The 'Material' Wisdom of Robert Heinlein

Science fiction writers with more than a bit of wisdom tend to be favorite reads of mine. One might think of Heinlein's two most well known books as typical of the rest; Stranger in A Strange Land and Starship Troopers, yet that is not so. Many of Heinlien's books are topics of more general human and philosophical interest.

Something of a social realist, I enjoy the spiritual element in Heinlein that recognized so many potential areas of new, innovative philosophical thought. The implicatives for cosmology and social selection for actualization in a challenge-response criterion on the human side of experience-- extrapolations of given technologies and biological facts, are hypothetically elaborated.

His 'Time Enough for Love' is a complete enough treatment of the known scientific biological facts of life at the time, and of the centrality of heterosexual relations as the social foundation of life. His treatment of genetics is extraordinarily interesting, even in retrospect. The conclusions Heinlein sketches are physically possible though rather repulsive; Lazarus, aka. Woodrow Wilson Smith, is not the best of humanity—perhaps just one gifted at survival and common sense. As the eldest of all humans regenerated countless times through cloning and other techniques he lacks some of the arête or virtue that ought to transcend even the manifestly physically evident—

One can make moral decisions if suitably inclined toward spirituality without prioritizing matter for-itself. Moral meanings can cohere within a spiritual-intellectual matrix. Such a spiritual paradigm follows the a priori rather than an interpretive paradigm of the extensional or empirical matter of experience. The failing of Lazarus Long to be more than just an excellent log roller on the phenomena of life leads to unusual evolutions mixed in sentimentality.

Heinlein has outlined one way a wayward humanity could go if it were capable—personally I think he was overly optimistic regarding science applied to transmogrification of human life, yet he was unaware of some of the potential science has created since to more radically transform and end the present nature of human existence. Well, one may read the history of Attila and the Hun invasion of the Roman Empire for relief.

I haven’t enough understanding of genetics to answer the question that arises in reading ‘Time Enough for Love’; if female clones are made from a man’s x genetic component, and he impregnates them, what would the progeny be genetically—more clones, or permutated genetic sequencing? Lazarus Long reaches the conclusions along with society generally that the sole wrong in sexual reproduction is the production of defective progeny. Because all genes are screened before mating to determine if defective births would occur, it becomes morally a non-sequiter for Lazarus Long to have sex with relatives so if the genetic examination people determine that no defectives will result inn marriage. Morality lacks a spiritual element in the brave new world of the very long-lived.

Genghis Khan also has had several interesting history books written on his life and times that one may find good alternative reading. While the United States plants war eggs of offshore oil wells and onshore nuclear plants that will serve as accelerants in improvisational explosive devices for a future conventional war attack on the U.S. economy, these genetic moral war eggs for future material confusion are being sponsored by federal tax support too. Remotely piloted submersibles, r.p.v. and drone aircraft will be able to ignite upon foreign discretion any and all vulnerable offshore oil infrastructure when convenient. In 1989 the Exxon Valdez oil spill altered the state of Alaska policy from a growing transformation away from reliance on oil to one of just basic, survival. The Gulf Coast of the U.S.A. has also experienced a reduction in intelligence through a variety of mass insults. Incompetent levy maintenance before Hurricane Katrina, a profusion of offshore oil platforms often controlled by foreign powers—these levers of globalist power over the economic security of the United States are clear and present dangers largely ignored in the District of Corruption.

A U.S. political environment foisting a constellation of offshore oil infrastructure upon sensitive ocean habitat presents a what me worry defense posture. Taxpayers are expected to pay for what amounts to a corporatist oil defense military force to lock down the security of vast tracks of coastal waters from potential improvised jet ski vectors for explosives ordinance launched from distant ships smoke on the horizon, or helions on terror junkets from abroad locked on courses of self-destruct with grappling hooks and pentex. The Chairperson of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullahs, has a plan to homosexually liberate the Navy with SecDef Gates. Congress is content with the defense response evidently. Reminds me of when Admiral Sanchez wanted 50,000 barrels of free oil from Alaska for the Pacific Fleet before the Exxon Valdez spill, and was turned down by Alaska Gov. Cowper. Oil disaster is always waiting to land on sensitive U.S. coastal environments, and probably those of Africa too.

In the story, Lazarus Long has lived for nearly 4700 years and recounts elements of his experience to a very great great...grandson. His experiences of society, politics, experience, space travel, pioneering of other worlds is full of interesting early American kinds of pioneering information as well. The book is a full kind of Cliff's Notes verisimilitude to making lists of things to fill a Conestoga wagon setting out for the unknown on an Earth-like world.

