A man who won a nearly $315 million Powerball lottery -- the largest single jackpot in history -- was ordered into substance abuse treatment today after his second drunken driving arrest this year.
In an agreement with prosecutors, Jack Whittaker, 57, will check himself into rehab by Jan. 2, must surrender his license and may not drive until he provides written proof he's completed the 28-day residential program.
Whittaker was charged with drunken driving last week, violating his $150 bond for a similar arrest in January. He was released today after posting a $1,700 cash bond, and will remain free on his original bond in the earlier arrest.
Kanawha County sheriff's Chief Deputy Phil Morris said the agreement "tells me that he's trying to get his life straightened out."
Whittaker's attorney did not immediately return a call for comment.
Whittaker has been in the news several times since he won the lottery Christmas Day 2002. He received a $113 million lump sum, and spent $14 million to set up a nonprofit foundation to help residents find jobs, buy food or receive an education.
He is named in two lawsuits by female employees of a racetrack who allege Whittaker assaulted them last year; and his vehicle, business and home have been allegedly broken into a number of times.
In September, a man's body was found at his home, though the death was not a crime and Whittaker was out of town. Also, he faces charges for allegedly assaulting and threatening a bar manager in January.
Jack - You need to buy an island....I just saw where Mel Gibson was looking at one for a mere 14 million...go ahead create "Jack Island" or " Whitaker World"...It would be nice...
What a joke! This guy must have a 24 carat gold horseshoe inserted in his rectum. To be guilty of 2 DUI's in one year and only have to spend 28 days in a substance abuse program and be able to drive again after completing it? This is not even a slap on the wrist for him.
Honest to god. Here's a man who can go anywhere in the world and do anything he pleases, and he stays in the same place and just drinks, drives drunk, gropes women drunk, goes to strip clubs and horse tracks, and carries so much cash around he is begging to be robbed and frequently is. If I wanted to drink and go to strip clubs and grope women, I would go to a nice all inclusive resort on an island and have private shows, and have a driver to take me places should I want to leave.
It's hard to figure out what's going on in Jack's pea brain.
Here's a classic example of what I've been saying all along - there are rules and laws for rich people, and there are rules and laws for the rest of us. The two sets of rules very seldom coincide, but the powers that be would have you believe in equal justice under the law, for rich and poor alike. Justice is only equal if you can hire attorneys of the same caliber O.J. Simpson did. May God have mercy on your soul if, for economic reasons, you find yourself stuck with a public defender. These leeches don't care whether you win or lose; they get their $230.00 either way.
LosingJeff and I have had this conversation many times. My position is that the United States Constitution isn't worth the parchment it's written on. It's only there to give you something to believe in, like the Easter Bunny, leprechauns or Eskimos (my apologies to Homer Simpson). That document, as well as the Judicial and Legislative branches of government, were created and adopted by rich landowners and merchants, most of whom were also involved in the lucrative slave trade to some degree. These are the parts that were conveniently left out of your high school history books.
During those first years, and for every subsequent year since, the federal treasury was looted time and again by entrepreneurial merchants, shipping magnates and manufacturers, who were admired and emulated by the common constituency. These thieves were held in the highest regard as examples of how "ingenuity, thrift and hard work" could transform the common man into a well-respected millionaire. Again, they left out the part about bribing entire legislatures (and, in one instance, an entire congress) to obtain laws and charters favorable to their various schemes. John Jacob Astor singlehandedly wiped the buffalo off the face of the earth with his American Fur Company, in spite of specific laws which regulated the fur trade back then. Federal law prohibited trading whiskey to Native American tribes, as it clouded their judgment and usually resulted in brutal retaliation when they sobered up and realized they had been screwed. If another man was found trapping on what Astor considered to be his territory (which encompassed the entire known United States), he was murdered on the spot, his body prominently displayed as a warning to future encroachers.
Phelps-Dodge Corporation, which is still in business today, was sued in 1872 by the U. S. Customs Office, after it was discovered that they were importing millions of tons of pewter, tin and copper shaped into crude statues. There was a high import tariff on these metals at the time, but works of art were exempted. Customs dventually settled for about six cents on the dollar, but could only collect on shortages from 1871. The records from previous years could not be found, and were "assumed destroyed." Sound familiar? It should. This is the same dodge used by WorldCom and Enron.
More recent illustrations include Ted Kennedy, who caused the death of a young girl while driving drunk (Chappaquiddick); he was exonerated of any wrongdoing. Michael Milkin was sent to federal prison for a few months over his junk bond scheme, but was allowed to keep the $500M he made in one year. John DeLorean was set up by the FBI in a sting operation when the company he founded threatened to cut into the market shares of the Big 3 automakers. He had actually committed no crime, so one was invented for his benefit. The list goes on and on. If you're not rich, you can join the police force and still enjoy exemption from the laws you're charged with enforcing. If you're a cop, you and your buddies can shoot an unarmed man FORTY-SEVEN TIMES, and walk away with medals instead of prison time. Cops can do things like this because, first, they're better people and, second, because they're hired to enforce the law, not to obey it.
Enough already with the history lesson. I only wanted to point out that the more things change, the more they stay the same. All things being equal, if there is a crime which should not be a crime in this country, it's theft. This entire nation was founded and built on theft in one form or another. We stole the land we build our homes on, and then complain that our shores should be closed to immigrants, because they take "our" jobs, even though you and I wouldn't do that type of work for so little compensation. The United States and Soviet Russia pilfered their respective jet and rocket technologies from Nazi Germany. We actually kidnapped some of their scientists and brought them back here to work for us. "Heavy water," an essential element in the manufacture of atomic weapons, was discovered and developed by Nazi scientists, even before Americans knew of the concept. An atomic bomb was one of Hitler's pet projects, and he devoted more resources to the program than he probably should have, and then we stole it and claimed it as our own. That's not mentioned our in history books either, for obvious reasons.
We have all been trained to believe in the illusion that hard work and thrift will ensure success. Squint your eyes a bit, and you'll discover that hard work gets you nothing more than an early grave in this country. Your heirs, more often than not, will toil in the same factory or corporation to which you dedicated your life in return for a meager pension and a gold (plated) watch. Having taught them well, you can die happy in the knowledge that, even though you didn't make it, you've instilled a solid work ethic in your offspring, thereby increasing their chances of becoming successful. In reality, though, what you've done is to provide a model for your children's graves.
I realize that many of you will be offended by the above revelations, and many more will simply refuse to believe or to even consider the truth. Well, that's what you're supposed to do; believe in the illusion, and reality will pretend not to intrude on your lives. Work hard, and you'll get rich (by lining your boss's pockets). Believe in the system, and it will work for you (provided you're never actually arrested for some imagined crime against property, in which case you'll have to prove you didn't do it). Put your faith in the old adage, "Money isn't everything," while you're unemployed and staring at a pile of unpaid bills.
