been under the impression that we're trying to stop global warming. Do they mean to admit that they, a secret cabal of unnamed businessmen, are taking over the exploration of the continental shelf and are a proponent of global warming for economic advantage? I was told in school that it was my fault because I used hairspray and air-conditioned my car. They're also putting up huge skyscrapers and hotels, 200 new ones in the next three years in Moscow alone. Hmm. Sounds like a plan. So, let's recap here: who benefits from the fallout of global warming? http://russiatoday.ru/scitech/news/11269

repost

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:43:53 GMT

The Mayan Calendar - The World Will Not End CARLOS BARRIOS was born into a Spanish family on El Altiplano, the highlands of Guatemala. His home was in Huehuetenango, also the dwelling place of the Maya Mam tribe. With other Maya and other indigenous tradition keepers, the Mam carry part of the old ways on Turtle Island (North America). They are keepers of time, authorities on remarkable calendars that are ancient, elegant and relevant. Mr. Barrios is a historian, an anthropologist and investigator. After studying with traditional elders for 25 years since the age of 19, he has also became a Mayan Ajq'ij, a ceremonial priest and spiritual guide, Eagle Clan. Years ago, along with his brother, Gerardo, Carlos initiated an investigation into the different Mayan calendars. He studied with many teachers. He says his brother Gerardo interviewed nearly 600 traditional Mayan elders to widen their scope of knowledge. "Anthropologists visit the temple sites," Mr. Barrios says, "and read the steles and inscriptions and make up stories about the Maya, but they do not read the signs correctly. It's just their imagination... Other people write about prophecy in the name of the Maya. They say that the world will end in December 2012. The Mayan elders are angry with this. The world will not end. It will be transformed. The indigenous have the calendars, and know how to accurately interpret it, not others." The Mayan Calendars comprehension of time, seasons, and cycles has proven itself to be vast and sophisticated. The Maya understand 17 different calendars, some of them charting time accurately over a span of more than ten million years. The calendar that has steadily drawn global attention since 1987 is called the Tzolk'in or Cholq'ij. Devised ages ago and based on the cycle of the Pleiades, it is still held as sacred. With the indigenous calendars, native people have kept track of important turning points in history. For example, the daykeepers who study the calendars identified an important day in the year One Reed, Ce Acatal, as it was called by the Mexicans. That was the day when an important ancestor was prophesied to return, "coming like a butterfly." In the western calendar, the One Reed date correlates to Easter Sunday, April 21, 1519 the day that Hernando Cortez and his fleet of 11 Spanish galleons arrived from the East at what is today called Vera Cruz, Mexico. When the Spanish ships came toward shore, native people were waiting and watching to see how it would go. The billowing sails of the ships did indeed remind the scouts of butterflies skimming the ocean surface. In this manner was a new era initiated, an era they had anticipated through their calendars. The Maya termed the new era the Nine Bolomtikus, or nine Hells of 52 years each. As the nine cycles unfolded, land and freedom were taken from the native people. Disease and disrespect dominated. What began with the arrival of Cortez, lasted until August 16, 1987 - a date many people recall as Harmonic Convergence. Millions of people took advantage of that date to make ceremony in sacred sites, praying for a smooth transition to a new era, the World of the Fifth Sun. From that 1987 date until now, Mr. Barrios says, we have been in a time when the right arm of the materialistic world is disappearing, slowly but inexorably. We are at the cusp of the era when peace begins, and people live in harmony with Mother Earth. We are no longer in the World of the Fourth Sun, but we are not yet in the World of the Fifth Sun. This is the time in-between, the time of transition. As we pass through transition there is a colossal, global convergence of environmental destruction, social chaos, war, and ongoing Earth changes. All this, Mr. Barrios says, was foreseen via the simple, spiral mathematics of the Mayan calendars. "It will change," Mr. Barrios observes. "Everything will change." He said Mayan Daykeepers view the Dec. 21, 2012 date as a rebirth, the start of the World of the Fifth Sun. It will be the start of a new era resulting from and signified by the solar meridian crossing the galactic equator, and the earth aligning itself with the center of the galaxy. At sunrise on December 21, 2012 for the first time in 26,000 years the Sun rises to conjunct the intersection of the Milky Way and the plane of the ecliptic. This cosmic cross is considered to be an embodiment of the Sacred Tree, The Tree of Life, a tree remembered in all the world's spiritual traditions. Some observers say this