A Moral Responsibility to “We The People”

I was on my Face Book page the other day and while reading through the posts I received, I realized the United States of America is split:

25% are awake to the fact that things are REALLY bad,
50% are too busy, or apathetic to do anything to change the Status Quo:

According to yourDictionary.com, status quo is defined as "the existing state of affairs (at a particular time)" or "the situation as it currently exists." The concept of status quo is often used when referring to political or social conditions. The idea is often debated vis-à-vis the dialectic between power systems that reinforce the status quo and those who seek to subvert it. http://www.yourdictionary.com/dictionary-articles/Definition-of-Status-Quo.html
25% are causing the REALLY Bad things to happen.

Note: This is my Disclaimer- There is a 100% +/- chance that I am correct or I could be wrong.


My sampling is from over 500 Face Book friends from California to New England (for those that forgot History and Geography- just think Original Colonies- like the 1776 Revolutionary War- 13 Colonial States that formed what is today the United States of America) and from New Mexico all the way to the North West. I have been to 38 of the contiguous (that is connected) States. I have been to Mexico, and Canada. What I realize is that “We The People' are so busy, well at least 50% anyway, that what happens in Washington D.C. Is not a priority to us- until or unless it impacts the “Status Quo” of our lifestyle.

The Mainline Media outlets do not report the “Un-Biased” news reports they used to be “Ethically” bound to report. They all have an agenda today. To see who owns the media outlets you follow, visit the following site and select the outlet and visit the information links:

http://www.mediaowners.com/

If the Media is owner by Socialist entities, then it follows that they will be interested in pushing their Socialist agenda. Remember History: The USSR (Union of Socialist Soviet Republic), according to WikiPedia “Socialism” is:

Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3] As an economic system, socialism is a system of production and allocation based on the direct production of use-values by allocating economic inputs, the means of production and investment through planning to directly satisfy economic demand. Economic calculation is based on either calculation-in-kind, some physical magnitude or a direct measure of labour time,[4][5] output for individual consumption is distributed through markets, and distribution of income is based on individual merit or individual contribution.[6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Socialism and Communism go hand-in-hand, Communism is:

1. Communism
a. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
b. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
http://www.answers.com/topic/communism

The current Political environment is one of what I call a Hybrid System of Socialism. The politicians seek to make decisions based on “Special Interest Groups” and “Lobbyists” that do not have th e”Best Interests” of the nation in mind. Their agenda is to absorb America and it's wealth and resources into the Collective Ideal of a One World Government. No more Nationlism:


The term “nationalism” is generally used to describe two phenomena: (1) the attitude that the members of a nation have when they care about their national identity, and (2) the actions that the members of a nation take when seeking to achieve (or sustain) self-determination. (1) raises questions about the concept of a nation (or national identity), which is often defined in terms of common origin, ethnicity, or cultural ties, and while an individual's membership in a nation is often regarded as involuntary, it is sometimes regarded as voluntary. (2) raises questions about whether self-determination must be understood as involving having full statehood with complete authority over domestic and international affairs, or whether something less is required.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nationalism/

Some would have you believe that Nationalism is wrong, I would ask the question, “What is wrong with an association with a national ideal that promotes “Liberty and Justice for All”?” As set forth in the “Pledge of Allegiance”. Or the timeless words of the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence

I ask you, “Just what exactly do you find wrong with this ideal?”

The following definitions are from:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberty

LIBERTY
1
: the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice


JUSTICE:
2
a : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness c : the quality of conforming to law
EQUALITY:
1 : the quality or state of being equal

ALL:
1 a : the whole amount, quantity, or extent of b : as much as possible
2: every member or individual component of
3: the whole number or sum of

My college professor says these are a strange use of terms for a Government to embrace. Governments are mostly about control: politically, militarily, economically, and socially. They are instituted for this purpose. BUT with regards to America and the “Experiment” called the United States of America, there is a world of difference:

Thomas Jefferson stated:
"The flames kindled on the 4th of July, 1776, have spread across too much of the globe to be extinguished by the feeble engines of despotism; on the contrary, they will consume the engines and all who work them."
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Commentary/2007/07/The-American-experiment

In “The American Experiment” by Helle Dale, you read the following: “The self-evident truth that "all men are created equal; endowed by their creator with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" remains the powerful philosophical and moral foundation of a successful foreign policy no less than it is the foundation of the American republic itself.”
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Commentary/2007/07/The-American-experiment

Again, I ask, “Just what exactly do you find wrong with this ideal?”