Seth Hollist for Public Office.

Check out Seth's Latest News and Opinion editorials as the Collin County Independent Examiner.

---

Some day I hope to to run for office as a Moderately Conservative candidate that's more interested in doing what's right for his constituents, rather then selling out to special interest groups, behind closed doors dealings and a power hungry freedom grabs. Instead I find myself with a deep desire to defend the U.S. Constitution as it was originally intended, instead of trying to re-interpret based on what happens to be trendy for the day. I also don't find myself being particularly strong towards one party or another as they all seem to think they same type of government is good at all levels, as apposed to me, who believes that government has different rolls at different levels: for example, a Federal/National/World Government is there to set standards that insure the States work together as a single unified nation while protecting the nation as a whole from destructive outside influences; beyond this any Federal government should be very limited as to it's influences upon the States. The States should be more moderate in providing social services to it's people, and enabling the local and county governments to organize community efforts to look after each other.

This is in contrast to the Republicans who tend to like big government (even under Ronald Regan the size of the federal government grew in some ways) so long as it benefits free enterprise and their own "conservative" views of socially acceptable behaviors and morality. While I certainly think that a moral nation will be more prosperous with less social unrest, I believe more strongly in one's ability to chose for one's self, and do not believe any amount of government controls or laws can ultimately keep a society moral but should rather be focused on protecting life liberty and the pursuit of happiness (but providing no guarantees to any).

My ideas also contrast the Democrats in that I do not believe it's the Federal governments roll to protect the individual, nor provide anything for them. Rather I believe these should provided on a limited basis by the States, and to a greater degree by local governments and communities. After all, it's not truly charity if you are forced into it, and I believe we would all be more generous, giving, and moral as a society if we had a bigger stake in taking care of our fellow neighbors, rather then paying someone else to do it for us.

If I could, I would be a member of the Constitution Party (they certainly think I am), on a national level if they didn't seem so self righteous about certain aspects of their party platform. However, on a State and local level, I would probably differ from them to some degree.

Libertarians have some good ideas, but they often take them too far and ignore the importance of some of the things that Federal government does to provide standards and order to the nation as a whole. They also ignore the importance of the Federal government being at least moderately involved in international affairs as part of it's efforts to promote world peace and protect the nation from destructive out-side forces.

The Green party is focused on things that I believe have been overly exaggerated. While I agree that having clean air and a clean environment improves quality of life for everyone, it has to be balanced with reality and a sense that Man is also a part of nature as the dominate creature on this earth. I believe we are meant to take care of this earth, and use it to our benefit while maintaining those uses and it's resources for the future.

Other parties just don't have enough of a presence in the political spectrum to have gotten my attention.

---

Check out some of my other posts on this blog:

The Clean Slate Amendment

Bad Gun Laws

Affirmative Action Abolished

Separation Church and State

The Importance of Self Governance

The Problem with Politics

Who's Rich Enough to Be Taxed

Bailouts R us vs. Inflation

My commentary on the 2009 Presidential Inauguration

Seth.Hollist.org Moves to Spaldam's Rants

- Posted by Seth Hollist

A stimulating letter to Senator John Cornyn

I got an e-mail from one of my Senators this week asking me to reply to the question, "How do you think the "stimulus" package has fallen short?" Here was my reply:

Senator Cornyn,

Thank you for you're question about the so called "stimulus bill and other failed initiatives that have passed threw congress recently. I hope you will take the time to personally read my thorough response.

It seems to me that you voted for a "stimulus" bill late last year. I urged you not to. Not because I didn't think there was a problem (there obviously was/is), not because I didn't think something needed to be done (I still think something does need to be done that isn't even being considered currently), but because I know it isn't wise to give people billions of dollars who mishandled a great deal of money in the first place. As we have since seen the money has not even gone to the very purpose it was meant to, but instead as gone to fill to coffers of those who came asking for the handout in the first place!

Now you've sent this request for comments, I can't help but say "I told you so", but you didn't listen. Apparently you are listening now, so let me tell you what should be happening. And I hope you can see it as I do, not as an opinion, but as a matter of constitutional law and authority.

I believe every single member of congress has violated his or her oath of office to uphold and defend The Constitution. I would love to get elected to congress myself so that I could start presenting cases as to why all of you (including President Obama, all of his zars, and at least half of the supreme court justices) should be removed from office, but as it is right now, I'm too busy working hard to do the right thing, and support my family; including my two 10 month old twins. Not to mention that the current election laws just make it too time consuming, expensive, and right down impossible to do so with out an army of bureaucrats and lobbyists assisting you. Perhaps you could pass a new "stimulus" bill to help "stimulate" more direct participation in government from you're constituents that employ you.