If one considers radical future galactic pioneering, it may be that complete self-reliance on non-technical items that could be forged from raw materials would be necessary. Independent pioneers might take advanced data bases along with them, yet high tech equipment requires a vast economic foundation to construct--if one part is missing the entire factory of culture may collapse letting the hapless pioneers starve. We may tend to look at Star Trek and magic box production machines as the future of real space colonization, yet that may be self-deceptive, for an independent colonization future of explorers and pioneers scattered throughout the galaxy may have no contact with an advanced civilization able to produce modern goods at all, nor could they take along such equipment with them and expect it to last forever. The Maytag repairman would be a long time in reaching an obscure planet several light years away.

That was one of the reasons I was so disgusted with President Obama's decision to skip the moon and raise the bar to some vague Martian future. Neglecting to establish a practical down-to-moon base of self reliant materials pioneers able to live without Earth resupply forever-even if that is just in potential and people only live their a few years at a time doing research-means that a practical, self-reliant Martian colony will as well be neglected and fail to appear the next century.

The federal government prefers 'flashy' one-off disposable symbolic ventures rather than pioneering bases on extra-terrestrial locations. As a leader in moon base development the U.S. Government could bring in teamwork from the International community of space developers, and missions of true space-ships constructed on the moon to be launched to mars in advance of human explorers, with supplies and shelters that could provide substantial survival redundancy to encourage a self-reliant facility as soon as possible. The President’s plan is simply a way to subvert the U.S. leadership in extra-terrestrial development.

That is not too surprising, for the U.S. economy is misdirected by the administration as it was by the previous three administrations. With the financial related service sector being nearly a third of the U.S. economy, and government much of the rest, there is a huge non-materially productive sector of the economy. When these sectors want to increase there income for employees and executives, essentially that means either printing more money, taking money away from the really materially productive sector, or finding cheap workers overseas to exploit. Unfortunately the latter outsources material production from our nation to nations A, B, C, D and E.

The federal government and others can of course borrow money from the materially productive countries to maintain or increase their standards of living for a while, but they won't want to have a substantial space pioneering mission on a moon or another planet for it would cost real money, and as the nation's material production declines many of the components would need to be made overseas. That is one of the fundamental problems with the United States today. Heinlein's books have some interesting ideas on society and economics as well, though perhaps not those given above.

That economic cycle of just increasing creature comforts--a dozen kinds of body wash as if Americans have become smellier than prior generations, fast food restaurants and other food outlets every 50 feet in many cities, 3/4s of young adults far overweight--this is a decadent generation trained that way by the indoctrination of consumerist supply and demand, or those without meaningful values. I believe that may have begun during the Vietnam War era when people got the scream yellow honkers from the Beatles, a Yellow Submarine or some such munchy ethic causality.

While various kinds of liberation occurred for the nation, I think kids suffered when their mothers no longer cooked at home making Yankee pot roast, corn beef and cabbage and various healthy foods. McDonald's is no substitute for home grown and cooked foods. A junk food generation smoking, piling of foreign financed public debt, canceling lunar development is challenged to find transcending, healthy social values. There is a clutter of non-valuable values making investment in the United States difficult.

Individualism was not only respected-it was unavoidable in pioneering generations, for technology had not advanced so far that women canning at home, cooking and so forth could be done without. Inventors in the United States were once world leaders, for the material opportunities to build and idea were in the United States rather than in China, India or Japan. Today, amongst those that are not corporate employees and are free to patent their own ideas, the extra costs of materializing an idea are much higher than before, since the lead in materials production increasing is transferring to China. One must not only have $3000 dollars for a pack of 5 patent applications, one must afford a patent search, higher a patent attorney and perhaps spend hundreds of thousands to defend a patent. Then one must perhaps fly to China to learn how one goes about finding materials producers willing and able to actualize the idea. In the meanwhile the clock is ticking and rivals have interest in your idea generally--and there are other problems such as hiring attorneys abroad to defend pirates of the idea producing in Thailand or some Quack province in China

The challenges presenting to Americans for the insipid federal response to the challenge of making patents affordable to poor, bright U.S. inventors will continue to create a serious loss of economic opportunity to foreign interests. I have given away several ideas myself in public writing after learning of the impossibility of actualizing patentable ideas in the U.S.A.

