Showing posts with label Personal Observations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Personal Observations. Show all posts

Monday, March 5, 2012

We moved!


It's sunrise at The Ohio Republic as we move to our new location at www.ohrepublic.com.

The remodeled blog will continue to contain my opinions and state news as before,  but will also tie in more closely to my book (future tense, books) and speaking engagements. It has a fresh look that is easy on the eyes.


I will keep this site up indefinitely as an archive of the 1,232 posts I have already written.

Thank you for the support you have given me in the last 4½ years. I hope you will continue to enjoy my blog at the new location.

Photo Copyright © 2000 Kevin B. Coleman • Intrepid Heritage Services . Used by permission.

Friday, March 2, 2012

Lots of changes going on

It's almost hard to know where to start.

My book, Governing Ourselves is now available online from my publisher, BookLocker.com (preferred -- higher royalty ;) ). On the BookLocker site, you can download an 18-page preview of my book in its final state. My book also appears in Amazon.com, and BarnesandNoble.com; and can be ordered from your favorite bookstore. Price is $14.95 for paperback, and $8.95 for eBook.

On Monday, The Ohio Republic will move to its new location: www.ohrepublic.com. I will  keep this site up indefinitely so links to old posts will still work, but new posts will originate there. Also on Monday will be my official opening for my author's Facebook page. If you prefer your information that way, I invite you to Like me there.

You can also reach me through Twitter (@HaroldDThomas) and LinkedIn.

Now, I've got a lot of work to do! See you Monday.

Friday, January 20, 2012

Copyright law and me ... and you

As many of you know, I am in the process of publishing my book Governing Ourselves. Respecting the copyrights of others has been one of the most challenging tasks I have faced as part of that process, because I have used several brief quotations from copyrighted sources.

Being a first time author, I am learning what is, and is not reasonable. One author and one publisher have been very gracious, and state that my use falls within "fair use" under the Copyright Act, thus no royalty is due them. On the other hand, I requested permission to use a brief quotation from a 1972 interview with Richard Nixon that was published in a newspaper that has been defunct since the 1980s. Another newspaper owns the copyright and wants a $390 royalty for the first 25,000 copies printed. If I knew that I would sell 25,000 copies of the book, that would seem reasonable, but if I only sell a few hundred...! (I have since removed that quotation and replaced it with a story that was posted in this blog about two years ago -- which turned out to be an improvement in content).


Existing copyright law is intended to protect artists and writers from those who would simply copy the work and sell it for themselves. It relies on what I call "passive regulation" (a concept on which I will elaborate in my book) -- you find that someone is stealing your work, you can sue for damages. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) relies on "active regulation," meaning that a corporation can ask the federal government to shut down sites that use copyrighted material. In other words, certain major content providers (such as New York publishers and Hollywood film companies) want to shut down all competition by taking control of the Internet. To give you an idea just how far-reaching this bill is, it seems that the Congressman who introduced the bill was himself a violator by illegally using a copyright image as background on his site (since removed).

In about a month, I will be adding a commercial element to The Ohio Republic (to sell my book, of course). In so doing, I will have to take much greater care about my use of copyrighted material on my site, because it then will be considered "for profit." I understand that, and am preparing for it. However, under SOPA, The Ohio Republic would be strictly limited to the content I generate myself. I could not even link to a copyrighted source, lest that source put me at risk by infringing on someone else's copyright.

My primary purpose in writing Governing Ourselves is to share with the public insights that I have gained over the last twenty years. I admit that I would also like the book to be profitable enough to substantially increase my retirement fund; and appreciate now, more than ever, the importance of protecting the rights of the author. However, I feel that existing law does that well enough. I have no desire to go against the blogger who quotes a couple of paragraphs of my book, as long as that blogger gives me credit for it (and a link to a site that sells it would be nice, too :) ).

Government has an obligation to protect the people from force and fraud. Reasonable copyright protection is a necessary function of our legal system. However, it should not be used to encourage the greedy to trample on the rights of everyone else.

In yesterday's post, I suggested an easy way to contact your Congressman and Senators in opposition to SOPA. If you have not registered your opposition to SOPA yet, please do so now.

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Governing Ourselves is now at the publisher

Those who have followed my blog know that I have been working on one of my life's major goals -- writing a book. Governing Ourselves: How Americans Can Regain Their Freedom. Publication will be completed as soon as I have resolved a few copyright questions, and is expected in February 2012. Right now, I am delving into the business end -- hiring an editor and setting my marketing plan.

When the book hits the street, please be assured that you will be the first to know!

