Comment: (and the battle isn't over yet)

(See in situ)

(and the battle isn't over yet)

With very few exceptions I have been sent into exile. I seek discussion, not argument, and so it is unusual, in my experience, to have these opportunities to respond to specifics that are specifically challenging my competitive viewpoint.

I don't often find, in my experience, specific acknowledgments of points I offer to counterpoints existing whereby a point intends to be compared with another point and where the two points appear to be contradictory, and at which point, having both points side by side, there then is an opportunity to evaluate those points as those points contradict each other, so as to reach a goal of knowing better as to which point is more accurate, more productive, less deceptive, less destructive, and in a word, which point is good, relative to which point is not so good.

Bear, if I may tell on her, has just gone through a David and Goliath moment on this point that I'm trying to point out, as this point compared to a competitive point and the point being stated as such:

Things are being held accountable for the actions of people.

Perhaps that point has been acknowledge and affirmed and I just fail to know better.

I write anyway.

Case in point:

"My daughter said her son very adamently believes that the Federal Government has no Constitutional right to take taxpayers money and arbitrarily dole it out for political purposes that have to do with control"

It takes a mightily determined individual power of will to slay this dragon, as can be attested by those who are doing that slaying, and I don't think the battle is ever over, since the lie proliferates human conscience in so many ways.

If it is not a lie, then it is an efficient use of language to say that "the Federal Government has no Constitutional right...", as the meaning of those words mean to convey the accurate understanding of how there are people who make up a company of people where that company of people share a common set of thoughts and actions and that set of people known as The Federal Government, which is a list of names, "has no Constitutional right...".

When such an efficient use of English Language is done in that way, then the speaker does not have to list all the people on the list of people who share those thoughts and actions that constitute The Federal Government.

On the other hand, as happens often, there are people who are taken by the lie, swept up in it, whereby a THING such as The Federal Government becomes a responsible, and accountable, entity, a Legal Person, a God among men, a thing that thinks, wants, acts, and benefits from those actions, or suffers from those actions, breathing, blood flowing, in pain, or happy, the THING is pointed at, and blamed when things go wrong, and the THING takes CREDIT for good times.

Where does this type of falsehood manifest itself?

I submit:

1) It provides us some amount of control and leverage over certain foreign powers that would otherwise be hostile. It is in effect, a bribe to a specific regime, and therefore affords certain benefits.

At the risk of being misunderstood, as to motive, or as to meaning, and without any reservation on my part as to the significance of the facts here, but with a certain understanding that I can be very wrong, those words in the lines above appear to be words that convey manifestations of the aforementioned infectious lie.

Please consider defending the point or perspective or viewpoint whereby a list of people who is identifiable as "us" and then please consider the significance of hold "us" to account for those things being done in this specific case where things are being done.

I may be wrong, of course, but I do not think that my concerns are trivial on this matter.

There are dragons to be slayed.

Coming to a theater near you?