With the patent trickle up to globalists and the federal political tilt toward macro-economic drift--with utter federal economic incomprehension of the importance of renewability in resource use, defending the nation's borders and the need to set goals and parameters that prioritize national economic self-advantage as an obligation rather than actualizing a vague, amorphous capitalist global theory such that a trickle down to the United States is in the best interest of Americans rather than direct effort to invest and build a self-reliant, independent U.S. future economy,--the United States has set a course toward intentional national disadvantage.

There are those that rationalize that a disadvantaged America is somehow in the nation or the world's interests, and they are wrong. The rich may be comfortable with that idea, Bostonian elites may like that ideas a 'liberal', yet it is simple the result of a lazy and myopic greed. The elites are heavily invested in thee trans-national corporatism corrupting U.S. politics through the media control and through direct political influence.

The United States should present a strong nationalism to the world. A new nationalism that defends itself against terrorism at the borders and through covert foreign intelligence and military work abroad would be more effective and cost less than a misguided conventional war saturation of second world nations to temporarily compel them to like a hypocritical U.S. concept of democracy and perhaps George W. Bush or Barrack Hussein Obama themselves. Many of the poor will always hate the rich in every place on Earth. Many of the repressed will forever hate their oppressors. Many straight people will forever fight the hateful attitude of homosexuals that regard them as potential sex objects and urinate on the idea of marriage as a heterosexual fact. Homosexual 'love' of their straight brothers attitude may be reckoned the kind of love a lion shows to its prey. These things cannot be changed. What should be changed and can be defended are fundamental democratic values of national independence, avoiding of entangling foreign alliances. Self-reliance in economic so far as possible and practical, elimination of public debt and elimination of authoritarianism in any form domestically. All citizens should have an assurance of the necessary items of life such as food, clothing and health care, yet such should be accomplished through reforms that make social safety nets including retirement useful for the people that really need them as insurance against suffering, and as just potentially available to those than can afford to do without them.

One of Heinlein's points was that any nation that requires I.D. of its citizens is probably too advanced and set for collapse. I may not go that far with a somewhat anachronistic idea of Heinlein, yet without somewhere else to go through the invention of a faster than space-time travel method, we must proceed in such a way that the health of the planet's people and ecosystem are attended with extreme care and conservation.

We know that communism is a response to authoritarian oppression of the majority by a minority. It is a power minority bargaining position in war and for revolution. Communism is itself totalitarian and so undesirable by the majority that wish freedom, yet we know that following war and revolution, in the absence of a government chaos reigns until an authoritarian power emerges to rule generally. That is a reason why so many governments are dictatorial following revolutions of any sort--it is difficult to evolve.

In China we see this history--following the revolution against the imperial government a corrupt nationalist government was followed by a corrupt Japanese military presence as well as a civil war and an authoritarian Chinese government. With 1,300,000,000 people, China cannot afford to just get rid of its neo-authoritarian government for it requires regulation to prevent chaos and mass death.

So the Chinese Communist government pursues liberalization in economics to a limited extent to raise its standard of living. Simultaneously it experiences the double bind presented when its formerly majority agrarian rural economic foundation is replaced by internationalism, trading, investments and finance. Such investment has much risk, and brings circumstances to China not within their control. The worst risk is that sudden economic collapse brings deregulation or political revolution and a few million Chinese are killed in the chaos. The chaos is a social organizational phenomenal product of the dynamics of demography and geography more so than of political system choice.

As the United States leadership pursues rather self-deceptive political economics of global investments in the belief that it will benefit the world's poor countries rather than itself, and is a kind of benevolent mentor in economics while actually receiving vast profits for the globalist participating in the process and impoverishing many of its own citizens, it might be useful to look ahead and consider not just political correctness by real politics as well. Basic pioneering sorts of issues about self-reliance no not mean that one must be at war with one's international neighbors.

There are no magic money machines that produce social justice and economic opportunity for all people of the world at a distance better than at home. If one can rectify national economics to that of renewable natural resource basis with full employment and very low population growth with sobriety and dedication to investing in fundamental life bettering technology, one may invest at very low, non-usurious rates, cash in select foreign projects that would help raise a nation abroad toward a rational ecologically healthful way of life within a sustainable economic basis. Developing a moon base the next few years would show a political, economic and scientific competence in judgment that people are increasingly skeptical regarding its existence in U.S. politics.

Nations have periods of historical existence with few or no challenges, while some have many. Some nations may find challenges as forced options, while other nations may have few forced options and many opportunities from which they may choose to actualize few or none.

