Military is not fanboy of Ron Paul

This was issued just prior to a Ron Paul rally............
================================================

—–Original Message—–
From: Weger, Joel A CIV OGC, Ethics [mailto:joel.weger@NAVY.MIL]
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:17
To: ETHICS@LISTSERV.LAW.NAVY.MIL
Subject: [ETHICS] Partisan Political March
Importance: High
It has come to our attention that a partisan political march targeting military personnel is being organized for February 20, 2012. See link below:
http://www.facebook.com/events/192677970828185/?ref=notif&no…
As a reminder, active duty personnel are prohibited by DoD Directive 1344.10 paragraph 4.1.2.10 from marching in a partisan political parade regardless of whether they are in uniform or civilian clothes. Reservists not on active duty and retirees may not march in uniform pursuant to paragraph 4.1.4. Reservists not on active duty and retirees may march in civilian clothes provided that they do not otherwise act in a manner that could reasonably give rise to the inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement.
The directive is a lawful general regulation. Violations of paragraphs 4.1.
through 4.5. of the Directive by persons subject to the Uniform Code of
Military Justice are punishable under Article 92, “Failure to Obey Order or
Regulation.”
In addition, DODI 1334.01, paragraph 3.1.2 prohibits the wearing of the uniform by members of the armed forces (including retired members and members of reserve components) during or in connection with political activities.
You may wish to advise your command regarding this particular event because of the apparent solicitation of active duty personnel.
Joel A. Weger
Senior Attorney
Department of the Navy
Office of the Assistant General Counsel (Ethics)
703.614.XXXX

==========================================


Q: Have you ever seen a soldier in uniform at a political rally ?
99guspuppet

Unemployable .... Working life in a post-robot era

There is lots of talk about American job creation in the year 2012.  Everyone has a solution but all I have is questions.

#1   There is no retreating from a world economy and jobs market ( Short of Armageddon ).   Q: How can any solutions take into account the uncertain events in other parts of the world ?

#2   A pundit for  *Design News* ( to paraphrase ) said there was good news and bad news about jobs.  The good news was that the U.S. had remained flat in industrial output over a given period.  The bad news was that the workforce had declined by more than 100,000 jobs.   Q:  How will people find meaning for themselves in a world where 10% of the population can provide for the other 90%.  How will this affect politics ?  We already see in America that 45% of the population is on the dole ( gets more largess than they pay in taxes ).  99.9% of U.S. dwellers receive some government handout.  The average wage in America is slightly exceeded by the average amount of received by someone on the dole.

Certainly there is more opportunity now that ever before to be creative.  The cloud ( internet ) has opened up the floodgates to collaboration and access to resources.  So what does it mean when most of this creativity is completely unnecessary for survival ?  Some people will throw themselves off the planet and look for adventure in space ( stellar , virtual, ..... )  I confess I do not have a clue as to how it will play out for the majority of humans on the planet.

Here is what one group is doing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MejbOFk7H6c&

99guspuppet        99unemployed

What is so great about the US Constitution ? *USC* *DOI*

 Many people invoke the USC to hammer home a point.  Many more swear an oath to support and defend the USC.  There is a conventional reverence for the USC.  And let us not forget a cororollary document that is really a preview of the USC..... that would be the Declaration of Independence.  *DOI*

So are these two documents still relevant ?   Are they over hyped spaghetti text written by old farts from the past ?  Can we just skip ahead to modern constitutions that promise a shining world flowing with lots of goodies ?   Nope !    I am going to argue that while flawed ; these two documents are the greatest roadmap to human triumph that have written to date.

WHY ?
Why were these two documents written ?   Why did some guys in the late 1700s cook up the the DOI and USC ?  Were they control freaks ?  Did they think they were special ?  Did they suffer from bloated egos ?  Hubris ?  Why did they do it ?  Creating the DOI was certainly dangerous.  The authors were painting a target on their backs that the British king and soldiers would be happy put some bullets into.  So why did they do it ?




2013m05d26 update
Here is a great update to what the USC was intended to mean
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyeUuNRC2Mo
Tom Woods has many great videos

My critique
History is nice stuff ......    *but*    The USC talks about natural rights.... No one has natural rights...   Natural rights would have to come from God...... ( It is very unlikely there is a god )  Rights have to be articulated and then they have to be fought for and then maintained.  As man has become more productive and robots have taken over banal tasks, *men* have had the opportunity to develop in the direction of sophoncy.


99guspuppet       keywords    777constitution  777declarationofindependence

Drowning in soft plasticity ... the tar pits ....glub

The sovereign, after taking individuals one by one in his powerful hands and kneading them to his liking, reaches out to embrace society as a whole. Over it he spreads a fine mesh of uniform, minute, and complex rules, through which not even the most original minds and most vigorous souls can poke their heads above the crowd. He does not break men's wills but softens, bends, and guides them. He seldom forces anyone to act but consistently opposes action. He does not destroy things but prevents them from coming into being. Rather than tyrannize, he inhibits, represses, saps, stifles, and stultifies, and in the end he reduces each nation to nothing but a flock of timid and industrious animals, with the government as its shepherd.

— Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. 2 [1840]

This is the anti-thesis of Individual Puzzle Pieces Paradigm    99IPPP

99guspuppet