At the death of every prophet in this dispensation since Joseph Smith, there has been a general apostasy among the people, every single time. The next Prophet is always the man the Prophet DIRECTLY preceding him appoints through revelation. The Prophet is always very close to the Prophet.
When Joseph Smith ordained the twelve apostles, they were placed in seniority one to another from oldest to youngest. That made Thomas B Marsh the president of the twelve, David W Patten second, and Brigham Young third. Lyman Johnson, who was one of the youngest was ordained first, and Brigham Young was ordained second. Thomas B Marsh and Lyman Johnson apostatized before Joseph passed away, and David Patten was killed in Missouri. And when Joseph Smith was killed there were many who apostatized, who did not believe Brigham Young was the prophet and followed other men. Those men were not "taken down" by God. God allows men to lead people astray if they will, but God never will lead a good person astray.
Brigham Young was the Prophet from 1844 to 1877, thirty-three years. Through most of those years Wilford Woodruff was believed by many to be senior to John Taylor because he was older, and as Joseph originally placed them in seniority according to age, Wilford Woodruff believed it to be still true as well, even though John Taylor helped to ordain Wilford Woodruff. Prior to Brigham Young's passing he made it very clear that where he was not John Taylor presided.
Brigham Young passed away in 1877 and from that time Wilford Woodruff was not close to John Taylor. He was senior in age, as was Orson Pratt, because for many years he was believed to be senior in Priesthood authority. Although this was corrected by Brigham Young shortly before he passed away, Wilford Woodruff went to the Lord asking about being co-equal in authority with John Taylor, he wrote a supposed revelation to the church while John Taylor was still alive, and still the prophet over the people.
Wilford Woodruff wrote "Thus saith the Lord unto My servant John Taylor...", and then later wrote: "And while my servant John Taylor is your President, I wish to ask the rest of my servants of the Apostles the question, although you have one to preside over your Quorum, which is the order of God in all generations, do you not, all of you, hold the apostleship, which is the highest authority ever given to men on earth? You do. Therefore you hold in common the Keys of the Kingdom of God in all the world."
This was completely wrong, and out of order for him. The other two largest of the fundamentalist Mormon groups, the AUB and the Centennial Park people both hold on to this as a revelation, and it was a major reason they split from the FLDS. The AUB has it included in the Four Hidden Revelations.
In 1879, the George Reynolds decision in the Supreme Court made the anti-plural marriage laws binding. Overturning the First Amendment and attempting to stop the Celestial Law. This is shortly before Wilford Woodruff wrote his "revelation" to John Taylor.
A 1882 Revelation to John Taylor states clearly regarding the prerequisite to ordaining men to the High Priesthood: "if he will conform to my law; for it is not meet that men who will not abide my law shall preside over my priesthood"
The 1886 was not submitted to the church because the Prophet John Taylor was in hiding, he was already being hunted by many at the time. He had been in hiding for over a year when George Q Cannon brought him a manifesto to consider, and that is when the Lord gave the 1886 at the home of John W Woolley. John Taylor said he would rather his tongue severed from his mouth than to sanction a manifesto, and his arm removed before he would sign it.
John Taylor passed away in 1887 while still hiding. Many who were in the Mormon church wanted to have plural marriage done away because of the persecution, relatively few were committed to living the highest law and the government was taking all of the property of the church. Wilford Woodruff became the President of the church even though he was not close to the Prophet John Taylor, or ever attempted to see him while in hiding. He was the next in line by ordination, not by unity.
The 1890 Manifesto does not state that the Church will not perform or sanction plural marriage, but rather that they denied that they were doing so. The problem was that was not true, as there are many documented cases proving otherwise besides Wilford Woodruffs own marriage in 1897. Brigham Young Jr who would have succeeded Wilford Woodruff had he lived, and John W Taylor were apostles and married after that, among many others.
And thus we have record of the 1880 "revelation" to Wilford Woodruff declaring he was "co-head" of the church. "Hold the keys in common" was the wording he used. Wilford Woodruff DID lose his seniority, which REQUIRES unity and obedience to the Law and the Prophet. When you read the Bible, the story of Elisha holding the mantle of Elijah is very relevant in how you understand who the Prophet is. Also the story of David and Saul is relevant to the Woolley men, for after David was anointed King he would not "set on the Lords anointed" even though Saul had lost his way. That is how John Woolley and Lorin Woolley treated Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, and Joseph F Smith. Many men stayed in good standing in the church and married plural wives at this time without the President of the Church approving, but the Prophet was doing it. John and Lorin Woolley were given this authority in 1886, and when the Manifesto was read and sustained, those men who sustained it as a revelation lost their Priesthood authority.