alignment with the heart of the galaxy in 2012 will open a channel for cosmic energy to flow through the earth, cleansing it and all that dwells upon it, raising all to a higher level of vibration. This process has already begun, Mr. Barrios suggested. "Change is accelerating now, and it will continue to accelerate." If the people of the earth can get to this 2012 date in good shape, without having destroyed too much of the Earth, Mr. Barrios said, we will rise to a new, higher level. But to get there we must transform enormously powerful forces that seek to block the way. A Picture of the Road Ahead From his understanding of the Mayan tradition and the calendars, Mr. Barrios offered a picture of where we are at and what may lie on the road ahead: The date specified in thecalendar Winter Solstice in the year 2012 does not mark the end of the world. Many outside people writing about the Mayan calendar sensationalize this date, but they do not know. The ones who know are the indigenous elders who are entrusted with keeping the tradition. "Humanity will continue," he contends, "but in a different way. Material structures will change. From this we will have the opportunity to be more human." We are living in the most important era of the Mayan calendars and prophecies. All the prophecies of the world, all the traditions, are converging now. There is no time for games. The spiritual ideal of this era is action. Many powerful souls have reincarnated in this era, with a lot of power. This is true on both sides, the light and the dark. High magic is at work on both sides. Things will change, but it is up to the people how difficult or easy it is for the changes to come about. The economy now is a fiction. The first five-year stretch of transition from August 1987 to August 1992 was the beginning of the destruction of the material world. We have progressed ten years deeper into the transition phase by now, and many of the so-called sources of financial stability are in fact hollow. The banks are weak. This is a delicate moment for them. They could crash globally if we don't pay attention. If the banks crash ... then we will be forced to rely on the land and our skills. The monetary systems will be in chaos, and we must then rely on our direct relationship with the Earth for our food and shelter. The North and South Poles are both breaking up. The level of the water in the oceans is going to rise. But at the same time land in the ocean, especially near Cuba, is also going to rise. A Call for Fusion As he met with audiences in Santa Fe, Mr. Barrios told a story about the most recent Mayan New Year ceremonies in Guatemala. He said that one respected Mam elder, who lives all year in a solitary mountain cave, journeyed to Chichicastenango to speak with the people at the ceremony. The elder delivered a simple, direct message. He called for human beings to come together in support of life and light. Right now each person and group is going his or her own way. The elder of the mountains said there is hope if the people of the light can come together and unite in some way. Reflecting on this, Mr. Barrios explained: "We live in a world of polarity: day and night, man and woman, positive and negative. Light and darkness need each other. They are a balance. Just now the dark side is very strong, and very clear about what they want. They have their vision and their priorities clearly held, and also their hierarchy. They are working in many ways so that we will be unable to connect with the spiral Fifth World in 2012." "On the light side everyone thinks they are the most important, that their own understandings, or their group's understandings, are the key. There's a diversity of cultures and opinions, so there is competition, diffusion, and no single focus." As Mr. Barrios sees it, the dark side works to block fusion through denial and materialism. It also works to destroy those who are working with the light to get the Earth to a higher level. They like the energy of the old, declining Fourth World, the materialism. They do not want it to change. They do not want fusion. They want to stay at this level, and are afraid of the next level. The dark power of the declining Fourth World cannot be destroyed or overpowered. It's too strong and clear for that, and that is the wrong strategy. The dark can only be transformed when confronted with simplicity and open-heartedness. This is what leads to fusion, a key concept for the World of the Fifth Sun. Mr. Barrios said the emerging era of the Fifth Sun will call attention to a much-overlooked element. Whereas the four traditional elements of earth, air, fire and water have dominated various epochs in the past, there will be a fifth element to reckon with in the time of the Fifth Sun: ether. The dictionary defines ether as the rarefied element of the Heavens. Ether is a medium. It permeates all space and transmits waves of energy in a wide range of frequencies, from cell phones to human auras. What is "ethereal" is related to the regions beyond earth: the heavens. Ether the element of the Fifth Sun is celestial and lacking in material substance, but is no less real than