Heart, Head and Soul

When Harry Reid boldly declared, ‘We have changed healthcare in America forever,‘ perhaps a second look at the basis of his declaration and the presumption inherent in the statement will make us tremble rather than rejoice.  Why does he presume future generations will like his actions?  Or does tradition imply a measured lack of freedom in the future?

See ‘The Goldilocks Quest: Tradition’ @ page 8 of link: http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2010/0610_stlweb/MV%20June10_web.pdf

President Obama frequently pleads the case that ‘everyone should pay their fair share.’  However, upon what authority does the president declare just what is fair?  How do we establish authority?  Does the president, do we presume authority is intrinsic or acquired?  Read more here: http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2010/0510_stlweb/MV%20May10_web.pdf  page 9 at link, “The Goldilocks Quest, Authority“

Is it wise to compare our Founders, The Three Musketeers, Joseph of Egypt, J.P. Rockefeller to current leaders, (i.e., Bush, Obama, Paulson, Geithner)?  Of all phrases to remember, ‘Wouldn’t be prudent!’  Except in this instance, it is VERY PRUDENT!  Read why.

http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2010/0410_stlweb/MV_Apr10_web.pdf   “The Goldilocks Quest, Solidarity” page 12.

As with real estate — location, location, location — so too with decisions.  Have you ever considered, where decisions are located ( in your heart/mind, at the local school board, Jeff City, or of all places, Washington D. C., ) affect you every bit as much as the effect of the decision itself?  Read what Goldilocks discovers this month on the way to a November Clean Sweep.

 http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2010/0310_stlweb/0310_index.htm page 23.

Just why do we apply ‘the Goldilocks Principle’ to nearly every decision in life?  Why do we balance our decisions seeking ‘just right’ on countless daily decisions but ignore the concept when we vote?  That is, why do we place little to no meaningful emphasis on a candidate’s political history but place most if not all our emphasis on a candidate’s campaign promises?  Allow the first of ten discussions in ‘The Goldilocks Quest’ to provide the answer!

 http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/pages/2010issues.html (February, page 12.)

Talk show host Jamie Allman performed far more than usual emcee services; he connected those frequent coal trains passing in the background that cool September evening — State’s Rights Rally, Washington, MO.  – to the current state legislative session, the national legislative agenda of Reid/Pelosi and called for a logical embrace to the way of life those trains represent!

 http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2010/0110_stlweb/0110_articles/allman_advocates.html

For contemporary, radical progressives like President Obama to advance a ‘New Constitution,’  they know a proper construct has to begin at the origin.  In this case the President contends the Constitution is maligned as flawed for only addressing ‘negative’ rights from its inception.  Onward the argument goes from that adjusted, flawed original intent.  Interestingly enough, a similar method is employed by two leading proponents of a ‘New Gospel’ by reseting original Apostolic intent and all subsequent traditions.  See how the methods to refute the ‘New Gospel’ argument can be modeled to refute those arguing a ‘New Constitution.’

http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2009/0609_stlweb/0609_articles/crossan_and_borg_proclaim.html

When President Obama portends to offer ‘fresh insight’ into Constitutional intent, is the concept truly new or old, tried and rejected?  Read how Judge Andrew Napolitano in a speech in St. Louis resets the arguments for those who advance the large federal government utopia and the ‘freedom’ which comes along at a heavy price: ‘serfdom’!

http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2009/0909_stlweb/0909_articles/judge_napolitano_makes_case.html

Does anyone find it strange how our federal government finds it necessary to fight local (i.e., dual) sovereignty?  Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s fight is a battle of dual sovereignty, local sovereignty once wagered and lost by that Goliath of an attorney general, that Goliath of a man/woman who was felled at the Supreme Court!  Read more here.

http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metrovoice.net/2009/1009_stlweb/1009_articles/guardians_of_liberty.html

In case you enjoy thinking, this site constructed to provide food for thought, food for the Heart, Head and Soul!