I would exhort you to spend some time reading and studying The Constitution as I have and especially pay attention to the 9th and 10th amendments. They used to be a valued part of the constitution, but today they might as well not exist. Also, try to find anything in The Constitution that authorizes federal bailouts or social programs of any kind.

I understand there are a lot of tough battles to be fought in Washington right now, which is all the more reason why we need strong people who will stand up to those who are violating our constitutional and God given rights (see the Declaration of Independence while you're at it, and pay attention to the part about our "Creator" and the rights he gave us). People of the highest integirty who will NOT compromise on doing what is best for their constituents, within the bounds set forth by The Constitution. Keep in mind, we are not a Democracy, and the majority cannot do anything they want just because they have the largest voice, rather they must follow the rules and laws as they are, and the foundation of those laws in this contry is The Constitution.

Please start fighting for a return to our core Constitutional foundations an give the people of this country and opportunity to make us a great nation once again.

- Seth Hollist

Explanation of Fourms of government

I always considered myself a Moderate, but when I first got involved in Politics, I was surprised to have so many people say I was a conservative. How could this be? Had the spectrum of liberal vs. conservative shifted so much that I was now a conservative? So I though for a while until my friend posted this on his blog:

The most important point this video makes is the one of Democracy vs. Republic. When I was in grade school I was told that our government was a Democratic-Republic. These days you hear everyone talking about the U.S,. is a Democracy. They're both wrong.

I've alway felt that we have the freedom to do as we please so long as it doesn't interfere with other people's rights.  Government is a way to help define were the line is between one person's rights and anthers.  Were those lines are draw are typically determined by the governors, who in turn are typically elected by the people.  What the constitution does for us is setup rules for the governors to follow; regardless of what the people may want.  These are what we call representation and rule of law, and they are the essence of what a Republic is.

In a Democracy majority rules, that includes mob mentality and inevitably a government doing things its people don't have the right to authorize the government to do; such as unjust imprisonment of "undesirable" people, etc.  This is a big part of what the Bill of Rights are about. Making sure the U.S. Government, that is "Of the People",  does not pretend to be given authority from the People for which the People do not have to give to it in the first place.

In other words, if  I shouldn't do something that violates your rights, because I don't have just cause for doing so, then how can I authorize my government to do it for me?  Since the U.S. government is "Of the People" it cannot gain any authority or take away any rights, that it's people do not have the ability to give away themselves.

For example, I cannot take your money from you and give it to a poor person, no matter how worthy I feel the cause is.  Therefor I cannot authorize the government to forcefully take money from you and give it to some government "Charity" or bailout program.  I may give the money myself if I so chose, but you cannot. We may decide that in order for our government to function for the common good, we need to have a certain level of taxation, but beyond that does the government really have the right to use those taxes to benefit special interests, specific groups or even private entities?  Is it really even charity if it is forced upon you?

I say no, because charity isn't the act of giving alone, it's also requires a desire to give.

Anti-Bailout vs Anti-philibuster

You don't want to vote for the "bailout" supporters. You don't want to allow the Democrats to gain "rubber-stamp" power over the government. So who do you chose? It almost comes down to voting for the one you fear the least, but is fear really the right thing to base such an import decision upon? Will voting out of fear allow your voice to truly be heard? I say it wont, and have a better solution:

What if Obama won the election by a large margin, not because he got a lot of votes, but because John McCain got relatively few? What if all those other votes when to someone else; anyone else? Wouldn't that send a clear message that real the conservative base (not the "neo-cons") of the Republican party was fed up and refused to support a party that no long allowed their voice to be hear?

If this happened, the Republican party would either have to realize they need to come back to their conservative base, or they would fall apart and leave room for a truly conservative party to rise up in its place. Would such an idea just end up causing you to throw your vote away? Perhaps, but is that worse then throwing your voice away?

Until we stop worrying more about who's going to win then we do about having our true voices and opinion be heard, we will never get our government back from our corrupt representatives who have taken it from us. Yes, it will be hard to deal with a rubber-stamped Democrat controlled government, but what will be even harder is to deal with is a corrupt congress emboldened by a vote re-instating most of the incumbents after they have clearly shown how little the care about the voice of he people.

---

Ever since John McCain secured the Republican Party Nominee, I've felt alienated from it. I've also noticed that many others feel the same way. Unfortunately I don't believe the Republican Party has much of a chance at wining very many elections this year; especially after getting falsely blamed by Senator Clinton for the very unpopular "Wall Street Bailout".