China with its large population and finite geography has experienced many forced political and economic options the past century. Since the end of the cold war the United States has experienced comparatively few. Arnold Toynbee believed that a nation with challenges (what William James would call forced options) could respond successfully or perish (or perhaps stagnate). Alternatively he found that without challenges—with an easy life, some peoples and nations have simply given away their advantage, lost the will to creatively advanced and otherwise have accomplished less with more than others that produced more with less. The United States has tended to give away its industry abroad, invested abroad, piled up vast debt, responded badly to external terrorist challenges financially speaking and failed to reform its own national interests at all well in the absence of a forced option to do so.

It may be so that intelligent concern can provide the information and stimulation for reform that is needed in the absence of an immediately compelling reason to do so. One may be content drifting, fishing, and drinking nectar with nubile lasses aboard the political love boat ship of state even while the sea is calm. Reason lets us know that the course may be unsustainable for a variety of reasons, and that waiting until the time of a forced option to pursue another course may be too late to successfully respond (a hurricane was over the horizon and the weather radio broke). It is time for the United States to get its house in order.

President Obama Affirms Plans To Green Light Oil Development In U.S. Offshore Coastal Habitat as Gulf Oil Disaster Continues

President Obama continues to support offshore oil drilling in a lawyer-politician way. Lawyers are agents of others—hired guns of jurisprudence. When they are elected as politicians they are doubly actors detached from public interests in-themselves. They may originate with some vague occupational tie to specific individuals or groups, yet inevitably they must migrate allegiance toward abstract social power special interests such as the offshore oil industry. Vladimir Illych Lenin was of course, a Russian lawyer. Too many lawyers in Government converts bread into the aerial souffle without eggs as it rises to windy eloquence within existential incomprehension.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html Obama Offshore Oil Development

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/environment/jan-june10/drill1_03-31.html Obama Offshore Oil Development

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/04/obama-still-believes-in-offshore-oil-drilling.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36800673/ns/us_news-environment/ Gulf oil spill reaches coast

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=12398762 Alaska Offshore Drilling--Shell

The oil spill response so far has been disingenuous—a week ago the undersea gusher might have been expected to become a mass beach disaster making life difficult for beachcombers of the south. The hundreds or thousands of offshore oil platforms are vulnerable advance placement jewels for opposition force elements to target. The President has overlooked the fact that oil corporation assurances that oil platforms offshore are safe make no provision for human failure and human attack. In the world today, human malevolence and political ignorance are the twin towers of environmental terror. An anemic administration effort to move to new forms of energy and transport relies upon fossil fuels on and offshore as a guarantee that things will remain as they are—profitable for concentrated wealth.

Not expecting a Hunnensturm of illegal Mexican aliens to conquer the west and put painter-entrepreneurs out of work in the volkerwanderrung. The administration like many comfortable middle class corporate milieus believe an American security in the brave new world can be purchased globally. Yes, there are economic Huns out there offshore that would subtly sabotage tempting offshore targets such as oil platforms and soft underbelly pipelines if they are stuck out to the conventional low-tech economic-military strategists like a glass jaw. A decadent 5th century Roman Empire was overrun by Goths and Huns by degrees. Romans believed their civilized way could be extended universally—the rest of the unRoman world disagreed. At a certain point, conventional military rationality regarding of the practicality forward positioning vulnerable soft target oil platforms controlled by global corporations should be considered. Americans too easily make themselves hostages to their own fossil fuel and nuclear economic infrastructure with the silly belief that a very expensive military guarantees the safety of those targets—instead it guarantees a continuum of oil dependence and military expenses with vast opportunity costs for the citizens of the United States


The Obama administration has helped transition Afghanistan and Iraq into proto-authoritarian governments conformable to the tradition U.S. role of partnering dictatorships abroad that sell oil to the Exxons and Shells of the world. Neither President Karzai nor Prime Minister Maliki is willing to give up office. America has spent trillions to replace oppressive totalitarian governments with fledgling totalitarian governments that only the future will reveal as becoming narcocracy, theocracy or secular National Socialism.

The military industrial complex alone could work offshore oil platforms for financial leverage in a myriad of scenarios. The ideal political fantasy world has no such cognizance in its programming-logic circuits of course.

Even if Hillary Clinton wrote that it takes a global village, the millennium has come and gone without the arrival of utopia or world dictatorship. C.E.O. megalomania still envisions a sugar plum fairy world of universal corporatism with happy drone employees purchasing product as consumers without a political voice of dissent. The world is a developmental league with implicit self-interest, and –pragmatic political and military defense precautions still require intelligent analysis. Offshore oil platforms and infrastructure, nuclear power plants, and other large plants are tempting targets for improvised exploding ordinance attacks from the Oort cloud of foes of U.S. economic independence.