John W Woolley was a very reserved man, and did not ever preach that he was the prophet, as he was very humble. And yet he continued to go to the LDS temple and worked there as the Temple Sealer (or the one who performed the wedding ceremonies) after the 1886 revelation. He, like David of Old did not "set on the Lords anointed" He was a close friend of Joseph F Smith, and they conferred together often, even after Joseph F Smith became president of the Church. He did not draw any attention to himself or speak in meetings or gather a separate people, he only continued to do what he was instructed by John Taylor after the 1886 revelation was given. And that was to perform weddings for those who wanted to live the Celestial law. After Joseph F Smith publicly announced the "second manifesto" he suffered quite a bit, for the other Apostles were going to depose him, John Woolley said he "sweat drops of blood", he then sanctioned plural weddings in secret up until his death. He performed the wedding of John W Woolley and his wife in 1910. It was not until Heber J Grant became President of the church that the church President began fighting the Celestial Law of Marriage in actual deed. Any who were devout up to that time could be married in the Celestial Law if they made the effort, as did John Y Barlow:
"I went on a mission, and while there I supposed this thing was all done away with. I came back and what did I see? I saw the President of our Stake -- and by the way, the President of our Stake was a brother to Brother [Heber J.]Grant -- and I saw two of his counselors, and all of them had taken plural wives. I thought to myself, "What is the matter here? There is something wrong somewhere. I am going to find out." So I commenced praying to God. I got the answer. I got it very, very plain. I might relate a little bit to you how it came about.
"I knew that this was going on, but who was doing it I didn't know. I was sure it was going on, for I had a brother that had gone into it, and Brother Thomas Steed and Walter and a great many others had gone into it, and I knew they were good men. So I got a chance. A young lady came to my home and was ready to go into it; so I went to Salt Lake to find out what to do. I approached half a dozen or more to find out what I should do. Finally, one said to me, "Think of the man that bore the strongest testimony you ever knew." I did. He lived out of town. I went to the depot and took the train to where he was. When I got there, he was standing at the depot waiting for me. I started to tell him what I wanted. He said, "Hold on, I will tell you what you want. I was out "Ward teaching" and God told me to come and meet you." I was going to tell him what I wanted, and he said, "I will tell you what you want." He explained to me the whole thing -- how it was and what they were doing. This is how I came to get in this work. Then after I found out it was right and could get it done, he said, "I will be downtown Thursday, or Tuesday, and I will take you to a man that can do it." He took me. I said, "How did you get your authority?" It was perfectly explained satisfactory to me. After he did it, he said, "Now, have your wife go get her endowments." So I went back, and she got a recommend and we all went to the temple. We fasted and prayed for three days, and the morning we went to the temple, I was called up first to stand in the prayer circle. I was called to take that woman through the veil. After that, I was patted on the shoulder and the brother said, "Be careful, Brother Barlow. I knew it the moment you stepped in here. God bless you. Be careful!" That was one of the greatest testimonies to me. Since then, I have had ever so many testimonies." (John Y Barlow 3/25/48)
God will not lead a righteous people astray, but He requires those who call themselves by His name to KNOW they are doing His will. He will send them tests, and requires them to make sure they are doing right no matter what. Those who were doing this during the 1880's and stayed with the doctrine of the Priesthood were no longer LDS after the passing of Joseph F Smith. The Church and any people who were just along for the ride and made no effort to sustain the Celestial Law were cut off from the authority of the Priesthood when the Church began excommunicating those who lived the Celestial Law. The Church authorities apostatized.
To search out and live the Priesthood law of marriage was available for everyone in the Church who would make the effort. All of the FLDS people now are descendants of, or are themselves those who seek after the Celestial Law. Not one marriage in the LDS Church is valid in the Celestial Kingdom, they must be performed by those who hold the Priesthood and live the Celestial Law. Many will be done for the righteous among the LDS and other people during the Millennium. God knows what He is doing, and He knows what we are doing, so we must know what we are doing is what HE wants us to be doing..
Friday, October 24, 2008
O my Father way up there
Will you hear this little prayer?
I seek for you to hear today
My anxious prayer in some small way
I know I am slow, and far behind
I’m not always sweet, pure, and kind
But still my Father I will pray
With all my heart anyway!
For just one thing I ask
One single solitary task
Nothing is to great for Thee
Even if it is just for little me
All I ask from you today
O If there is any way!
Tell those I love with all my soul
Just how much I love them so!
Will you hear this little prayer?