Tg636 has hit it on the head; Mr. Whittaker can behave in any manner he chooses, without danger of significant consequence, because he's rich and you're not. His station in life is far above that of the common man, so he cannot be held to the same rigid standard as those who languish beneath him. He was a millionaire even before he won the largest PowerBall jackpot in history, but you didn't read about his antics back then because he didn't have the celebrity he now... uh... "enjoys." Whenever he's robbed, or his home burgled, he's not scolded for carrying obscene amounts of cash; the law says it's every American's right to walk around, unmolested, with hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, if he want to. If someone tries to steal it from him, the law states that the thief must go to jail, even if he's a millionaire himself. We'll have to wait and see if this holds up, because, so far, only poor people have tried to relieve Jack of part of his burden.
It's all done with smoke and mirrors, folks. Be a good little working-poor person; don't make waves, believe what you're told to believe, and you'll get along just fine, until you die, at which time your son or daughter will be hired to fill the vacancy, and life goes on, because the boss's pockets are still flush with cash so, see? everybody wins.
If anyone cares to discover how things really work in America, I recommend you read A History of the Great American Fortunes, by Gustavus Meyers (1936). It's currently out-of-print, but you can buy a decent used copy in good condition from Border's for about twenty bucks. I'm reading this book for the third time, and I don't mind telling you it has really opened my eyes. You can get an idea of what this book reveals by performing the following exercise: Take a blank sheet of paper and draw a line down the middle. Now, on the left side of the line, write, "The Way Things Are," and then on the right, "The Way Things Should Be." The line is what's important, because it separates reality (The Way Things Are) from illusion (The Way Things Should Be). Examples of what you'd list on the right include the myth of equal justice under the law, your perceived, supposedly inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, your perceived right to privacy (which by the way, is not guaranteed to you by any document of law), and the old stand-by, "innocent until proven guilty" (sorry; that one gets me every time). The reality, The Way Things Are, includes the fact that equal justice under the law exists only if you have the money to hire a top-gun attorney, that you only think you have a right to privacy because that's what you've been led to believe and, finally, that you're guilty until you prove your innocence, or post a surety bond, at which time the handcuffs will be removed and your liberty restored pending arraignment. That's the way things are; that's reality.
Jack Whittaker notwithstanding, you can't win the game (not without hitting a jackpot, anyway) unless you're playing by the same rules and laws as those who wrote them to benefit their own kind. I'm not saying they're not out there, but when was the last time you heard of an elected official who wasn't a millionaire? As I've pointed out in other posts, the bankruptcy laws were initially written to give rich people a way to keep their property when they went belly-up. When the middle and lower classes discovered that they could also discharge their debts, legislation was introduced to make it more difficult for these people to take advantage of the bankruptcy laws. It's okay for rich people to have their obligations dissolved, but when the poor and middle-class do it, that takes money out of the pockets of the magnates. They don't like that, because it levels the playing field a little too much, so they've taken steps to change the laws.
Sorry for the lengthy post. I've been itching for a chance to address this issue, and Jack Whittaker provided the perfect opportunity with his latest shenanigans. If Whittaker's behavior doesn't convince you that my take on this matter is a sound one, then please, do yourself a favor, and read the book referenced above.
If he can't seem do understand what a blessing hand he has been dealt. Let me talk to him. I'll show him how he can seem to get rid of that burden that money has been giving him. He has so much money he will not spend it in his lifetime. At the rate he's going, that lifetime will be over shortly. I think he forgot I was his long lost relative though. (lol - smile)
>Mr. Whittaker can behave in any manner he chooses, without danger of significant consequence, because he's rich and you're not. His station in life is far above that of the common man, so he cannot be held to the same rigid standard as those who languish beneath him.
Financially, someone like Jack is not and cannot be financially punished the way you or I would be for the same offenses. If I had done the same things as Jack - car totalled, drunk driving arrest, lawyer fees, insurance premiums jacked as high as can be, 24 days house arrest - I would be bankrupt, unemployed and my 401k and savings that took me years to build would be emptied from the expense. So even if I were treated with the same "kid gloves" I would be punished far more just because the expenses I had are a much higher percentage of my net worth than a rich person's.
So the main factor for Jack is the hassle involved in all this. It's just strange that he chooses to drink and see strippers in ways that open him up to such hassles when he could afford to do the same things in ways that don't open him to arrest, car crashes, robbery etc.
Quote:Originally posted by jim695 on December 9, 2004
....My position is that the United States Constitution isn't worth the parchment it's written on. It's only there to give you something to believe in, like the Easter Bunny, leprechauns or Eskimos (my apologies to Homer Simpson)....
I couldn't disagree stronger. Your statement is a slap in the face of some very courageous men who framed one of the greatest documents ever. It established a basic set of rules that formed the greatest country the world has ever known.
Don't say that you weren't talking badly about the men themselves, or some other justification, because you went on to criticize those men for a number of different things.
Only God is perfect, so yes, those men had their failings. But the fact that they were fallible is not the point. The point is that this country, and in fact the world, has not been witness to more courageous, more righteous people than those who founded this country.
I believe your personal issues and/or dissatisfaction with your station in life should not be the basis to launch an attack on this great country's founding fathers and framing documents.
And one more thing. I don't like it one bit when someone has a problem with a rich person winning the lottery. Anyone who enters has an equal chance of winning, and that's the way it should be. It smacks of socialism to say that a lottery prize should be distributed to someone based on need.
And if that person wants to be a fool, then we can all criticize him and laugh at him, but it's his choice whether he wants to be a fool or not.
The lottery is entertainment, so if you're that poor that you NEED to win, then you shouldn't be playing. Save your money.
Quote:Originally posted by Todd on December 9, 2004
And one more thing. I don't like it one bit when someone has a problem with a rich person winning the lottery. Anyone who enters has an equal chance of winning, and that's the way it should be. It smacks of socialism to say that a lottery prize should be distributed to someone based on need.
And if that person wants to be a fool, then we can all criticize him and laugh at him, but it's his choice whether he wants to be a fool or not.
The lottery is entertainment, so if you're that poor that you NEED to win, then you shouldn't be playing. Save your money.
I just want to thank you for that post. I was walking around at work today feeling quasi-depressed because it seems the further I get ahead the deeper the hole is dug. (got a raise got hir4ed from temp to full and the medical and dental and other various expenses ate the entire raise and then some *heh*) As I sit reflecting on the day with a cold beer, I again thank you for honing my focus. It's as we believed all along *grins* we are trapped in the Matrix and it does indeed Have Us!
Thanks for your comments; I'm always glad to hear from you, even when you don't agree with me, because you actually contribute something to the topics that interest you.
I don't necessarily believe that the working man is a sucker. Quite the contrary; without unskilled labor, mass production might still be nothing more than an idea bouncing around in someone's head, but with no manpower to carry the concept to fruition.