Genghis Khan also has had several interesting history books written on his life and times that one may find good alternative reading. While the United States plants war eggs of offshore oil wells and onshore nuclear plants that will serve as accelerants in improvisational explosive devices for a future conventional war attack on the U.S. economy, these genetic moral war eggs for future material confusion are being sponsored by federal tax support too. Remotely piloted submersibles, R.P.V. and drone aircraft will be able to ignite upon foreign discretion any and all vulnerable offshore oil infrastructure when convenient.

In 1989 the Exxon Valdez oil spill altered the state of Alaska policy from a growing transformation away from reliance on oil to one of just basic, survival. The Gulf Coast of the U.S.A. has also experienced a reduction in intelligence through a variety of mass insults. Incompetent levy maintenance before Hurricane Katrina, a profusion of offshore oil platforms often controlled by foreign powers—these levers of globalist power over the economic security of the United States are clear and present dangers largely ignored in the District of Corruption.

A U.S. political environment foisting a constellation of offshore oil infrastructure upon sensitive ocean habitat presents a what me worry defense posture. Taxpayers are expected to pay for what amounts to a corporatist oil defense military force to lock down the security of vast tracks of coastal waters from potential improvised jet ski vectors for explosives ordinance launched from distant ships smoke on the horizon, or hellions on terror junkets from abroad locked on courses of self-destruct with grappling hooks and pentex. The Chairperson of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullahs, has a plan to homosexually liberate the Navy with SecDef Gates. Congress is content with the defense response evidently. Reminds me of when Admiral Sanchez wanted 50,000 barrels of free oil from Alaska for the Pacific Fleet before the Exxon Valdez spill, and was turned down by Alaska Gov. Cowper. Oil disaster is always waiting to land on sensitive U.S. coastal environments, and probably those of Africa too.

Offshore Oil developments Assault Health of World's Oceans

The massive oil spill from an exploded offshore oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico below the Mississippi River is an example of why offshore oil exploration and drilling in the Alaskan Arctic is such a bad idea. President Obama signed off on that development of course, in an ethical compromise with Republicans in order to gain support for his energy plan. It was Barry Goldwater I believe who said ‘extremism in pursuit of virtue is no vice’ (I believe). When President Obama signs off on ethical compromises in pursuit of political objectives he may indeed reflect former President Richard M. Nixon’s political style, yet without President Nixon’s depth of political understanding all that is produced for the nation is an avalanche of mediocrity. While it is true that the sludge of Obamanism is less deleterious than that of former President George W. Bush who was most skilled at spending political and public capital, it is an ecologically unsustainable course. The environment is uncompromising in its turning a cold shoulder of death to those organisms that repeatedly and decisively violate its ‘partnership with life’ to their own advantage.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36800673/ns/us_news-environment/?GT1=43001

If such a disastrous oil spill eventually occurs under the winter arctic ice it would be very difficult to access before the spring-summer melt to stanch. Just one seafloor wellhead corruption could decisively kill vast region of the Arctic marine habitat, and potentially radically alter the Earth’s northern albedo index through a cascade of alteration of environmental characteristics impacting sea ice formation.

A network of Atlantic Coast and Appalachian wind farms tied through superconductors to Rocky Mountain wind farms may be able to supply much energy for the energy-inefficient U.S. electrical consumerist sink—that course should be encouraged while marine ecosystem and marine chemistry integrity destroying offshore oil developments ought to be halted and Executive Operating Officers of Major Oil Corporations given fair jury trials and jailed for crimes against the environment when such spills occur.

Such permisiveness in environmental assault is a consequence of the too big to fail or be held accountable dispensationalism given to global oil corporations that have addicted the United States to oil consumerist slavery. It is theoretically possible to liberate the public reliance upon global oil for energy, with the incredible scale of damage to the environment and alternative economic and ecological opportunities lost to the polluting, trade deficit, liberty sapping oil industry as it has been the last century. The Coast Guard has a 10,000 dollar fine for just throwing a candy wrapper out the window of a ship in San Pedro--such oil spills and transmogrification of the ocean composition just once should place BP out of business in the United States for good.

Alaska and Other States Litigate Against Obama 'Health' Care in Defense of Liberty

Alaska Governor Sean Parnell decided to join several other states in challenging the Obama Health Care plan to require individuals to purchase health insurance from private insurers. That plan was a composite amalgam of bureaucratic compromise designed especially with the interests of the middle class in mind. In my opinion the poor were tossed in as a negotiating tool, and a Roman 'turtle' to hide behind morally as the bill was advanced toward the bastions of the opposition of the rich ultra-rightists, greed speaking.