The answer to the problems with our government will not be fixed by Obama, despite what he wants us to believe. We all know how well socialism works in the rest of the world. With all the problems he is going to inherit, he, and his Democratic friends, are going to end up looking very bad four years from now; and likely the rest of the nation with it.  How good will traditional conservative values look then?

If the Republicans loose big this election year, they will only come back bigger and better four years from now, or they will be replaced with something else; likely something much better.

- Posted by Spaldam

Oil Crisis? Why?

Ever Heard of the Bakken Formation? Well you have now.
http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

We actually have a great deal of oil reserves right here in the good old USA. So why aren't we using it? Could it be the same reason the democratically controlled congress has refused time and again to allow energy legislation in this country to even come to a vote?

"On the Senate floor Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) offered several Unanimous Consent requests to lift the ban on offshore drilling for oil. The Democrats objected. Senator McConnell continued to ask, "how much do American citizens have to pay for gas for the Congressional Democrats to change their mind? $4.50? $5.00? $7.50?" Finally Senator McConnell asked if the Democrats would allow a vote if gas prices were to reach $10 a gallon? The Democrats continuously objected and said no!" - https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=AL08H01&f=AL08H01&t=e or https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=AL08H01&f=WA08H11

No wonder there approval rating is now at an all time low. - http://www.gallup.com/poll/108856/Congressional-Approval-Hits-RecordLow-14.aspx

Maybe it's truly time for change as Barak Obama has been saying. But in this case, Barak is actually not in favor of change at all. - http://www.gop.com/news/NewsRead.aspx?Guid=24e094b9-da5e-4220-bd43-5c5adf0e2e27

Who is? Well McCain of course. And don't forget the Libertarians, and Constitutionalist; they are certainly for less government and a free market that is able to do its own oil exploration.

I though the Democrats were the party of the "little people", the poor, and the average hard working citizens that are hurting the most because of these high gas prices? Apparently they don't care about the overall inflation in prices we have seen this year especially not these higher gas prices. Do they think they are somehow helping the people by keeping prices high, or are they more concerned about the environmentalists? The same environmentalists that want $5 a gallon gas (can you say "Al").

Personally, I think we are fools to put so much reliance on any other countries for our most basic needs, including food, energy of any kind, and our ability to maintain our own infrastructure and manufacturing capabilities. We need to be more self sufficient, not only as a nation, but also as individuals.

On the other hand, what if oil is the life blood for our planet and we are slowly sucking the life out of it?

- Posted By Spaldam

Seth.Hollist.org Moves to Spaldam's Rants

I've found myself unable to keep my seth.hollist.org web-page up to date, so I've decided to re-direct it here and help contribute to "Spaldam's Rants". If I find anything special that I want to draw particular attention to, I'll try to add a link to it on the side-bar from the main page; but be sure to check out all of the great information on this blog. I also have a couple of items I'll be keeping on my web-page that you can see listed bellow. What is bellow is a similitude as to what my web-pages home page used to look like. I chose to publish this post as September of 2005 because that's probably the last time I really updated my main web-page.

---

The best government is self-government or in other words, freedom to chose for ourselves, and understanding the natural laws that God has set forth. I regularly check up on my elected officials to see what they're doing with our freedoms, and write them letters regularly. I'm a very big support of The Constitution, and strongly believe to fully understand it one must study our forefathers and understand the language and word meanings used at the time. I also believe the Declaration of Independence is the moral foundation for the Constitution, and to understand The Constitution, one must understand this declaration. These two documents are the foundation of our country, and if we allow it to be left open to interpretation it will only serve to make for an unstable foundation. Any house built on an unstable foundation is doomed to fall.

One Mormon's View of World history

My dissertation on the United States Constitution.

Will I ever run for public office? Very much probably. As for now I have a young family to provide for and enjoy as I watch my kids grow up. Maybe once the kids are old enough to be on their own, and I get frustrated enough with the state of our government (sometimes I think I'm there) then I will. In the mean time I'll do what I can to learn about and watch history unfold while helping others, through this blog, to understand how our governments meddling affects our lives in ways I know I'd much rather not have.

---

Check out some of my other posts on this blog:

Seth Hollist for Public Office

Bad Gun Laws

Affirmative Action Abolished

Separation Church and State

The Importance of Self Governance

The Problem with Politics

Who's Rich Enough to Be Taxed

Bailouts R us vs. Inflation

My commentary on the 2009 Presidential Inauguration

- Posted by Seth Hollist