I seek for you to hear today
My anxious prayer in some small way
I know I am slow, and far behind
I’m not always sweet, pure, and kind
But still my Father I will pray
With all my heart anyway!
For just one thing I ask
One single solitary task
Nothing is to great for Thee
Even if it is just for little me
All I ask from you today
O If there is any way!
Tell those I love with all my soul
Just how much I love them so!
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Davy Crockett On the Sanctity of Taxpayer Money
From The Life of Colonel David Crockett,by Edward S. Ellis (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)
"I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support – rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill.
He commenced:
"Mr. Speaker – I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount. There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt. The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.
Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.
I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table. I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:
"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."
He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said:
"Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."
I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:
"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.
"The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.
The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.
"So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don't be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."
He replied: "I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."
I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and – "
"'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'
This was a sockdolager... I begged him to tell me what was the matter.
"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."
"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."
"No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"
"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with."
"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"
Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:
"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."
"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."
I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:
"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."
"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:
"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."
He laughingly replied:
"Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."
"If I don't," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."
"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."
"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."
"My name is Bunce."
"Not Horatio Bunce?"
"Yes."
"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."
We shook hands and parted.
It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.
Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.
I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.
I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him – no, that is not the word – I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted – at least, they all knew me.
In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:
"Fellow citizens – I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."
I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:
"And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.
"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."
He came upon the stand and said:
"Fellow citizens – It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."
He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.
I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.
"Now, Sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.
"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men – men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased – a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."
-----------------------------------------------------
My Father wanted me to post this.
"I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support – rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill.
He commenced:
"Mr. Speaker – I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount. There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt. The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.
Like many other young men, and old ones, too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.
I went early to his room the next morning and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table. I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied:
"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."
He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished he turned to me and said:
"Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."
I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:
"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way.
"The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.
The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them.
"So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don't be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."
He replied: "I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."
I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and – "
"'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'
This was a sockdolager... I begged him to tell me what was the matter.
"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the Constitution to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."
"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."
"No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"
"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with."
"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"
Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:
"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."
"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."
I have given you an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:
"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."
"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:
"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it full. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said there at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."
He laughingly replied:
"Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."
"If I don't," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."
"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."
"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."
"My name is Bunce."
"Not Horatio Bunce?"
"Yes."
"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me; but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."
We shook hands and parted.
It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.
Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.
I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.
I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him – no, that is not the word – I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted – at least, they all knew me.
In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:
"Fellow citizens – I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."
I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:
"And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.
"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."
He came upon the stand and said:
"Fellow citizens – It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."
He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.
I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.
"Now, Sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.
"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men – men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased – a debt which could not be paid by money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."
-----------------------------------------------------
My Father wanted me to post this.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Will's son's story
I did not know Will very well, in fact I only met him once that I remember, but I do remember that wonderful experience very, very well. It was not long after he was released from the Hospital after his accident in Nevada. (They were dismantling a portable steel building)
He just so happened to be walking down Memorial St in Hildale when I was loading up to go on a picnic. He called out "HI AL!" and came walking to me with a great big smile. I greeted him just as warmly and shook his hand. I don't know why, but I have never loved a brother more, he treated me like his best friend and bore his testemony to me of the Priesthood and the Prophet and the work of Zion. He was so filled with love even for me that I cannot even describe it. We stood there and spoke for 45 minutes... I will never forget that... How I want to be like WILL!
But that is not why I started this post. I want everyone to go and read about Will's son Willson, and his experience with CPS. Here:
http://www.truthwillprevail.org/index.php?parentid=1&index=144
He just so happened to be walking down Memorial St in Hildale when I was loading up to go on a picnic. He called out "HI AL!" and came walking to me with a great big smile. I greeted him just as warmly and shook his hand. I don't know why, but I have never loved a brother more, he treated me like his best friend and bore his testemony to me of the Priesthood and the Prophet and the work of Zion. He was so filled with love even for me that I cannot even describe it. We stood there and spoke for 45 minutes... I will never forget that... How I want to be like WILL!
But that is not why I started this post. I want everyone to go and read about Will's son Willson, and his experience with CPS. Here:
http://www.truthwillprevail.org/index.php?parentid=1&index=144
Thursday, October 9, 2008
House In A Day
From sticks of wood to stones on countertops, bare pipe plumbing to taking a shower, in a 5 bedroom home in a little over 24 hours.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
How to "Make" Money
Many people blame the banking and financial mess that the United States is having on bad loans. I agree, but not how you might think.