wood, stone or flesh. "Within the context of ether there can be a fusion of the polarities," Mr. Barrios said. "No more darkness or light in the people, but an uplifted fusion. But right now the realm of darkness is not interested in this. They are organized to block it. They seek to unbalance the Earth and its environment so we will be unready for the alignment in 2012. We need to work together for peace, and balance with the other side. We need to take care of the Earth that feeds and shelters us. We need to put our entire mind and heart into pursuing unity and fusion now, to confront the other side and preserve life." To be Ready for this Moment in History Mr. Barrios told his audiences in Santa Fe that we are at a critical moment of world history. "We are disturbed," he said. "We can't play anymore. Our planet can be renewed or ravaged. Now is the time to awaken and take action." "Everyone is needed. You are not here for no reason. Everyone who is here now has an important purpose. This is a hard, but a special time.We have the opportunity for growth, but we must be ready for this moment in history." Mr. Barrios offered a number of suggestions to help people walk in balance through the years ahead. "The prophesied changes are going to happen," he said "but our attitude and actions determine how harsh or mild they are." We need to act, to make changes, and to elect people to represent us who understand and who will take political action to respect the earth. Meditation and spiritual practice are good, but also action. It's very important to be clear about who you are, and also about your relation to the Earth. Develop yourself according to your own tradition and the call of your heart. But remember to respect differences, and strive for unity. Eat wisely. A lot of food is corrupt in either subtle or gross ways. Pay attention to what you are taking into your body. Learn to preserve food, and to conserve energy. Learn some good breathing techniques, so you have mastery of your breath. Be clear. Follow a tradition with great roots. It is not important what tradition, your heart will tell you, but it must have great roots. We live in a world of energy. An important task at this time is to learn to sense or see the energy of everyone and everything: people, plants, animals. This becomes increasingly important as we draw close to the World of the Fifth Sun, for it is associated with the element ether - the realm where energy lives and weaves. Go to the sacred places of the earth to pray for peace, and have respect for the Earth which gives us our food, clothing, and shelter. We need to reactivate the energy of these sacred places. That is our work. According to Mr. Barrios' reading of the Mayan calendar, if war happens in November 2002 or after, then it's bad, but not catastrophic. But if it happens between April and November 2003, it will be catastrophic. Really bad. It could eventually result in the death of two-thirds of humanity. "So stay active," he said. "If we are active, we can transform the planet. The elders watch to see what happens." Many Mayan elders and knowledge keepers may be eliminated in the next few years. For the first half of the current Katun (20-year period) the dark side has a lot of power. But that will pass 3 to 4 years from now. The tide can turn. Amazing things are going to happen. One simple but effective prayer technique is to light a white or baby-blue colored candle. Think a moment in peace. Speak your intention to the flame and send the light of it on to the leaders who have the power to make war or peace. We Have Work to Do According to Mr. Barrios this is a crucially important moment for humanity, and for earth. Each person is important. If you have incarnated into this era, you have spiritual work to do balancing the planet. He said the elders have opened the doors so that other races can come to the Mayan world to receive the tradition. The Maya have long appreciated and respected that there are other colors, other races, and other spiritual systems. "They know," he said, "that the destiny of the Mayan world is related to the destiny of the whole world." "The greatest wisdom is in simplicity," Mr. Barrios advised before leaving Santa Fe. "Love, respect, tolerance, sharing, gratitude, forgiveness. It's not complex or elaborate. The real knowledge is free. It's encoded in your DNA. All you need is within you. Great teachers have said that from the beginning. Find your heart, and you will find your way." Carlos Barrios is the author of KamWuj: El Libro del Destino, a book published in Spanish that explores Mayan teachings. He is looking for a way to have the book translated and published in English. Mr. Barrios can be contacted via Saq1 Be1 -- Organization for Mayan and Indigenous Spiritual Studies: HCR 72, Box 142, Ribera, NM 87560 USA ( http://www.sacredroad.org) This is the html version of the file http://www.mayamysteryschool.net/pdf%20files/Carlos_Barrios.pdf. To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:4FQrkaGAkq0J:www.mayamysteryschool.net/pdf%2520files/Carlos_Barrios.pdf+Barrios+Mayan&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8