The point I was trying to make is that a man with an MBA can steal hundreds of millions of dollars under the guise of some corporate banner, and he's hailed as a brilliant tactician in the business world. However, if an unemployed high school dropout steals supper for his family from a grocery store, he's tossed into jail, awarded a criminal record which will haunt him for the rest of his life and, upon his release from prison, he's made to feel like an outcast by the very society that created his circumstances. It's true; Justice is blind. But she has a deep-seated revulsion for those without means.
Funny thing is, I have no problem with that. Those are the rules; that's The Way Things Are. If equal justice under the law weren't the myth that it is, the high school dropout would be congratulated for his courage and determination to provide for his children, and he'd be offered a job. That's The Way Things Should Be.
Fortunately, if we're aware of the double standard, we can safely and totally ignore The Way Things Should Be, since it doesn't matter, and just focus on The Way Things Are. In other words, we can't win the capitalism game unless we play by the same set of rules that govern the wealthy. There is no law to prohibit the working poor from playing by those rules. The problem is, they're not aware of them; they still believe everything they've been taught since childhood, and that's how they govern their own lives. We're taught to leave the stock and commodities markets to the experts, because it's too complex and risky. In reality, the opposite is true. This is no quirk of fate; it was engineered this way. Hence the adage, "Most people are too busy earning a living to make any money." People in general fear the unknown and what they believe they can't understand.
I'm not criticizing these people; many working-class people are perfectly happy being working-class. I empathize with those who put their hearts and souls into a new business, only to see it fail, taking their life savings with it, because they did everything right, the way they were supposed to. Honore de Balzac wrote, "Behind every great fortune, there is a crime." There are always exceptions, of course, but from what I've read and learned of American history, this statement contains more than just a grain of truth.
I'm a great believer in capitalism in its purest form, and I won't pretend that I'm above this type of base behavior, because I'm not. I've lied and said that I had the requisite experience in order to secure a lucrative contract to write or edit a technical manual. I lied the first time I was hired to write a speech for the mayor of a nearby city (if you think I'm going to mention his name, think again; he likes my work). I lied because that's what I had to do to get my foot in the door. I've lied while under oath in civil court, because that's what I had to do in order to counter the blatant lies of the defendant and his greasy attorney. That doesn't make it right; that's not The Way Things Should Be.
People who are driven to succeed will go to lengths others would not dare, for fear of breaking the rules. For example, it's widely believed that Bill Gates stole Microsoft's Graphical User Interface (MS Windows) from Steve Jobs and Apple Computer. In truth, they both stole it from Xerox PARC at about the same time (technically, Apple had it first, but Jobs didn't think it was necessary to secure the rights to the technology; Xerox didn't think so, either). I certainly don't mean to compare myself to Bill Gates or Steve Jobs, but I do want to point out that they were willing to do things that Gary Kildall wouldn't even consider. Vision, drive and passion are what separates common criminals from extraordinary business leaders.
Common sense and a modicum of intelligence certainly doesn't hurt anything. Common criminals are really more stupid and shortsighted than most people give them credit for. Consider this: if you rob a liquor store in Indiana, you'll do 20 to 50 years hard time in state prison. If you rob a bank, though, the mandatory ten years you'll spend in federal custody (Title 18, Section 2113, SS (B)) will be a breeze by comparison. Yet, people still rob liquor stores every day. Why? The only reason I can think of is that they must be standing closer to a liquor store than a bank when the notion first strikes.
I'm getting off-track here. I'll sum up by bringing up a point I had hoped to read in a response to my initial commentary: Many people are perfectly content playing by the familiar written rules. That's fine; in fact, those people are critical to our way of life. If everyone were rich, separation of the classes would no longer exist, and America would quickly fall. But those of us who want to reach for the stars must realize that we can't attain those lofty heights without standing on the shoulders of a thrifty working class, who actually produce our goods and services for low wages. That's The Way Things Are; that's American commerce. True justice would dictate that these are the citizens who deserve to make millions, while the CEO collects $9.00 an hour for sitting in his office scheduling his next tee-off time or making paper clip necklaces.
Since Jack Whittaker is the subject of this thread, I looked up a quote from Horace that I think sums up his current circumstances:
"Fortune makes a fool of those she favors too much."
Good Luck, Jack; I hope the next twenty-eight days will help you turn things around.
Quote:Originally posted by Todd on December 9, 2004
I couldn't disagree stronger. Your statement is a slap in the face of some very courageous men who framed one of the greatest documents ever. It established a basic set of rules that formed the greatest country the world has ever known.
Don't say that you weren't talking badly about the men themselves, or some other justification, because you went on to criticize those men for a number of different things.
Whether you agree or not is entirely incidental; I didn't say anything that isn't true. I certainly will state that I wasn't talking badly about these men and, quite frankly, I find it odd that, from the responses I've read so far, you're the only one who believes I was. I pointed out some of the things that these men did during their lives. I observed, as you did, that they did have their faults, but also that their shortcomings were entirely glossed over in all of our school textbooks, with the single purpose of presenting a favorable, almost magical image of who they were. I didn't force them to do those things, so how can you say I'm being critical of them? From what I gather from your scathing remarks, you were simply more comfortable not knowing the facts I brought forward, which only serves to prove my point; that's what you're supposed to do - Deny it, and it's not real.
Since you've taken it upon yourself to bring my income into this discussion, you should be happy to learn that I cleared $87,000.00 last year, and $81,000.00 in 2003. This is another fact. If you'd like copies of my tax returns, I'll be happy to mail them to you. Normally, I wouldn't publicize this, but since you brought it up, I felt compelled to point out to you that I am very satisfied with my station in life.
Concerning your comment about millionaires playing the lottery, I haven't a clue where you came up with the idea that I was criticizing Mr. Whittaker, but it wasn't from my post. I merely pointed out that we didn't read about his behavior before he won the PowerBall drawing because he wasn't famous back then; we have no way of knowing what his disposition was prior to winning his jackpot.
To conclude, I'll point out that I am a disabled Gulf War veteran, having served my country honorably and faithfully for eighteen years. To this day, I carry almost eight ounces of shrapnel in my chest, neck and left hip because it was driven so far into the bone it couldn't be removed. I accepted a lateral promotion to a different rate in aviation electronics for my last three years in the Navy, rather than be discharged. I was forced into retirement when my headaches became so severe that I was deemed unfit for active duty. The fact remains that The United States Constitution, IN MY OPINION, favors the wealthy. When I left the service, my total income was $307.00 per month, and my house payment was $293.51. I couldn't hold a job for more than ninety days. I had to study ten hours a day, six days a week, to earn a college degree, because I couldn't remember things the way other students could. I've seen both sides of capitalism, my friend, so I believe I'm qualified to make the judgments I've made, and to share what I've learned from my experiences with those members who don't mind reading my wordy comments.