Disingenuity and disinterest were basic reasons why neither the Democrats nor Republicans sought to construct a practical, free, public health service for the poor in the United States. Such a program would have created the most efficient and lowest cost structure for the provisioning of medical care.

Republicans would oppose that as socialism, and democrats would be afraid of being considered socialists after December 1989, and would do little to defend liberty and common sense. The cost of a failure to legislate rationally and responsively to forced existential options can work to bring down a democratic viability when it is a persisting characteristic of a government. The failure to comprehend the Adam Smith material orientation of capitalism instead of the current financial capital advantage, with a dysfunctioning monetary philosophy, is another ongoing failure to legislate a rational public sector response to the economic and environmental challenges of the age.

It is difficult to disagree with the Parnell administration and most Alaska Republicans on the fundamentally corrupting nature of the offensive element of the Obama Health Plan. It blows up the constitutional liberty of Americans from requirements that they buy anything from anyone just for existing. The Obama Administration and Democratic Congress have in effect overthrown the revolutionary spirit of the Boston Tea Party and the revolt against the Stamp Act.

Albeit excuses would be made that something had to be done. Both sides of the political coin of today-Republican and Democrat, are fettered in the hobbles of global corporatism. Most all Americans are ensnared in the financial services networks that have leveraged mere material trade, home owning and such to liquid assets. Financial traders have made abstract money able to create profit itself out of rational relational scaler--an enormity--regarding its intended function as a tool to permit easier trade. A sober economic theoretical college of philosophers would advocate that money be issued with a two year expiration date in order to restore primacy to material goods as real wealth.

In ones heart you know free health care for the poor is right. Those Alaskan Republicans that defend American liberty from a global corporate insurer aristocracy that would receive legally forced payments from the poor, or taxpayer substitutes, also do not give a rat's ass about the financial and physical injury done to the poor who cannot afford ordinary medical services. Those opponents are generally comfortable, fully insured and have no experience as adults with poverty. In America the poor are real people too. Thus on both sides of the political coin a deceptive and inadequate reasoning is inscribed; in corrupt mammon and global we trust might be better than the 'in God we trust' idea of former generations when government and corporatism together had not created a Leviathan of greed and globalism to repress American freedom.

Scott Simon of NPR said that the majority of Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are Jews and Catholics today. The Chief Justice is heavily invested on Wall Street--a corporatist. The founding philosophy of protestants in the U.S.A. and England have moved into the edge of the mists of time. Adam Smith-the author of ‘The Wealth of Nations’ published in 1776, was a friend and student of David Hume. We cannot be assured that today’s court still values the freedom that the founders fought to liberate the new nation from global aristocracy, from the restrictions on free trade, and from requirements that Americans purchase anything from anyone anywhere through aristocratic decretal. Perhaps the Democrats in Congress believe the court will be as fast to jetison liberty and join the gentle chains of global corporatism.

If the U.S. Supreme Court does revolt against the poison pill smuggled in plain sight into the Obama Health Plan, morality should require that a better plan--one that first creates a comprehensive public health service for the poor--and only the poor, is made law within a year. Then those fortunate enough to be able to afford health insurance can be given the attention they deserve within some kind of collective bargaining paradigm if they prefer.

Perhaps I shall need to write about the basics of taxation, and that a sales tax is a tax on sales, not a tax on spending or purchasing. If a tax on spending is made, that would comprise a back loaded double income tax in states that have income taxes. Internet taxation is fair enough on businesses established in the state doing the taxing, otherwise it becomes completely irrational, corrupt and simply a state claim upon one’s money within a format of a universal spending tax.

Obama Energy Plan a Corporate Globalist Sychophancy?

No right thinking environmentalist would support the proliferation of hundreds or thousands of nuclear power plant or offshore oil drilling--each are dangerous insults to the global environment. Yet the Obama energy plan provides support for both.

During the campaign, President Obama talked about 'clean coal'. He referred to the idea of sequestering global warming greenhouse gases in coal underground, and seemed unconcerned about other deleterious impacts of coal mining such as mountain to removal, leaching of toxic chemical into waterways or underground mining disasters.