The value of a loan is based on the value of the collateral that is used to secure the debt. In reality, money is created when loans are given. That may sound strange but it is the truth. So when a bank loans 160k for a house and the house drops in value to 140k the debt becomes worse, it becomes a non equity. If the housing and real estate value boom that was created by easy credit continued, we would not be having the crisis in the financial markets that we have today. In effect our money supply is hampered by debt that is overvalued. Our money is losing value as fast as the loans lose value.
So the cry is “oversight” “regulations” etc, etc. And I agree 100% but most people are fooled into believing that the free market is the cause of the mess, or that “golden parachutes” are the worst thing we have to worry about. The problem is at the bottom, not the top.
Our monetary system was BUILT to crash. It has never been sustainable since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. Sure it has been milked along with all the ups and downs in the market, but it is rotten to the core. If you did a REAL study of the Great Depression you would see that it was caused by the Federal Reserve System. There was no drought, no national catastrophe; no other reason for our country to be in a financial mess other than the lack of money with value. Our problem is how money is CREATED in the first place. The “roaring twenties” caused the broke thirties. I still can’t figure out why they didn’t chuck the Fed during the depression. You can actually give partial blame to a Mormon named Merriner Eccles.
Money is created by the Federal Reserve loaning it out to the government, at interest. Just think about that for a minute. For every dollar they give out they expect one dollar and six cents (or more) back. And that is the ONLY source of money in the United States. Got it? The system is a spiral going up, and can never be leveled off because in order to pay the interest, they have to create more money, and that money is created by another loan. Inflation, or the quantity of money (and thus prices) going up, is necessary to keep the system afloat. Deflation, or prices going down, will always cause financial trouble in this system, ESPECIALLY in real estate, the largest loans out there.
But guess what, that is only the second worst problem with our financial system. The worst problem is the fact that the Fed only creates a small percentage of our money, the majority of the money is created by banks below the Fed lending out money they do not have. This is how they do it: For every ten bucks you deposit in a checking account at a bank, that bank can loan out nine (in a savings account they can loan out all of it). So your bank balance shows ten, but they loaned out nine of it, so in essence the money is in two places at once. That is what I mean when I say money is “created” when it is loaned out by a bank. This is what is called “Fractional Reserve Banking” Ten thousand people put ten bucks in the bank and ninety thousand is lent out. But if too many take their ten bucks out, and the bank doesn’t meet their reserve requirement at the end of the day, they have to borrow money from other banks overnight to be balanced. They can pay it back the next day with more deposits and/or not giving out loans. But guess what, when a bank is only required to keep ten percent “reserve requirement” it multiplies the problem. That ninety thousand that they loaned out does what? It gets DEPOSITED, and thus becomes added funds that they can use as part of their “reserve requirement” and then can LOAN out 90% of that as well! So for every $100 the Federal Reserve creates, the banks turn it into $1000.
And so the only real and true way to fix our monetary system is to RAISE the “reserve requirement” and create foundational money that is NOT interest bearing. It would be simple to do. The banking industry would need no more “oversight” than that; honesty.
Prior to Abe Lincoln and the Civil War, the government really had no influence on the value of money directly as is mandated in the Constitution, although they tried to control banks through regulation, and three times they allowed a Central Bank, they never before printed their own paper money, but only coined money from gold and silver. Abraham Lincoln, for one year in 1862, printed money based solely on the trustworthiness of the government, and this money had no ties to gold or debt. It was called the “greenback”, and is how he paid the vendors and soldiers of the Civil War. He and the Secretary of the Treasury read in the Constitution that congress could “coin” (print) money and regulate the value thereof, and so they did, independent of gold or debt. But after only one year, they ended the practice in an effort to tie it to gold. Thus began the system of Treasury debt backed money that we use today. The power to print paper money was given back to the large national banks, and greenbacks, (government money without debt), was replaced with banker debt money, and tied to gold only through the false perception that the banks printed money only as receipts for gold. The original greenbacks stayed in circulation for a long time, and their value was real on the same principle as banker credit money; and that is trust. In the greenback case, it was trust in the government to be prudent with that power. In the Treasury debt paper case, it was trust in the government to repay money they get from a trust that the bankers were rich (in gold) enough to loan it. Allowing banks (willingly or not through fractional reserve) to print money on that trust.
“Fiat” Money is money “by decree” or government money. Governments can gain money three different ways, one is to tax the people, two is to borrow, and the third it to create it by “fiat”. People who call gold the only “real” money are accurate in the sense that it is exchangeable without government or banks. But in reality gold is counterfeit money if the government does not accept it by fiat for payments to them, as is true now in the United States. The Current inflationary “fiat” money that we use is actually created by government indebtedness to the Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve issues this “fiat” money by loaning it to the government. Because of this there is not enough money in circulation to cover all of the debt if you include the interest. To pay off the debt now would be to remove all of the money that is in existence twenty times over. The current ratio of debt to equity is 22:1 in the U.S. securities markets, where debt far outweighs value. If the Federal Reserve was REALLY part of the government, why doesn’t the government get all of the interest income?