Like all members of this forum, I have a great deal of respect for you, Todd. You shoot from the hip, you never post unless you have something valuable to contribute to the topic at hand and you do your level best to make certain that every one of your members receives equal treatment. Your efforts in my quest to bring down the Hoosier Lottery have been invaluable, and I don't want to lose your support. But make no mistake - if someone had said those things to my face, at least one of us would be making a trip to the hospital. I am now, and always have been fiercely loyal to my beloved country. My friends and family will tell you that I believe there is no more honorable way to die than on a battlefield in the service of our country. If I had a choice in the matter, that's how I'd prefer to go out, so when you question my patriotism and call me a socialist, I am made to feel that you don't appreciate my efforts. I understand that you had no way of knowing what I've been through, and there's a reason for that: I don't like to talk about it because it no longer matters; that's The Way Things Are. That's my reality. I can either accept it and move forward, or I can wallow in self-pity, dwelling on The Way Things Should Be until I die in my bed. I choose to move forward with my eyes open.
I realize it's lengthy, but if you read my entire post in this thread, I think you'll be able to glean its intended message.
I don't think it speaks well of you when you say that if I said my statement to your face I would be making a trip to the hospital. I am honestly shocked and saddened to read that - saddened because it really changes that mental picture I had formed of you.
I have great respect for anyone that has served our country and put themselves in harm's way. You are to be commended for your bravery and service.
Unfortunately, some people who have served our country do come down on the wrong side of some issues. For example, for the life of me, I cannot understand why a single veteran would support John Kerry for president. Maybe they were getting paid or something, but that's a real sell-out. Note, for perfect clarity, I did not acuse YOU of supporting Kerry, I am using that as an example.
People who serve in the military, as well as the president as Commander-in-Chief, are doing so first and foremost to protect and serve the Constitution of the United States of America. It is our country's most sacred document. Again, I think you are way off-base in your criticism of it, and your military retirement pay does not further your argument about the Constitution being for the wealthy. The constitution say anything about your retirement pay, or about income in general.
I think you need to focus your resentment on the government agency responsible for your military income, not our framing document. I think you'll find that Democrats have largely been responsible for lack of military funding. People like John Kerry.
There are so many other things that you have written which are just totally unfair and untrue, and totally not what I said. Where did I question your patriotism? Or label you a socialist? If you can't separate a socialist position from socialism itself, that's not my fault. Maybe you should try to see things from a different perspective and try to see the merit in what I'm saying.
Maybe we should just drop this before I keep going, because I just see it going back-and-forth with no end. The bottom line is that I think you were wrong in your criticism of one of the greatest documents ever written by some of the greatest people who ever lived, and you believe those average people had ulterior motives when they wrote that not-so-great document which favors the rich. We have an impassible divide.
lol,yeah that avator is quite unique jeff.yeah those were lengthy discussions i just read.these political discussions have a way of becoming heated.my older brother and his best friend of years actually came to blows one night over a discussion of the vietnam war and didn't speak for a while but finally got it straightened out.it seems like there are so many choices out there and so many opinions that its really easy to get into it with someone if they don't like the same political party,president,sports team,type of music,etc. i stayed firmly out of the discussion on here when the presidential elevtion was discussed because i knew it was 50/50 and that half the people liked kerry and half liked bush and i felt like if i disclosed who i really liked i ran the risk of alienating people so i kept quiet.i hope everyone has a merry christmas........
Yea and old Jack had his problems before he won and since he won you'd figure that the stuff he's been through would be a wake up call. For most it might but some guys just don't know when to quit. If he is truly addicted to alcohol, women and gambling he's not alone. Some guys just refuse to recognize the problem and when you have all that money to boot. And at his age. He probably figures what the heck. I'm gonna do whatever I want to it's my life. The slap on the wrist the judge gave him might fuel his fire to do something even more outlandish. Or he might seek some form of treatment. But I doubt it. Some guys have to be in the gutter before they will admit any faults. Or correct them.
I was very careful to word my comments so they would not be construed as a threat; I should have written that if someone else had said those things while within my reach, one of us would be going to the hospital. This comment wasn't meant to be leveled directly at you, and I'm truly sorry that I made you feel that it was. I only intended to illustrate how strongly I feel about the matter. If you think less of me for speaking my mind candidly, then so be it. One major fault of my own is that sometimes I get so caught up in selecting just the right words that my point, while clear in my own mind, becomes mired in my own vocabulary and passion for the subject. I'll work on that and, again, I offer you my sincere apologies.
I don't resent or regret anything that's happened in my life; it's been a wild ride so far. I'm glad those things happened to me. We have to take the bad with the good, and that's the route I had to take to get to where I am today. If I hadn't experienced those dvents, I wouldn't be the person I am now, and I don't think I'm deserving of any special treatment because of those experiences, nor do I believe that America owes me anything. At the time of my injury, I was on a landmine sweep on a Kuwaiti beach when the Marine next to me stepped on one. That doesn't make me a hero or deserving of any accolades. I did my job; I followed orders and utilized my training to fulfill my function within the military machine, as did millions of others who came before me, and those who served with me.
We are both on the same page when you state that the Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever written, and I can see now that I failed to make that clear in my previous posts but, again, you're the only one who took it that way. I'll re-state that I'm not criticizing the Constitution, the American way of life or even capitalism. I will defend any of these to the death, regardless of who they benefit. I believe in the Constitution; I took an oath to defend it.
I'd like to reiterate my initial point as clearly as I possibly can: The Constitution guarantees American citizens equal justice under the law "without regard to race, creed or color..." In point of fact, that justice is not equal. The Fifth Amendment reads, in part, "No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law ...," but simultaneously fails to clearly define that "due process." This is no accident; our founding fathers decided to leave that definition up to the quasi-independent state governments.
The concept of a person being "innocent until proven guilty" is proven false in actual practice since, if someone is merely suspected of committing a crime, his liberty is immediately forfeit, pending further investigation or evidence. On a similar note, I've been present at many live criminal trials throughout my life, and have yet to see a jury of destitute people deciding the fate of someone suffering equal hardships, so the concept of being tried by one's peers goes out the window as well. I accept this double standard, first because I am powerless to change it, and secondly because it is integral to American jurisprudence. Personally, I'd like to see a maple tree with blue leaves. I'll never see one, though, because maple leaves are green; that's just The Way Things Are.
I am trying to emphasize that we should all be aware of the very real differences in what is practiced, as opposed to that which is written, because the two rarely coincide. What is written in that document is The Way Things Should Be, but people in general tend to confuse that with what is actually practiced, which is The Way Things Are. That's all I was trying to say.
The United States of America is the greatest and most powerful country in the world; the U. S. Constitution is, without question, one of the greatest documents ever constructed, and the men who crafted it certainly don't need to defend their own courage to the likes of me. But they were human, and they were men of property, every one, and to delude ourselves by buying into the notion that they were somehow above possessing basic human traits such as greed and debauchery does not serve the interests of those of us who recognize those traits within the politicians of the present day.