is this for real?

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 22:23:36 GMT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pdz38TIwqIQ

FYI: Got a California Lemon? read my demand letter that got me a full refund on my car

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 05:54:20 GMT

8 April 2005 Ms. A. B. Volvo Cars of North America 1 Premier Place Irvine, California 92616 Fax (949) 341 7778 Re: Volvo S-80 VIN YV1TS94D61XXXXXXX Dear Ms. A. B.: As a loyal Volvo driver of fifteen years, I am writing again to express my deep disappointment with my most recent Volvo purchase. I trusted that Volvo would be the right choice for a disabled single woman, as your sales advertising indicates that Volvo “for life” is the safest car on the road. I am sorely disappointed. As you can imagine it is frightening to be alone on a dark, rural highway in northern California without cellular phone service for 60 miles, and no service stations in sight for 30 miles, while sitting alone on the side of the road in a car that is not running. After making numerous requests to middle and lower level management and to the dealership where I purchased my Volvo, I am now asking for your immediate help in remedying my particular situation pursuant to California Civil Code 1793.2-1793.5. . Since the purchase of this vehicle I’ve never received the title because the dealership sent the wrong address to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). I am entitled to clear title upon purchase, although after repeated requests to the dealer to correct their administrative paperwork error, they refused to correct this problem which led to subsequent complications and damages. In summary, and secondly, as stated in previous correspondence with K. P. and S. C. of P. Brand Volvo, and Al K. beginning late February 2004, I paid $27,023.39 in cash for purchase of a premium automobile (a sizable amount of money to which I am entitled to have refunded to me with interest). Instead of the premium automobile to which I was entitled when I purchased this vehicle, I received a defective and unreliable problem car, a Volvo 2003 s-80 purchased from P. Volvo in Burlingame, CA. The car is in the dealer repair shop for continued and repeated problems. Since the day I purchased the car the headlights were badly burned. When taken in for repair, the car was assessed by an accomplished Volvo technician as having very badly burned bulb sockets. As a temporary measure, the light bulbs were replaced, but I was advised by the Volvo service technicians that the system powering the headlights is defective and is needing replacement. A few days later the ETM began malfunctioning. While I was stopped in front of a crosswalk in the Berkeley, CA business district, I nearly collided into a pedestrian U.C. Berkeley police officer as he witnessed my car suddenly surge at him while the brakes were engaged. The car would just die in traffic. Additionally, the alert system in the dash transmits numerous confusing messages that the car needs urgent repair. The messages disappear and then reappear. Prior to the transmission replacement the car would suddenly stop while in drive mode, or would stay jammed in second gear. Since the transmission was replaced by M. Volvo in Berkeley, February 2004, it continues to get stuck in park mode and won’t shift into any gear (i.e. reverse mode), until the car has been turned off and after the key has been removed for about ten or so minutes. The car has a higher than normal stall speed and rolls backwards while in drive. Most recently there are loud noises coming from underneath the hood of the car, the transmission kicks or jerks and lags during acceleration. The power seats work intermittently. The car is simply falling apart. At my most recent request to P. Volvo, I was told by the sales manager that it is no longer their responsibility to refund my money since M. Volvo dealership installed the transmission replacement, the Volvo transmission shipped directly from VCNA. I am not really sure how this could be any exemption. The car currently sits at M. Volvo for its most recent inspection of the current transmission problem and possibly more ETM problems. It has a flat tire on the right passenger side, one that was defective and needing air weekly since purchase due to a slow leak. The car is not drivable and will remain at M. Volvo until I am refunded the full purchase price of the vehicle added to the damages I’ve incurred while in possession of this vehicle. If I am forced to store the vehicle there will be additional costs. In conclusion, I do not feel confident in this car and since this vehicle is highly unsafe to drive and could result in a fatality I am asking for your help in an expeditious resolution of this situation. When I returned the vehicle to P. Brand Volvo for a full refund 7 March 2004 the car was in pristine cosmetic condition. My request at that time was for a full refund or a reliable Volvo to which I was entitled when I paid them $27, 023.39 in cash. They made an unreasonable offer of $20,000 or a different car for which I would have to pay all of the tax, and fees associated with the purchase. I told them that I’d paid tax and license. I've already done that. I don’t need to do it again. This is my last attempt at resolving this matter after repeated letters, emails, telephone conversations, faxes, visits to the dealership, and the numerous trips to the repair shop. Since no one at Volvo has complied soon enough to circumvent subsequent wear and tear, and since I am not wealthy enough to purchase a replacement vehicle while VCNA and P. Brand Volvo respond in a timely manner, I am not responsible for the suggested deductions for normal wear and tear to the vehicle, namely tire wear and moderate bumper scraping subject to normal street parking practices, unless VCNA wishes to pay my insurance deductible for a repair claim. Nor am I responsible for any DMV penalties for delinquent registration and subsequent tickets for missing plates and tags. I will accept the deduction for mileage prior to the first request for a refund, approximately 1800 miles. Current Itemization of Damages: 1) Full purchase price of vehicle, registration fees, taxes, license, incidental costs 2) Interest on total amount owed since 7 March 2004 on the unpaid amount due 3) Registration fees and penalties due to dealership administration error; cost to replace title 4) Cost to insure the vehicle while in continued refund negotiations 5) Car rental while without use of a vehicle 6) City of Berkeley Citations: dated 09/15/04 MISSING PLATES 5200 CVC dated 09/15/04 MISSING TABS 5204 CVC dated 09/15/04 MISSING TABS 5204 CVC Please understand, if you will, that all I have requested is the bare minimum of what was owed compared to the current amount that is increasing daily. If I am pressed to take further steps in this matter, due to noncompliance with CC 1793.2 there will be additional fees, damages, and penalties far greater that those which I am entitled today. Please contact me via phone or fax: I look forward to hearing from your office this week. Thank you. And congratulations on your recent promotion. Best of luck. Sincerely, KLN

one of my favorite PHC monologues

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 02:00:16 GMT

http://prairiehome.publicradio.org/programs/20000527/ scroll down to 121:16 Monologue - Graduation Parties, Banquet, Cemetery on Memorial Day

I'm eating chocolate and watching truthdig

lightning_bolt_lottery_winner — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 04:56:25 GMT

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/20070617_religion_politics_and_the_end_of_the_world/