The best way to fix the system is simple, and John F Kennedy attempted to start the process shortly before he was assassinated. Executive Order 11110 authorized the Treasury to issue Silver Certificates against the Silver that was in the governments “reserve”. The government can issue silver backed dollars, gold backed dollars, oil backed dollars, coal backed dollars, storable wheat backed dollars, and even real estate backed dollars; money that represents real tangible assets and not debt, stored to secure the value of the money. Just imagine the power Congress really has. I call it the “Storehouse” money system, REAL “supply side” economics. I would not doubt that it would end most inflation. They could even keep the Federal “Reserve” Bank, and make that bank be a storehouse.
A presidential candidate in 1844 proposed that we should make a Central Bank that was owned by the Government, with branches in each state and territory, each raising their own money and lending it at interest to private banks. Interest would be income for the government replacing most taxation. But that candidate was murdered. His name? Joseph Smith.
The value of a loan is based on the value of the collateral that is used to secure the debt. In reality, money is created when loans are given. That may sound strange but it is the truth. So when a bank loans 160k for a house and the house drops in value to 140k the debt becomes worse, it becomes a non equity. If the housing and real estate value boom that was created by easy credit continued, we would not be having the crisis in the financial markets that we have today. In effect our money supply is hampered by debt that is overvalued. Our money is losing value as fast as the loans lose value.
So the cry is “oversight” “regulations” etc, etc. And I agree 100% but most people are fooled into believing that the free market is the cause of the mess, or that “golden parachutes” are the worst thing we have to worry about. The problem is at the bottom, not the top.
Our monetary system was BUILT to crash. It has never been sustainable since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. Sure it has been milked along with all the ups and downs in the market, but it is rotten to the core. If you did a REAL study of the Great Depression you would see that it was caused by the Federal Reserve System. There was no drought, no national catastrophe; no other reason for our country to be in a financial mess other than the lack of money with value. Our problem is how money is CREATED in the first place. The “roaring twenties” caused the broke thirties. I still can’t figure out why they didn’t chuck the Fed during the depression. You can actually give partial blame to a Mormon named Merriner Eccles.
Money is created by the Federal Reserve loaning it out to the government, at interest. Just think about that for a minute. For every dollar they give out they expect one dollar and six cents (or more) back. And that is the ONLY source of money in the United States. Got it? The system is a spiral going up, and can never be leveled off because in order to pay the interest, they have to create more money, and that money is created by another loan. Inflation, or the quantity of money (and thus prices) going up, is necessary to keep the system afloat. Deflation, or prices going down, will always cause financial trouble in this system, ESPECIALLY in real estate, the largest loans out there.
But guess what, that is only the second worst problem with our financial system. The worst problem is the fact that the Fed only creates a small percentage of our money, the majority of the money is created by banks below the Fed lending out money they do not have. This is how they do it: For every ten bucks you deposit in a checking account at a bank, that bank can loan out nine (in a savings account they can loan out all of it). So your bank balance shows ten, but they loaned out nine of it, so in essence the money is in two places at once. That is what I mean when I say money is “created” when it is loaned out by a bank. This is what is called “Fractional Reserve Banking” Ten thousand people put ten bucks in the bank and ninety thousand is lent out. But if too many take their ten bucks out, and the bank doesn’t meet their reserve requirement at the end of the day, they have to borrow money from other banks overnight to be balanced. They can pay it back the next day with more deposits and/or not giving out loans. But guess what, when a bank is only required to keep ten percent “reserve requirement” it multiplies the problem. That ninety thousand that they loaned out does what? It gets DEPOSITED, and thus becomes added funds that they can use as part of their “reserve requirement” and then can LOAN out 90% of that as well! So for every $100 the Federal Reserve creates, the banks turn it into $1000.
And so the only real and true way to fix our monetary system is to RAISE the “reserve requirement” and create foundational money that is NOT interest bearing. It would be simple to do. The banking industry would need no more “oversight” than that; honesty.