It's nice, it's comforting to believe that George Washington, James Madison, Ben Franklin, John Langdon and the 35 others who drafted and signed the U. S. Constitution were of absolutely sterling character, as is universally taught. However, they were politicians and property owners. In fact, of the 39 men who signed the Constitution, 13 were Masons. This is not my opinion; this is a fact. Of the four men mentioned above, Benjamin Franklin was the only one who never owned slaves. Therefore, it is my considered opinion that the basic premise on which the Constitution is founded, that of "equal justice for all men, under the law, without regard to race, creed or color," might look good on paper, but had no more basis in fact, or in practice, during 1787 than it does now.
In order to achieve success today in the nation they founded 217 years ago, we need to first realize, and then accept the fact that our society, and the laws which govern it, must be interpreted and manipulated to serve our own individual interests. Again, history bears this out. Generally speaking, people who have achieved success were able to do so because they were willing to simply ignore or break the rules and laws that didn't fit their plans. The Hoosier Lottery is an admittedly extreme example. They were able to get away with their schemes for so many years because they completely ignored the very laws by which they're governed. We're not forced to accept this, however, because it's something we can change. Bill Gates and Steven Jobs stole their GUI's from Xerox PARC. The United States and Russia stole their jet, rocket and nuclear technologies from Germany. These, of course,were the spoils of war, but that doesn't change thetruth. German history books record nothing of significance during the years 1939 through 1945. Does this mean that the atrocities of World War II never took place?
We must accept the fact that conformity, more often than not, will be detrimental, by design, to our quest for success. We can either follow the written rules without question, or we can emulate people who have reached the goals we've set for ourselves; we must do as they do, not as they say, if we want to become wealthy. I've admitted in a previous post that I have accepted and actively practice this, to an extent (there are certain lines I refuse to cross), so I am in no position to criticize anyone who has done likewise.
We may not like it; we may not agree with it, but we must acknowledge and accept it if we want to succeed, because that's The Way Things Are.
Quote:Originally posted by jim695 on December 10, 2004
The only reason I can think of is that they must be standing closer to a liquor store than a bank when the notion first strikes.
Quote:Originally posted by LOTTOMIKE on December 11, 2004 i'm gonna make a prediction....jack whitaker will be dead or broke by the end of 2005.....
I would possibly say dead but not broke. Even as foolish and careless as Jack is, it would still be very hard to blow somewhere around $100,000,000.00 in one year.
whodeani: he allready gave away about half of his winnings and spent a lot on property to build custom homes in his state. So he might have about a quarter of it left. If that. No doubt he will probably never be broke as his family would step in and declair him insane.
Jack - You need to buy an island....I just saw where Mel Gibson was looking at one for a mere 14 million...go ahead create "Jack Island" or " Whitaker World"...It would be nice...
Hey all what is the over/under on the number of days it will take Jack to be caught for driving after suspension????? I will say 16.
Now that he can't drive maybe Jack will walk around with $100,000+ in his pockets instead of stashed away in his Hummer somewhere.
What a joke! This guy must have a 24 carat gold horseshoe inserted in his rectum. To be guilty of 2 DUI's in one year and only have to spend 28 days in a substance abuse program and be able to drive again after completing it? This is not even a slap on the wrist for him.
And they say money can't buy everything....
Honest to god. Here's a man who can go anywhere in the world and do anything he pleases, and he stays in the same place and just drinks, drives drunk, gropes women drunk, goes to strip clubs and horse tracks, and carries so much cash around he is begging to be robbed and frequently is. If I wanted to drink and go to strip clubs and grope women, I would go to a nice all inclusive resort on an island and have private shows, and have a driver to take me places should I want to leave.
It's hard to figure out what's going on in Jack's pea brain.
perhaps he thinks that he does not deserve all that $$$
he is showing classing signs of self sabatoge and destructive behavior...the man needs help not 28 days in a bed/breakfast!!
What a goofball!!!
"Very Interesting"
Here's a classic example of what I've been saying all along - there are rules and laws for rich people, and there are rules and laws for the rest of us. The two sets of rules very seldom coincide, but the powers that be would have you believe in equal justice under the law, for rich and poor alike. Justice is only equal if you can hire attorneys of the same caliber O.J. Simpson did. May God have mercy on your soul if, for economic reasons, you find yourself stuck with a public defender. These leeches don't care whether you win or lose; they get their $230.00 either way.
LosingJeff and I have had this conversation many times. My position is that the United States Constitution isn't worth the parchment it's written on. It's only there to give you something to believe in, like the Easter Bunny, leprechauns or Eskimos (my apologies to Homer Simpson). That document, as well as the Judicial and Legislative branches of government, were created and adopted by rich landowners and merchants, most of whom were also involved in the lucrative slave trade to some degree. These are the parts that were conveniently left out of your high school history books.
During those first years, and for every subsequent year since, the federal treasury was looted time and again by entrepreneurial merchants, shipping magnates and manufacturers, who were admired and emulated by the common constituency. These thieves were held in the highest regard as examples of how "ingenuity, thrift and hard work" could transform the common man into a well-respected millionaire. Again, they left out the part about bribing entire legislatures (and, in one instance, an entire congress) to obtain laws and charters favorable to their various schemes. John Jacob Astor singlehandedly wiped the buffalo off the face of the earth with his American Fur Company, in spite of specific laws which regulated the fur trade back then. Federal law prohibited trading whiskey to Native American tribes, as it clouded their judgment and usually resulted in brutal retaliation when they sobered up and realized they had been screwed. If another man was found trapping on what Astor considered to be his territory (which encompassed the entire known United States), he was murdered on the spot, his body prominently displayed as a warning to future encroachers.
Phelps-Dodge Corporation, which is still in business today, was sued in 1872 by the U. S. Customs Office, after it was discovered that they were importing millions of tons of pewter, tin and copper shaped into crude statues. There was a high import tariff on these metals at the time, but works of art were exempted. Customs dventually settled for about six cents on the dollar, but could only collect on shortages from 1871. The records from previous years could not be found, and were "assumed destroyed." Sound familiar? It should. This is the same dodge used by WorldCom and Enron.
More recent illustrations include Ted Kennedy, who caused the death of a young girl while driving drunk (Chappaquiddick); he was exonerated of any wrongdoing. Michael Milkin was sent to federal prison for a few months over his junk bond scheme, but was allowed to keep the $500M he made in one year. John DeLorean was set up by the FBI in a sting operation when the company he founded threatened to cut into the market shares of the Big 3 automakers. He had actually committed no crime, so one was invented for his benefit. The list goes on and on. If you're not rich, you can join the police force and still enjoy exemption from the laws you're charged with enforcing. If you're a cop, you and your buddies can shoot an unarmed man FORTY-SEVEN TIMES, and walk away with medals instead of prison time. Cops can do things like this because, first, they're better people and, second, because they're hired to enforce the law, not to obey it.