Rational environmentalists realize that the ocean is becoming a toxic chemical soup by degrees, and that the ocean ecosystem is being depleted of large fish with significant evolutionary changes ensuing that cannot be reversed. Global warming may cause the ice sheets to melt, stop the Gulf Stream from circulating and bring about a requirement that Arctic polar bears receive refugee status and relocation to Antarctica with the loss of polar ice. Significantly, nuclear plant waste cannot be disposed of on Earth properly. In recent years international mafias have dumped radiological waste offshore in ships--perhaps there is a Chicago Plan to dump nuclear waste from the blooming of hundreds of petite 45 megawatt plants into Lake Michigan for 'long term storage'?

The only real solution to the energy problem would require a government Department of Ecological Economics to direct criteria that would support national economic renewability within ecologically efficient criteria. There are three present governing factors that negate U.S. efforts to create a viable economy with full employment and renewability. They are

1) As the economy heats up fuel imports and costs rise causing exports of U.S. cash unavailable for domestic investment or saving

2) As the economy heats up cheap Mexican labor drives down wages, accelerates a building boom and corrupts rational development planning within ecologically healthful parameters. When recession follows from an inflated development rate many illegal migrants leave to enjoy there profit in Mexico until the U.S. economy recovers. A non-migratory workforce is required for any semblance of a balanced, renewable economy with wage and price stability.

3) The globalization of business corrupts domestic politics, cherry picks jobs to outsource and prevents a national, democratic ecological economic preference for citizen prosperity and a completely effective social safety net.

Nuclear power and offshore oil drilling may be favorably considered by certain amoral, unconscionable Republican politicians lacking a national patriotic fervor to conserve vestigial wild America, keep offshore waters pure for good fishing and fisheries health, prevent the construction of radiological waste producing easy targets for terrorist blow up with conventional military explosives--yet they have an ally in the President who has decided that compromise with evil is a virtue, and calculating that the Democratic conservationists are in his pocket bound and gagged so he can cut a deal with Republican of the evil global empire persuasion. The President has made a mistake in that regard, and his energy plan as it is presently is probably bound to fail.

The health bill was a quagmire beneficial for corporate political power rather than for the relief of the poor and suffering. I know that my personal hernia surgery repair costs about 3500 dollars and hour for four hours--since I have earned just about 4000 annually the past several years, that is nearly four years wages for repair of a couple self-employed on the job injuries. The Presidential perspective on health care was that of the effete rich, of Harvard (can we ever elect a non-Harvard-Yale-Oxford President again?) and Lawrence Summers, of non-renewable, expensive, impractical greed-economics. The energy plan is just as bad or worse.

The nation could construct super-conducting power lines in liquid hydrogen cooled below the freeway pipelines for electric car recharging and for a faster energy grid. Transcontinental 1000m.p.h. electric rail-gun trains could move freight to local terminals for electric-truck local shipping. There are lots of solar, wind and fuel cell electric vehicle and home-power generating possibilities for national development that could be constructed if a Department of Ecological Economics or an intelligent President existed to drive such a direction forward toward the finish line of the elimination of public debt and ecological decay.

Cetaceans of the seas likely are traumatized by 264 decibel offshore seismic survey sono-blasting that goes on interminably in many regions of the ocean. It must be far worse than enduring bad music from neighbors with ultra-tech blasters at full volume, or the worst of car audio hop low rider-cruiser suburban sonic assault vehicles. It may be why some whales choose to beach instead of remaining in the sea to endure no more the incomparably bad broadcasts. P.E.T.A. seems silent on this offshore issue--that compromises the creatures with the largest known brains in the universe. There must be an alternative method of seismic survey testing besides air-blast waves in the ocean--yet who is researching that?

When an administration has a 'let them eat squid' attitude, we can only wonder about the future of human life on Earth in a pervasively polluted ecosystem.

Two Qualities The Next Supreme Court Justice Should Have

President Obama's second choice should be a strong supporter of clarity and openness in legal contracts with a full disclosure principle as a goal. Fine print may obfuscate and technically nullify the principle that all contracts for legality must have consent of all parties involved. Corporatism has tended to obfuscate truth, hedgemonize the marketplace and throw disequilibrium into free enterprise with advantage to the in-siders.

Without ecological economic principles within a strong national prioritization criteria the future of the United States is less bright than could yet be secured. Corporatism and globalism's advantages in the broadcast media, in business and adverse influence upon government at all levels has controverted significant portions of the premises of the founders in violently overthrowing the globalist government of the day. A decadent court with no military service history heavily invested in foreign or trans-national corporations is hardly one to be much concerned about democracy and equal rights for all citizens free from the inherent encumbrances and control mechanisms of global corporatism.

