Sunday, July 3, 2011

We Need to Follow the Example of John Hancock

                We are living in an age of Political cleansing by the powers that be in the White House, The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. They seek to silence the opposition or any voice of dissent. They want to send a chilling effect using fear and intimidation so we will stay quiet and not speak out. They want to censor the internet. They send FBI agents to ask questions to people who attend anti war rallies. They have special handbooks and manuals warning police and other law enforcement agencies to fear the patriots. They do not want free speech. What is good and patriotic is now suspect.

                 To be afraid of what they will do to us if we dare speak out or ask questions is playing into their hands. We cannot afford to self-censor ourselves out of fear the thought police will be knocking at our doors. The bolder people shining the light on corruption who will not capitulate to servitude to a dictator, the better off we will be if we stay the course. I get disappointed when people call into shows not giving their names calling themselves "Mr. X" or "The Guy from LA" for fear being placed on a list by the government. The fear they are watching us because they tap our phones and our internet activities must not dictate how we live. It is a mind game they play selling the illusion it is futile to resist because the government are watching you.

                  Let me tell you about a man who was one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. We have heard from time to time when signing some papers. The person would hand us a pen and say” sign your John Hancock here" or our signature to a piece of paper. To see John Hancock’s signature on the Declaration of Independence in bold letters that stand out the most for all to view without wearing reading glasses. Why is it the biggest signature on this historical document? All the signers knew once they put their signature on this piece of paper. They knew they committed treason against King George III and their names seen on the paper meant a death sentence to them all.

                 John Hancock went a step further. When he signed his name to the document, he had one thing in mind for a good reason. The purpose he made the signature so big is because he wanted the King to see his name on the document without wearing his spectacles. He wanted the king to know he singed it. A very courageous statement to make as one of the best historical examples to follow in our fight for freedom against a tyrant.  Now we need to make our John Hancock known not in just a signature. It is a symbol of showing we are not afraid, we do not fear the tyrant anymore and we renounce their authority over us. John Hancock shows us not to be afraid and not to fear letting them know who you are. We are Americans and we will stay free. Most off all saying, we are not your slaves. Kudos to John Hancock.


  1. How about we put our 'autographs' right across the letter/declaration that states there will be no more tax collected from YOU until our individual grievances are addressed and rectified to our satisfaction? As far a the 'size' of our 'mark', I think they know a whole lot about us all, too much in fact.

  2. "The purpose he made the signature so big is because he wanted the King to see his name on the document without wearing his spectacles. He wanted the king to know he singed it."

    Actually you're conflating two things. And both of them are wrong.

    First, Hancock didn't say that of the king. He was said to have declared, "JOHN BULL can read my name without spectacles!" Which is like saying, "Uncle Sam can read my name without spectacles."

    Secondly, he didn't actually say either.

    The Declaration was not a single document. It wasn't all signed at the same time. There were in fact, several copies of the Declaration, copied and recopied in order to reach the various signatories.

    Eventually, one final copy was created, and sent around to each signor. That copy was sent by mail, by carrier, or by traders, over the course of several years.

    Why was Hancock's signature so big? Because he was trying to cover whitespace. Because he was afraid if the document was only partially filled with signatures, it wouldn't look as good.

    In other words, Hancock signed his name so large because he the declaration only filled up part of the page.

    Further, there was no large meeting where all the Founding Fathers gathered together to sign it, one after another.

    It just didn't happen. And more to the point, it didn't NEED to happen. We don't need that myth. That made up story is totally unnecessary. What the Fathers did was incredible. Still is.

    The ACTUAL facts of the signing and the struggles of the Founding Fathers is QUITE sufficient. It is a story of bravery, of good men. And even of bad men. Of flawed men. It is one of the best stories in all of history.

    But of course, Realman2020 has yet AGAIN failed to do any sort of homework. Intellectual curiosity? Not here. Go beyond 3rd grade social studies? Never. Just more regurgitation of the narrative.

    Come on, Realman. The REAL story of those patriots is too important to be drowned by such stage dressing.

    You call yourself Realman. Are you a real man? Are you man enough to admit you know nearly nothing about this? Are you man enough to pick up a book, and read it? Even if it challenges you?

    Are you?

  3. Yeah, do as I say, not as I do.

    "RealMan" get real.

    Where is your real signature?


  4. Hey Rooty,
    What is your problem?

    Regardless of the details that no one knows exactly occurred (you weren't there were you?) this is a good post from someone who is trying to come up with solutions and has a viable one.

    Are you a REALMAN??? or perhaps a troll?

  5. Wikipedia as a credible source? Please.

  6. "Hey Rooty,
    What is your problem?"

    My problem, is laziness. Intellectual laziness. Like not bothering to spell check. Like relying on cliche instead of thought. Like using lame arguments as, "you weren't there".

    One of the things that always impressed me about the Founding Fathers was, these people were damn smart. They were educated. Far more than you or I. They new their history. They knew how to write, to inspire.

    At no point did a Founding Father make the argument that "How do you know what happened at Lexington & Concord? You weren't there!"

    Never has a Founding Father written so much as a letter to home with the sort of spelling and gramar mistakes we see on this site.

    A not once would someone have excused a Founding Father's lack of intellect, simply because they agreed with what he was saying.

    My problem? Look at every article Realman2020 has written.

  7. Rooty Said: "My problem? Look at every article Realman2020 has written."


    Just look at all the work a fella can do when he puts his mind to it. Just a regular Joe doing what he can with what he's got to work with.

    It's is often the imperfections in a fine piece of wood that gives it character and true beauty. Infact I search for such qualities when I select wood for making furniture.

    I can get perfectly puctuated BS from the mainstream media daily. All lies, and scams of one sorte or another.

    I would choose a poorly written fact, coming from the heart over such druel anyday.

    In anycase how many Articles have you written Rooty?

    It is always far easier to tear something down then it is to build it yourself.

    But only a realman would know that!

  8. "In anycase how many Articles have you written Rooty?"

    Just one. But you wouldn't like it.

    It's full of correct grammar, spelling, and I checked it for content and readability.

    It's funny. I always figured that communication was up to the speaker. If I, as the speaker, want to get something across, it's MY job to get it across well. But I guess I'm wrong. All I need to do is say the right thing, and it doesn't matter how poorly I say it.

    I wonder. Is it possible to say something "from the heart", but still say it well? Or are the two things mutually exclusive?

  9. All the above I would say.

    The point is too......communicate!

    Method and quality are secondary to the primary mission.

    Would you prefer a well educated perfectly written lie, over a poorly worded mispelled fact?

    If you have good skills Rooty, or perhaps you have supurb skills. Then it is you who is not reaching your potential here in the forum.

    Offering alternative views supported by good research would be of great help to us all. Minus the unflattering personal remarks of course.