Prior to Abe Lincoln and the Civil War, the government really had no influence on the value of money directly as is mandated in the Constitution, although they tried to control banks through regulation, and three times they allowed a Central Bank, they never before printed their own paper money, but only coined money from gold and silver. Abraham Lincoln, for one year in 1862, printed money based solely on the trustworthiness of the government, and this money had no ties to gold or debt. It was called the “greenback”, and is how he paid the vendors and soldiers of the Civil War. He and the Secretary of the Treasury read in the Constitution that congress could “coin” (print) money and regulate the value thereof, and so they did, independent of gold or debt. But after only one year, they ended the practice in an effort to tie it to gold. Thus began the system of Treasury debt backed money that we use today. The power to print paper money was given back to the large national banks, and greenbacks, (government money without debt), was replaced with banker debt money, and tied to gold only through the false perception that the banks printed money only as receipts for gold. The original greenbacks stayed in circulation for a long time, and their value was real on the same principle as banker credit money; and that is trust. In the greenback case, it was trust in the government to be prudent with that power. In the Treasury debt paper case, it was trust in the government to repay money they get from a trust that the bankers were rich (in gold) enough to loan it. Allowing banks (willingly or not through fractional reserve) to print money on that trust.
“Fiat” Money is money “by decree” or government money. Governments can gain money three different ways, one is to tax the people, two is to borrow, and the third it to create it by “fiat”. People who call gold the only “real” money are accurate in the sense that it is exchangeable without government or banks. But in reality gold is counterfeit money if the government does not accept it by fiat for payments to them, as is true now in the United States. The Current inflationary “fiat” money that we use is actually created by government indebtedness to the Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve issues this “fiat” money by loaning it to the government. Because of this there is not enough money in circulation to cover all of the debt if you include the interest. To pay off the debt now would be to remove all of the money that is in existence twenty times over. The current ratio of debt to equity is 22:1 in the U.S. securities markets, where debt far outweighs value. If the Federal Reserve was REALLY part of the government, why doesn’t the government get all of the interest income?
The best way to fix the system is simple, and John F Kennedy attempted to start the process shortly before he was assassinated. Executive Order 11110 authorized the Treasury to issue Silver Certificates against the Silver that was in the governments “reserve”. The government can issue silver backed dollars, gold backed dollars, oil backed dollars, coal backed dollars, storable wheat backed dollars, and even real estate backed dollars; money that represents real tangible assets and not debt, stored to secure the value of the money. Just imagine the power Congress really has. I call it the “Storehouse” money system, REAL “supply side” economics. I would not doubt that it would end most inflation. They could even keep the Federal “Reserve” Bank, and make that bank be a storehouse.
A presidential candidate in 1844 proposed that we should make a Central Bank that was owned by the Government, with branches in each state and territory, each raising their own money and lending it at interest to private banks. Interest would be income for the government replacing most taxation. But that candidate was murdered. His name? Joseph Smith.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Scientheology
[This is my personal belief and may or may not be truth, I am always striving to learn and subject to correction]
All religion is the same in the belief that our individual identity does not cease when our bodies cease to have life in them. Without this belief then we are atheist, or believe that life does not exist except in a physical way. I believe both; the spirituality of the soul is physical beyond the visible body. Science has begun to grasp this through quantum physics, and quantum menchanics, but in their “String Theories” they try to exclude God. Microbiology does not have the technology to “see” what life is, life just “IS”. Life is made of refined and “invisible” subatomic matter, often referred to as “energy”
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity says Energy equals Mass (of matter) multiplied by the speed of light squared. Life is an energy matter mastered only by God, and His speed and energy is unobservable. Satan has much scientific prowess to sustain life, but his power and existence is energy based on anti-life, which is anti-energy, which is anti-matter. His “life” is dictated by the true life in God. Time is even relative to speed and energy. But time travel is impossible in reverse. The past can be seen, but cannot be changed from now or in the future; but the future can be seen and changed from now. Eternity is one continuous “now” leaving a trail called “the past”. Our Father in heaven is jealous of us because we are so naive about our own existence.
Our Father in Heaven is Eternal, He existed forever. Yet it is also true that we His children existed forever. Energy as matter of intelligence, or Life, Love, and the Spirit of God, is without beginning of days or end of years. Our Father and Mothers created us as individuals from the eternal energy called Life, and gave us our individual existence, our Spirit “me”. Life exists with or without individuality. We were created as individuals by God, but our life existed eternally, as did His. Our individual “Life” existence predates our life here, and when, how, and who we come here as is greatly influenced by our pre-life existence. God, who sits enthroned in Heaven is a resurrected and perfected physical and embodied “man”, we are created as earthlings in His “image”. He gained mastery over life through His perfected Love, His purification of the individual spirit and individual body that His parents gave to Him before he became God. We as His children either become “like” Him, or we will eventually lose progression and seek to be dissolved.