Enough already with the history lesson. I only wanted to point out that the more things change, the more they stay the same. All things being equal, if there is a crime which should not be a crime in this country, it's theft. This entire nation was founded and built on theft in one form or another. We stole the land we build our homes on, and then complain that our shores should be closed to immigrants, because they take "our" jobs, even though you and I wouldn't do that type of work for so little compensation. The United States and Soviet Russia pilfered their respective jet and rocket technologies from Nazi Germany. We actually kidnapped some of their scientists and brought them back here to work for us. "Heavy water," an essential element in the manufacture of atomic weapons, was discovered and developed by Nazi scientists, even before Americans knew of the concept. An atomic bomb was one of Hitler's pet projects, and he devoted more resources to the program than he probably should have, and then we stole it and claimed it as our own. That's not mentioned our in history books either, for obvious reasons.
We have all been trained to believe in the illusion that hard work and thrift will ensure success. Squint your eyes a bit, and you'll discover that hard work gets you nothing more than an early grave in this country. Your heirs, more often than not, will toil in the same factory or corporation to which you dedicated your life in return for a meager pension and a gold (plated) watch. Having taught them well, you can die happy in the knowledge that, even though you didn't make it, you've instilled a solid work ethic in your offspring, thereby increasing their chances of becoming successful. In reality, though, what you've done is to provide a model for your children's graves.
I realize that many of you will be offended by the above revelations, and many more will simply refuse to believe or to even consider the truth. Well, that's what you're supposed to do; believe in the illusion, and reality will pretend not to intrude on your lives. Work hard, and you'll get rich (by lining your boss's pockets). Believe in the system, and it will work for you (provided you're never actually arrested for some imagined crime against property, in which case you'll have to prove you didn't do it). Put your faith in the old adage, "Money isn't everything," while you're unemployed and staring at a pile of unpaid bills.
Tg636 has hit it on the head; Mr. Whittaker can behave in any manner he chooses, without danger of significant consequence, because he's rich and you're not. His station in life is far above that of the common man, so he cannot be held to the same rigid standard as those who languish beneath him. He was a millionaire even before he won the largest PowerBall jackpot in history, but you didn't read about his antics back then because he didn't have the celebrity he now... uh... "enjoys." Whenever he's robbed, or his home burgled, he's not scolded for carrying obscene amounts of cash; the law says it's every American's right to walk around, unmolested, with hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, if he want to. If someone tries to steal it from him, the law states that the thief must go to jail, even if he's a millionaire himself. We'll have to wait and see if this holds up, because, so far, only poor people have tried to relieve Jack of part of his burden.
It's all done with smoke and mirrors, folks. Be a good little working-poor person; don't make waves, believe what you're told to believe, and you'll get along just fine, until you die, at which time your son or daughter will be hired to fill the vacancy, and life goes on, because the boss's pockets are still flush with cash so, see? everybody wins.
If anyone cares to discover how things really work in America, I recommend you read A History of the Great American Fortunes, by Gustavus Meyers (1936). It's currently out-of-print, but you can buy a decent used copy in good condition from Border's for about twenty bucks. I'm reading this book for the third time, and I don't mind telling you it has really opened my eyes. You can get an idea of what this book reveals by performing the following exercise: Take a blank sheet of paper and draw a line down the middle. Now, on the left side of the line, write, "The Way Things Are," and then on the right, "The Way Things Should Be." The line is what's important, because it separates reality (The Way Things Are) from illusion (The Way Things Should Be). Examples of what you'd list on the right include the myth of equal justice under the law, your perceived, supposedly inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, your perceived right to privacy (which by the way, is not guaranteed to you by any document of law), and the old stand-by, "innocent until proven guilty" (sorry; that one gets me every time). The reality, The Way Things Are, includes the fact that equal justice under the law exists only if you have the money to hire a top-gun attorney, that you only think you have a right to privacy because that's what you've been led to believe and, finally, that you're guilty until you prove your innocence, or post a surety bond, at which time the handcuffs will be removed and your liberty restored pending arraignment. That's the way things are; that's reality.
Jack Whittaker notwithstanding, you can't win the game (not without hitting a jackpot, anyway) unless you're playing by the same rules and laws as those who wrote them to benefit their own kind. I'm not saying they're not out there, but when was the last time you heard of an elected official who wasn't a millionaire? As I've pointed out in other posts, the bankruptcy laws were initially written to give rich people a way to keep their property when they went belly-up. When the middle and lower classes discovered that they could also discharge their debts, legislation was introduced to make it more difficult for these people to take advantage of the bankruptcy laws. It's okay for rich people to have their obligations dissolved, but when the poor and middle-class do it, that takes money out of the pockets of the magnates. They don't like that, because it levels the playing field a little too much, so they've taken steps to change the laws.
Sorry for the lengthy post. I've been itching for a chance to address this issue, and Jack Whittaker provided the perfect opportunity with his latest shenanigans. If Whittaker's behavior doesn't convince you that my take on this matter is a sound one, then please, do yourself a favor, and read the book referenced above.
Your post was a nice read... reminds me of the movie "A Bronx Tale", where a mobster teaches a kid that the "working man" is a sucker.
If he can't seem do understand what a blessing hand he has been dealt. Let me talk to him. I'll show him how he can seem to get rid of that burden that money has been giving him. He has so much money he will not spend it in his lifetime. At the rate he's going, that lifetime will be over shortly. I think he forgot I was his long lost relative though. (lol - smile)
Good post Jim 695, I agree with it.
>Mr. Whittaker can behave in any manner he chooses, without danger of significant consequence, because he's rich and you're not. His station in life is far above that of the common man, so he cannot be held to the same rigid standard as those who languish beneath him.
Financially, someone like Jack is not and cannot be financially punished the way you or I would be for the same offenses. If I had done the same things as Jack - car totalled, drunk driving arrest, lawyer fees, insurance premiums jacked as high as can be, 24 days house arrest - I would be bankrupt, unemployed and my 401k and savings that took me years to build would be emptied from the expense. So even if I were treated with the same "kid gloves" I would be punished far more just because the expenses I had are a much higher percentage of my net worth than a rich person's.
So the main factor for Jack is the hassle involved in all this. It's just strange that he chooses to drink and see strippers in ways that open him up to such hassles when he could afford to do the same things in ways that don't open him to arrest, car crashes, robbery etc.
I couldn't disagree stronger. Your statement is a slap in the face of some very courageous men who framed one of the greatest documents ever. It established a basic set of rules that formed the greatest country the world has ever known.
Don't say that you weren't talking badly about the men themselves, or some other justification, because you went on to criticize those men for a number of different things.
Only God is perfect, so yes, those men had their failings. But the fact that they were fallible is not the point. The point is that this country, and in fact the world, has not been witness to more courageous, more righteous people than those who founded this country.
I believe your personal issues and/or dissatisfaction with your station in life should not be the basis to launch an attack on this great country's founding fathers and framing documents.
