AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO . . .

Today's blog post is for the entertainment of Americans citizens only. Anyone else may find a certain entertainment value in trying to come up with correct answers as well, and may in fact score better than most Americans. Sadly.

Okay, let's talk about American 'rights.' You know what a right is, right? You hear the word dozens of times every day, until some of us want to throw up at its very mention. But try to hold your lunch.

The United States Constitution provides Americans their rights. They're written down, clear and obvious. But they're in there in two ways: those rights reserved for Government, and those reserved for the citizens. We're going to concern ourselves, in this blog, with those rights that belong to the citizen.

So here's the quiz: which of the below 'rights', semi-colon separated, are rights according to the US Constitution? Pick all that apply.

You have the right to:

A lawyer; a speedy trial; privacy; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; separation of church and State; vote; own property; offensive speech; health care; a job; associate with whomever you choose to associate; shelter; free exercise of your religion; own and carry firearms; food; not be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure; special treatment if you are of a specified race or gender; money and other necessary resources; health care; transportation; your safety; not associate with whomever you do not want to associate; a cell phone; an abortion; freedom of movement; television; an education.

Good luck. Let your friendly Ostrich Killer know how you do. You can score yourself by consulting your research assistant, Mr. Google, about the US Constitution.

While you're browsing the Constitution, take a look at the Tenth Amendment. Then think about it.

THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND YOUR CIVIC DUTY - A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Let's begin this by presuming that the drafters of our Constitution wrote the Second Amendment to the Constitution to make sure that the citizenry would have the means to keep the federal government honest and defend our national security. Here's what they said:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Put another way, our Founding Fathers intended that our citizens be able to defend our freedom by force of arms, if necessary. We can reasonably presume this was their intent by simply looking at the history of the times leading up to that Constitution - they'd just been through a terrible shooting war to overthrow a tyrannical government. That war is called the Revolutionary War, and it resulted in the founding of a new country, the United States of America. Without an armed citizenry at that time, that war could not have been fought. There would be no United States of America. So, extrapolating, it's perfectly logical to conclude that our Founding Fathers meant to preserve that same capability for the citizenry of the new country. They meant to preserve an armed citizenry.

But back to our thought experiment: when does it become a civic duty to pick up that musket?

Our Founding Fathers gave us the legal, Constitutional means to do that if necessary, to preserve our freedoms. Freedoms won with blood, sustained with more blood, and promising to cost yet more blood. Does that imply an ugly duty, if necessary? After all, it is the right to keep and bear - emphasis on 'bear' - arms that makes all other rights possible.

Some would tell us that under no circumstances should anyone pick up a musket and join like-thinkers to protect our freedoms from the enemy, be they from abroad or from within. To them your Ostrich Killer says that a citizenry that under no circumstances will pick up their muskets to protect our national sovereignty or our Constitution is one that has already agreed to be ruled, that is tamed and subdued. They would be right at home in North Korea.

Your Ostrich Killer is not sure we're at that point yet, as a citizenry, but wonders what catalyst - or final straw, if you will - would trigger a little house cleaning? It would have to be something massive, obviously, but the possibility has to exist if our employees in Washington are to be kept honest. So is it a civic duty to actually bear those arms, then? That's the question that this thought experiment raises.

Or is your Ostrich Killer missing something here? If you think so, drop me a note and let me know the error of my thinking.

Now, another cup of coffee . . .

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE AMERICAN VOTER?

It's taken a year of thought, but your friendly Ostrich Killer kept at it and finally, thanks to a really awful chic flick on TV, he saw the answer to the above question. In this movie there's Anthony Quinn explaining the difference between men and women to a WWII vet. He points to his head and says "Men think." Then he pats his tummy. "But women, they feel."

The light went on in my head. Jumping way ahead to the conclusion, I saw the truth of that: we've become a nation of feminized males.

Think about it: in public and even many private schools, boys are punished if they do not behave like girls. Instead of staring out the window and dreaming of fishing and ball playing, or snickering at some classmate's fart, they must sit politely and pretend to pay attention. If they can't sit still like a little girl, they're sent to doctors who give them medicine to help them sit still. Is it only coincidence that the vast majority of ADHD kids are boys? You can Google the stats, if you think your Ostrich Killer is just making this up.

Instead of running around the playground and rough-housing, they're told they can only walk and cannot touch anyone. No dodge ball, it can hurt (Duh. Isn't that the point?) No boxing gloves, there might be a lawsuit. No throwing anything. No jumping. No impolite remarks . . . the list is endless. Our boys, being turned into little girls.

Think that's absurd? Think again. How often have you been encouraged to 'get in touch with your feminine side?' Or counseled or made fun of because you've 'lost touch with your feminine side?' Have you ever heard anyone tell girls to be more like men?

News flash: Manly men don't even know they have a feminine side, which is another way of saying they don't have one. Girley men, on the other hand . . .

But how does this relate to the American voter? You think your Ostrich Killer has run down a bunny trail, but no. Here is the link: Too many American voters vote their feelings, instead of their brains. That can be traced right back to their schooling and pop culture. For example, maybe it feels good to vote for more money to be spent on (fill in the entitlement name here). But a thinker would wonder where the money would come from, but only for an instant because he would realize that the money will come out of his wallet. Then he thinks something like 'would I rather keep my money, or send it to those people (who receive that entitlement)?'

Well the answer to that is obvious, at least to a thinker who takes care of his family first.

Or maybe a feeler will vote skin color just to prove to himself that he's not a racist. Of course, a thinker would realize instantly that is racism - because skin color is a factor in that vote.

Not everyone who voted for Obama did so for that reason; don't get me wrong. Socialists, communists, fascists, liberals, and America's other enemies voted for him out of ideological conviction. But many did vote for him because of skin color. How many? What percent? Was it enough to give him the plurality he received? More? Think back: how often, before the election, did you hear allegedly important people say "the only reason anyone wouldn't vote for Obama is that they're racist." And think: since the election, how many times have you heard those same people say "Those that don't agree with what Obama wants for America are just racists?"

Yeah, your Ostrich Killer knows he's struck a nerve here. You do remember all that sort of rhetoric, and some of you don't want to. No one wants to 'feel' that they are racists. We can hear it now: "We voted for Obama. That proves we're not racists." Does it? That depends on why you voted for Obama. If you voted for Obama to demonstrate that you're not a racist, that makes you a racist. If you voted for him because you agree with him, that makes you a think-alike. Now, a year later, neither of those reasons should make any voter proud.

But enough digression: your Ostrich Killer contends that there were enough 'feelers' that if just male voters had thought instead of felt, we'd have a different president. I call this lack of thinking 'Voter malpractice.'

So here's your mission, O Reader: think. Research. Collect facts. Tell others to do the same. Explain what has happened to their brains in public school, where American history is not taught and the Constitution is not taught and 'alternate lifestyle' is applauded and the scientific method is only applied when it won't conflict with agendas.

And don't forget the women. Just because they are instinctively 'feelers' doesn't mean they won't think. Encourage them to stop saying things like "I feel that (issue opinion)" and instead say "I think that (issue opinion) because (facts and data here)." Do the same with any feminized men you know which, sadly, are many of us.

An electorate with facts and data, that thinks, is dangerous to tyranny. It's a good citizen's job to be dangerous. Elected officials should have a healthy fear of us all. So think and be dangerous. Wield your informed, well-reasoned vote like a sword, and be ruthless. That's good citizenship.