Inasmuch as there is death, there is eternal dissolution. The second death is the death of the body and the individual Spirit, which can be the only time that the soul ceases to “exist”. We were not created out of nothing, and thus we cannot be destroyed into nothing. Those who experience the second death will cease to exist as individuals, and shall be dissolved into the Life pool, or Life energy existence without individuality. Sometime later to be created again as an individual, perhaps a child of a god, or possibly as animal life, somewhere in eternity. Life, or the Spirit of God, has existed forever. Individual gods, or the spirit children of God called human’s, have not.
When we die we do not change from being who we are. We enter the world of Paradise, or Spirit World, waiting to be resurrected with the exact same character and weaknesses that we have here. When the resurrection occurs we are given our completed soul again, meaning our mind and body is restored to our spirit, and we are judged according to how we treated it. Then we are given a mansion in His house that we can appreciate, in the kingdom with those who are similar to ourselves. Those who are not worthy of the highest heaven will be separated from those who are. Two other Kingdoms will be created for those who are not worthy of the highest, but they will be visited and taught by those in the higher kingdoms. Those who are able to grasp the necessity of righteousness and “think NO evil” shall enter the highest kingdom, the school or Church of the gods, and become joint heirs with Jesus Christ.
All religion is the same in the belief that our individual identity does not cease when our bodies cease to have life in them. Without this belief then we are atheist, or believe that life does not exist except in a physical way. I believe both; the spirituality of the soul is physical beyond the visible body. Science has begun to grasp this through quantum physics, and quantum menchanics, but in their “String Theories” they try to exclude God. Microbiology does not have the technology to “see” what life is, life just “IS”. Life is made of refined and “invisible” subatomic matter, often referred to as “energy”
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity says Energy equals Mass (of matter) multiplied by the speed of light squared. Life is an energy matter mastered only by God, and His speed and energy is unobservable. Satan has much scientific prowess to sustain life, but his power and existence is energy based on anti-life, which is anti-energy, which is anti-matter. His “life” is dictated by the true life in God. Time is even relative to speed and energy. But time travel is impossible in reverse. The past can be seen, but cannot be changed from now or in the future; but the future can be seen and changed from now. Eternity is one continuous “now” leaving a trail called “the past”. Our Father in heaven is jealous of us because we are so naive about our own existence.
Our Father in Heaven is Eternal, He existed forever. Yet it is also true that we His children existed forever. Energy as matter of intelligence, or Life, Love, and the Spirit of God, is without beginning of days or end of years. Our Father and Mothers created us as individuals from the eternal energy called Life, and gave us our individual existence, our Spirit “me”. Life exists with or without individuality. We were created as individuals by God, but our life existed eternally, as did His. Our individual “Life” existence predates our life here, and when, how, and who we come here as is greatly influenced by our pre-life existence. God, who sits enthroned in Heaven is a resurrected and perfected physical and embodied “man”, we are created as earthlings in His “image”. He gained mastery over life through His perfected Love, His purification of the individual spirit and individual body that His parents gave to Him before he became God. We as His children either become “like” Him, or we will eventually lose progression and seek to be dissolved.
Inasmuch as there is death, there is eternal dissolution. The second death is the death of the body and the individual Spirit, which can be the only time that the soul ceases to “exist”. We were not created out of nothing, and thus we cannot be destroyed into nothing. Those who experience the second death will cease to exist as individuals, and shall be dissolved into the Life pool, or Life energy existence without individuality. Sometime later to be created again as an individual, perhaps a child of a god, or possibly as animal life, somewhere in eternity. Life, or the Spirit of God, has existed forever. Individual gods, or the spirit children of God called human’s, have not.
When we die we do not change from being who we are. We enter the world of Paradise, or Spirit World, waiting to be resurrected with the exact same character and weaknesses that we have here. When the resurrection occurs we are given our completed soul again, meaning our mind and body is restored to our spirit, and we are judged according to how we treated it. Then we are given a mansion in His house that we can appreciate, in the kingdom with those who are similar to ourselves. Those who are not worthy of the highest heaven will be separated from those who are. Two other Kingdoms will be created for those who are not worthy of the highest, but they will be visited and taught by those in the higher kingdoms. Those who are able to grasp the necessity of righteousness and “think NO evil” shall enter the highest kingdom, the school or Church of the gods, and become joint heirs with Jesus Christ.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Cracked Pots
"A water bearer in China had two large pots, each hung on each end of a pole which he carried across his neck. One of the pots had a crack in it, and while the other pot was perfect and always delivered a full portion of water at the end of the long walk from the stream to the master's house, the cracked pot arrived only half full.