And one more thing. I don't like it one bit when someone has a problem with a rich person winning the lottery. Anyone who enters has an equal chance of winning, and that's the way it should be. It smacks of socialism to say that a lottery prize should be distributed to someone based on need.
And if that person wants to be a fool, then we can all criticize him and laugh at him, but it's his choice whether he wants to be a fool or not.
The lottery is entertainment, so if you're that poor that you NEED to win, then you shouldn't be playing. Save your money.
I just want to thank you for that post. I was walking around at work today feeling quasi-depressed because it seems the further I get ahead the deeper the hole is dug. (got a raise got hir4ed from temp to full and the medical and dental and other various expenses ate the entire raise and then some *heh*) As I sit reflecting on the day with a cold beer, I again thank you for honing my focus. It's as we believed all along *grins* we are trapped in the Matrix and it does indeed Have Us!
Maverick:
Thanks for your comments; I'm always glad to hear from you, even when you don't agree with me, because you actually contribute something to the topics that interest you.
I don't necessarily believe that the working man is a sucker. Quite the contrary; without unskilled labor, mass production might still be nothing more than an idea bouncing around in someone's head, but with no manpower to carry the concept to fruition.
The point I was trying to make is that a man with an MBA can steal hundreds of millions of dollars under the guise of some corporate banner, and he's hailed as a brilliant tactician in the business world. However, if an unemployed high school dropout steals supper for his family from a grocery store, he's tossed into jail, awarded a criminal record which will haunt him for the rest of his life and, upon his release from prison, he's made to feel like an outcast by the very society that created his circumstances. It's true; Justice is blind. But she has a deep-seated revulsion for those without means.
Funny thing is, I have no problem with that. Those are the rules; that's The Way Things Are. If equal justice under the law weren't the myth that it is, the high school dropout would be congratulated for his courage and determination to provide for his children, and he'd be offered a job. That's The Way Things Should Be.
Fortunately, if we're aware of the double standard, we can safely and totally ignore The Way Things Should Be, since it doesn't matter, and just focus on The Way Things Are. In other words, we can't win the capitalism game unless we play by the same set of rules that govern the wealthy. There is no law to prohibit the working poor from playing by those rules. The problem is, they're not aware of them; they still believe everything they've been taught since childhood, and that's how they govern their own lives. We're taught to leave the stock and commodities markets to the experts, because it's too complex and risky. In reality, the opposite is true. This is no quirk of fate; it was engineered this way. Hence the adage, "Most people are too busy earning a living to make any money." People in general fear the unknown and what they believe they can't understand.
I'm not criticizing these people; many working-class people are perfectly happy being working-class. I empathize with those who put their hearts and souls into a new business, only to see it fail, taking their life savings with it, because they did everything right, the way they were supposed to. Honore de Balzac wrote, "Behind every great fortune, there is a crime." There are always exceptions, of course, but from what I've read and learned of American history, this statement contains more than just a grain of truth.
I'm a great believer in capitalism in its purest form, and I won't pretend that I'm above this type of base behavior, because I'm not. I've lied and said that I had the requisite experience in order to secure a lucrative contract to write or edit a technical manual. I lied the first time I was hired to write a speech for the mayor of a nearby city (if you think I'm going to mention his name, think again; he likes my work). I lied because that's what I had to do to get my foot in the door. I've lied while under oath in civil court, because that's what I had to do in order to counter the blatant lies of the defendant and his greasy attorney. That doesn't make it right; that's not The Way Things Should Be.
People who are driven to succeed will go to lengths others would not dare, for fear of breaking the rules. For example, it's widely believed that Bill Gates stole Microsoft's Graphical User Interface (MS Windows) from Steve Jobs and Apple Computer. In truth, they both stole it from Xerox PARC at about the same time (technically, Apple had it first, but Jobs didn't think it was necessary to secure the rights to the technology; Xerox didn't think so, either). I certainly don't mean to compare myself to Bill Gates or Steve Jobs, but I do want to point out that they were willing to do things that Gary Kildall wouldn't even consider. Vision, drive and passion are what separates common criminals from extraordinary business leaders.
Common sense and a modicum of intelligence certainly doesn't hurt anything. Common criminals are really more stupid and shortsighted than most people give them credit for. Consider this: if you rob a liquor store in Indiana, you'll do 20 to 50 years hard time in state prison. If you rob a bank, though, the mandatory ten years you'll spend in federal custody (Title 18, Section 2113, SS (B)) will be a breeze by comparison. Yet, people still rob liquor stores every day. Why? The only reason I can think of is that they must be standing closer to a liquor store than a bank when the notion first strikes.
I'm getting off-track here. I'll sum up by bringing up a point I had hoped to read in a response to my initial commentary: Many people are perfectly content playing by the familiar written rules. That's fine; in fact, those people are critical to our way of life. If everyone were rich, separation of the classes would no longer exist, and America would quickly fall. But those of us who want to reach for the stars must realize that we can't attain those lofty heights without standing on the shoulders of a thrifty working class, who actually produce our goods and services for low wages. That's The Way Things Are; that's American commerce. True justice would dictate that these are the citizens who deserve to make millions, while the CEO collects $9.00 an hour for sitting in his office scheduling his next tee-off time or making paper clip necklaces.
Since Jack Whittaker is the subject of this thread, I looked up a quote from Horace that I think sums up his current circumstances:
"Fortune makes a fool of those she favors too much."
Good Luck, Jack; I hope the next twenty-eight days will help you turn things around.
Jim695:
I don't think it speaks well of you when you say that if I said my statement to your face I would be making a trip to the hospital. I am honestly shocked and saddened to read that - saddened because it really changes that mental picture I had formed of you.
I have great respect for anyone that has served our country and put themselves in harm's way. You are to be commended for your bravery and service.
Unfortunately, some people who have served our country do come down on the wrong side of some issues. For example, for the life of me, I cannot understand why a single veteran would support John Kerry for president. Maybe they were getting paid or something, but that's a real sell-out. Note, for perfect clarity, I did not acuse YOU of supporting Kerry, I am using that as an example.
People who serve in the military, as well as the president as Commander-in-Chief, are doing so first and foremost to protect and serve the Constitution of the United States of America. It is our country's most sacred document. Again, I think you are way off-base in your criticism of it, and your military retirement pay does not further your argument about the Constitution being for the wealthy. The constitution say anything about your retirement pay, or about income in general.
I think you need to focus your resentment on the government agency responsible for your military income, not our framing document. I think you'll find that Democrats have largely been responsible for lack of military funding. People like John Kerry.
There are so many other things that you have written which are just totally unfair and untrue, and totally not what I said. Where did I question your patriotism? Or label you a socialist? If you can't separate a socialist position from socialism itself, that's not my fault. Maybe you should try to see things from a different perspective and try to see the merit in what I'm saying.
Maybe we should just drop this before I keep going, because I just see it going back-and-forth with no end. The bottom line is that I think you were wrong in your criticism of one of the greatest documents ever written by some of the greatest people who ever lived, and you believe those average people had ulterior motives when they wrote that not-so-great document which favors the rich. We have an impassible divide.