John Paul Stevens, like John Paul Jones, had a substantial regard for the liberty of the United States and for Americans. The next Justice should exceed his record in defense of U.S. Independence.

Enlist in the International Guard and Serve Globalism?

In the cold war era, serving in the National Guard presented a simpler opportunity to believe one was serving national rather than global corporate interests.Today the belief is harder to attain. When one asks 'what would Ronald Reagan do(?)' on a particular national defense policy, one seeks the understanding of America's best pragmatic post-Eisenhower/Nixon President on defense issues. Reagan had a penchant for successfully defending the real interests of the nation. Ronald Reagan was no multi-trillion dollar big spender on foreign overseas missions; as are Iraq and Afghanistan Bush II-Obama policies

Ronald Reagan's defense budget built up a large military for potential rather than actual use. The military was capable of good military action, yet was not largely employed in war as economic and social self-interests tended to prevail. Following 9-11 I believe Ronald Reagan would have taken a far different course than the Bush II policy of protracted foreign engagement with a vast deficit and harm to the U.S. national economy.

Corporate influence over Government has diminished democratic, national self-interest. Half-baked political economics has made of corporatism a kind of crack-pot anointed fail-safe philosophy. The financial sector has swollen in size, too many jobs outsourced without adequate replacement, and nationalism has been attacked in the corporate broadcast media. The financial industry was allowed to become 'too big to fail' and too big to let nationalism and self-interest, low unemployment rate and no public debt be prioritized.

What was needed in Afghanistan following the Taliban's unwillingness to give up Al Qa'eda-which they might not have been capable of anyway, was saturation bombing of select targets. The United States contains Iran and North Korea reasonably well,and could have tolerated the existence of Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban occasionally smoked by B-52 sortees when their terrorist actions against the United States became unbearable.

The same containment of Iraq might have been pursued with a total degradation of Iraq's military capability such that domestic subversion and revolutionary attacks could have increased, or to the extent that Iran might have attacked enabling a U.S. response to the Iranian aggression in Iraq again by air. The Bush II choices to pursue the most expensive possible reconstruction of government of ungoverned people seems more of a choice for internationalism and global corporate profits, military adventurism and increased output for the military industrial complex than a rational Reagan-like military policy of walking softly and carrying a big stick striking only when really needed to eliminate foreign capacity to continue assault missions upon direct U.S. interests.

With the very high cost of sending even private E-1's to Afghanistan or Iraq for extended tours of duty the present U.S.military policy is very un-Reaganesque. It is a policy of globalism and international defense of Chinese copper mines in Afghanistan, and for and increased military size. This is why, in a jobless recovery, with an Obama plan to increase public debt a trillion dollars a year the next decade, the corporatist broadcasts soliciting people to enlist in 'the national guard' ring so false. It seems like 'enlist in the international guard' would be more honest.

Military officers in the revolutionary era were not without genuine political opinion. Perhaps it was easier to avoid the draft in 1775 than today. It was not so simple to avoid the British colonial government though, so those that sought political liberation from the onerous British policy toward the United States had few remedies besides personal military service3 if they wanted things to change.

Today the globalist corporate ubiquitous presence requires silence from its employees at the executive level on many kinds of non-sycophantic political expression. I would think the military leaders of today also must be yes men, sort of remote control corporate yes men, if they wish to serve. If the Gates leadership brings the service to gay integration with heterosexuals in units, it is difficult to imagine that many straight soldiers will resign. Money and career overcomes political opinion far more than it did in the revolutionary era perhaps.

Well, not to pick on gays, it is a clear and present issue that brings the nature of loyalty to hierarchical leadership up, and why the National Guard to evolve into being more of an international guard of global corporatism than a force to defend Pittsburgh, or Fairbanks or Miami. It is plain that the military response to 9-11 was exceedingly incompetent in financial nature regarding the challenge, and did more financial harm to the U.S. economy that the foreign terrorist did. There has been no continuing harvest of large numbers of illegal combatants to fill Gitmo's cells with, and the actual terrorist efforts have been fairly pathetic since then. (9-11 has been used as a license to unlimited deficit spending and disregard of U.S. national economic interests. It is difficult to believe that anything more than a tripling of the size of the C.I.A. and F.B.I., building a salt-water moat along the Mexican border with berms and pipelines, increasing U,.S. Customs and increasing the numbers of stealth fighter-bombers was needed. Such could have cost less than a tenth of what was bought by the Bush II and Obama Administrations with such harm to U.S. national financial interests.