"For a full two years this went on daily, with the bearer delivering only one and a half pots full of water in his master's house. Of course, the perfect pot was proud of its accomplishments.
But the poor cracked pot was ashamed of its own imperfections, and miserable that it was able to accomplish only half of what it had been made to do. After two years of what it perceived to be a bitter failure, it spoke to the water bearer one day by the stream.
"I am ashamed of myself, and I want to apologize to you."
"Why?" asked the bearer. "What are you ashamed of?"
"I have been able, for these past two years, to deliver only half my load because this crack in my side causes water to leak out all the way back to your master's house. Because of my flaws, you have to do all of this work and you don't get full value for your efforts," the pot said.
"I have been able, for these past two years, to deliver only half my load because this crack in my side causes water to leak out all the way back to your master's house. Because of my flaws, you have to do all of this work and you don't get full value for your efforts," the pot said.
"The water bearer felt sorry for the old cracked pot and in his compassion he said, "As we return to the master's house I want you to notice the beautiful flowers along the path."
"Indeed, as they went up the hill, the old cracked pot took notice of the sun warming the beautiful wild flowers on the side of the path, and this cheered it some. But at the end of the trail, it still felt bad because it had leaked out half its load, and so again it apologized to the bearer for its failure.
"The bearer said to the pot, "Did you notice that there were flowers only on your side of the path but not on the other pot's side? That's because I have always known about your flaw, and I took advantage of it. I planted flower seeds on your side of the path, and every day while we walk back from the stream, you've watered them. For two years I have been able to pick these beautiful flowers to decorate my master's table. Without you being just the way you are, he would not have this beauty to grace his house."
"Each of us has our own unique flaws. We're all cracked pots. But if we will allow it, the Lord will use our flaws to grace His Father's table. In God's great economy, nothing goes to waste.
So as we seek ways to minister together and as God calls you to the tasks He has appointed for you, don't be afraid of your flaws. Acknowledge them and allow Him to take advantage of them, and you, too, can be the cause of beauty in His pathway.
"Go out boldly, knowing that in our weakness we find His strength and that "In Him every one of God's promises is a Yes".
-Author Unknown
Thursday, October 2, 2008
From the Hill Commorah
It was dark, and raining, but I stopped by and took a picture anyway.
An angel from on high The long, long silence broke,
Descending from the sky, These gracious words he spoke:
"Lo, in Cumorah's lonely hill A sacred record lies concealed;
Lo, in Cumorah's lonely hill, A sacred record lies concealed."
Sealed by Moroni's hand, It has for ages lain
To wait the Lord's command, From dust to speak again.
It shall again to light come forth To usher in Christ's reign on earth;
It shall again to light come forth To usher in Christ's reign on earth.
It speaks of Joseph's seed And makes the remnant known
Of nations long since dead, Who once had dwelt alone.
The fulness of the gospel, too, Its pages will reveal to view;
The fulness of the gospel, too, Its pages will reveal to view.
The time is now fulfilled, The long expected day;
Let earth obedience yield And darkness flee away;
Remove the seals; be wide unfurled Its light and glory to the world;
Remove the seals; be wide unfurled Its light and glory to the world.
Lo, Israel filled with joy Shall now be gathered home;
Their wealth and means employ To build Jerusalem,
While Zion shall arise and shine And fill the earth with truth divine,
While Zion shall arise and shine And fill the earth with truth divine.
- Parley P Pratt
An angel from on high The long, long silence broke,
Descending from the sky, These gracious words he spoke:
"Lo, in Cumorah's lonely hill A sacred record lies concealed;
Lo, in Cumorah's lonely hill, A sacred record lies concealed."
Sealed by Moroni's hand, It has for ages lain
To wait the Lord's command, From dust to speak again.
It shall again to light come forth To usher in Christ's reign on earth;
It shall again to light come forth To usher in Christ's reign on earth.
It speaks of Joseph's seed And makes the remnant known
Of nations long since dead, Who once had dwelt alone.
The fulness of the gospel, too, Its pages will reveal to view;
The fulness of the gospel, too, Its pages will reveal to view.
The time is now fulfilled, The long expected day;
Let earth obedience yield And darkness flee away;
Remove the seals; be wide unfurled Its light and glory to the world;
Remove the seals; be wide unfurled Its light and glory to the world.
Lo, Israel filled with joy Shall now be gathered home;
Their wealth and means employ To build Jerusalem,
While Zion shall arise and shine And fill the earth with truth divine,
While Zion shall arise and shine And fill the earth with truth divine.
- Parley P Pratt
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)