I'M GETTING DIZZY FROM THIS ONE...
This is, without a doubt, the most interesting topic of conversation I have seen. These are the things that make Lottery Post interesting and unique.
LosingJeff:
I laugh every time I see that avatar of yours!
lol,yeah that avator is quite unique jeff.yeah those were lengthy discussions i just read.these political discussions have a way of becoming heated.my older brother and his best friend of years actually came to blows one night over a discussion of the vietnam war and didn't speak for a while but finally got it straightened out.it seems like there are so many choices out there and so many opinions that its really easy to get into it with someone if they don't like the same political party,president,sports team,type of music,etc. i stayed firmly out of the discussion on here when the presidential elevtion was discussed because i knew it was 50/50 and that half the people liked kerry and half liked bush and i felt like if i disclosed who i really liked i ran the risk of alienating people so i kept quiet.i hope everyone has a merry christmas........
Yea and old Jack had his problems before he won and since he won you'd figure that the stuff he's been through would be a wake up call. For most it might but some guys just don't know when to quit. If he is truly addicted to alcohol, women and gambling he's not alone. Some guys just refuse to recognize the problem and when you have all that money to boot. And at his age. He probably figures what the heck. I'm gonna do whatever I want to it's my life. The slap on the wrist the judge gave him might fuel his fire to do something even more outlandish. Or he might seek some form of treatment. But I doubt it. Some guys have to be in the gutter before they will admit any faults. Or correct them.
i'm gonna make a prediction....jack whitaker will be dead or broke by the end of 2005.....
Todd:
I was very careful to word my comments so they would not be construed as a threat; I should have written that if someone else had said those things while within my reach, one of us would be going to the hospital. This comment wasn't meant to be leveled directly at you, and I'm truly sorry that I made you feel that it was. I only intended to illustrate how strongly I feel about the matter. If you think less of me for speaking my mind candidly, then so be it. One major fault of my own is that sometimes I get so caught up in selecting just the right words that my point, while clear in my own mind, becomes mired in my own vocabulary and passion for the subject. I'll work on that and, again, I offer you my sincere apologies.
I don't resent or regret anything that's happened in my life; it's been a wild ride so far. I'm glad those things happened to me. We have to take the bad with the good, and that's the route I had to take to get to where I am today. If I hadn't experienced those dvents, I wouldn't be the person I am now, and I don't think I'm deserving of any special treatment because of those experiences, nor do I believe that America owes me anything. At the time of my injury, I was on a landmine sweep on a Kuwaiti beach when the Marine next to me stepped on one. That doesn't make me a hero or deserving of any accolades. I did my job; I followed orders and utilized my training to fulfill my function within the military machine, as did millions of others who came before me, and those who served with me.
We are both on the same page when you state that the Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever written, and I can see now that I failed to make that clear in my previous posts but, again, you're the only one who took it that way. I'll re-state that I'm not criticizing the Constitution, the American way of life or even capitalism. I will defend any of these to the death, regardless of who they benefit. I believe in the Constitution; I took an oath to defend it.
I'd like to reiterate my initial point as clearly as I possibly can: The Constitution guarantees American citizens equal justice under the law "without regard to race, creed or color..." In point of fact, that justice is not equal. The Fifth Amendment reads, in part, "No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law ...," but simultaneously fails to clearly define that "due process." This is no accident; our founding fathers decided to leave that definition up to the quasi-independent state governments.
The concept of a person being "innocent until proven guilty" is proven false in actual practice since, if someone is merely suspected of committing a crime, his liberty is immediately forfeit, pending further investigation or evidence. On a similar note, I've been present at many live criminal trials throughout my life, and have yet to see a jury of destitute people deciding the fate of someone suffering equal hardships, so the concept of being tried by one's peers goes out the window as well. I accept this double standard, first because I am powerless to change it, and secondly because it is integral to American jurisprudence. Personally, I'd like to see a maple tree with blue leaves. I'll never see one, though, because maple leaves are green; that's just The Way Things Are.
I am trying to emphasize that we should all be aware of the very real differences in what is practiced, as opposed to that which is written, because the two rarely coincide. What is written in that document is The Way Things Should Be, but people in general tend to confuse that with what is actually practiced, which is The Way Things Are. That's all I was trying to say.
The United States of America is the greatest and most powerful country in the world; the U. S. Constitution is, without question, one of the greatest documents ever constructed, and the men who crafted it certainly don't need to defend their own courage to the likes of me. But they were human, and they were men of property, every one, and to delude ourselves by buying into the notion that they were somehow above possessing basic human traits such as greed and debauchery does not serve the interests of those of us who recognize those traits within the politicians of the present day.
It's nice, it's comforting to believe that George Washington, James Madison, Ben Franklin, John Langdon and the 35 others who drafted and signed the U. S. Constitution were of absolutely sterling character, as is universally taught. However, they were politicians and property owners. In fact, of the 39 men who signed the Constitution, 13 were Masons. This is not my opinion; this is a fact. Of the four men mentioned above, Benjamin Franklin was the only one who never owned slaves. Therefore, it is my considered opinion that the basic premise on which the Constitution is founded, that of "equal justice for all men, under the law, without regard to race, creed or color," might look good on paper, but had no more basis in fact, or in practice, during 1787 than it does now.
In order to achieve success today in the nation they founded 217 years ago, we need to first realize, and then accept the fact that our society, and the laws which govern it, must be interpreted and manipulated to serve our own individual interests. Again, history bears this out. Generally speaking, people who have achieved success were able to do so because they were willing to simply ignore or break the rules and laws that didn't fit their plans. The Hoosier Lottery is an admittedly extreme example. They were able to get away with their schemes for so many years because they completely ignored the very laws by which they're governed. We're not forced to accept this, however, because it's something we can change. Bill Gates and Steven Jobs stole their GUI's from Xerox PARC. The United States and Russia stole their jet, rocket and nuclear technologies from Germany. These, of course,were the spoils of war, but that doesn't change the truth. German history books record nothing of significance during the years 1939 through 1945. Does this mean that the atrocities of World War II never took place?
We must accept the fact that conformity, more often than not, will be detrimental, by design, to our quest for success. We can either follow the written rules without question, or we can emulate people who have reached the goals we've set for ourselves; we must do as they do, not as they say, if we want to become wealthy. I've admitted in a previous post that I have accepted and actively practice this, to an extent (there are certain lines I refuse to cross), so I am in no position to criticize anyone who has done likewise.
We may not like it; we may not agree with it, but we must acknowledge and accept it if we want to succeed, because that's The Way Things Are.
lol good one
whodeani: he allready gave away about half of his winnings and spent a lot on property to build custom homes in his state. So he might have about a quarter of it left. If that. No doubt he will probably never be broke as his family would step in and declair him insane.