Monday, September 12, 2011

9-12

Today is the fourth anniversary of The Ohio Republic. In my first post (of 1,130 so far), I stated the purpose of this blog:

The purpose of this blog is to advocate the peaceful, legal independence of Ohio from the United States of America. This will be done by discussing the philosophy that will underlie the new political system; the emotional, legal, and practical issues involved in achieving independence; and highlighting news of differences between the State of Ohio and the United States Government.

This, I trust I have done, even though at times I have been circumspect in promoting independence. I do believe that ultimately (and soon), independence will be necessary to preserve our freedoms; but I am willing to entertain the idea that nullification might prove sufficient, and to ensure that all lesser measures to prevent tyranny have failed before pressing secession in earnest.

On January 1 of this year, I summarized at greater length the platform of The Ohio Republic. The essential points of that platform are commitments to individual freedom, decentralist government, using practical approaches to problem-solving. rejection of anarchism, pressing the Ohio General Assembly to resist the federal government when necessary by preventing the enforcement of unconstitutional federal laws (nullification), advocating preparations for independence and declaration of same when all else has failed, and placing our faith in our Judaeo-Christian heritage.

While my all-time hit count (a little over 83,000 last week) won't knock anybody's socks off, I have found loyal readers who respect my writing and occasionally have quoted my posts elsewhere. I appreciate all of my readers, and thank you for passing on whatever you have found worthy. In addition to this site, The Ohio Republic appears on my Facebook page, in the Libertarian section of Before It's News, and was recently added to Ohio's Top Blogs.

We have clearly lost a great deal of freedom just in the last four years, so the work clearly needs to continue.

Please feel free to comment or e-mail me your feedback on what you like about The Ohio Republic, and your suggestions for improvement.

And for my part, I promise, God willing and the Internet able, to be here when the time comes to celebrate The Ohio Republic's fifth anniversary.

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Why do we have to go to the Brits to get the good stuff?

Case in point: this piece from The (London) Telegraph, which documents an exchange between an Iowa Tea Party activist and President Obama, in which both agree on one (and only one) thing -- we need to civilize our rhetoric.

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Another quick take on the debt crisis

I do not buy into all the rhetoric about tying down our children and grandchildren with the national debt and unfunded obligations. The debt will be repudiated within the next 2-3 years. What we should be worrying about is hyperinflation -- printing money to pay it off and thus destroying the savings of every thrifty American.

(Posted Wednesday in Facebook)

Friday, July 29, 2011

Getting real

Over on Facebook, an interesting discussion has taken place on my friend Bill Yarbrough's wall about how (or whether) the Libertarian Party should interact with the Tea Party. The struggle in the Party is between those who would insist on absolute fidelity to the Party Platform in all decisions, and those who understand that (as my Republican political mentor, Robert E. Levitt* put it) "the purpose of the ... Party is to elect candidates." In other words, we need to be faithful to our values, but understand that, in politics, our values are a destination. Decisions made by Libertarian officeholders will fall short of the Platform's goals, but the Libertarian must be held accountable for bringing us closer to them.

Bill, who has the virtue of being both a Libertarian and a realist, puts it this way:
I agree the country and state are not ready for a third party - and they don't have to be. The Libertarian brand simply has to overcome obscurity to the point that one really good candidate wins one prominant U.S. House seat. That should be ...the focus - one winnable race of note. From there, the sky's the limit. The LP needs to sink all its money into a winnable race before the [realists] of the world will find us worth their time.
A political party that cannot elect candidates is useless. On the other hand, neither of our major parties appear to be grounded in principle, even though many of their candidates and officeholders are personally so grounded.

On the Tea Party side, there is complete agreement on where we need to go -- and total confusion as to how to get there. Some Tea Partiers are libertarians who want less government across the board, but others are conservatives who embrace the social constraints and militarism favored by many Republicans. Because many of the most visible supporters of the Tea Party are Republicans, there is a perception that the Tea Partiers are nothing but GOP hacks. Part of this confusion stems from the amorphousness of the Tea Party. The Tea Parties and related organizations stem from many roots. As Bill Yarbrough observed, to properly judge a Tea Party, one has to look at each individual local organization.

Leadership and members in both movements need to understand that candidates and officeholders can only work with the legislation as it is. Legislators can amend bills and try to persuade others toward our Platform goals -- but they can only vote on what is in front of them.

Thomas Sowell reminds us of this reality in today's Townhall:
One of the good things about the Tea Party movement is that it resisted the temptation to actually form a third political party, which has been an exercise in futility, time and time again, under the American electoral system.


But, if the Tea Party movement within the Republican Party becomes just a rule-or-ruin minority, then they might just as well have formed a separate third party and gone on to oblivion.
It is not in the interest, either of the Tea Party or of the people, to insist that Congressmen or state legislators commit political suicide in support of a long-range goal. For example, I agree that Congress should take a hard line both against raising the debt limit and raising tax rates; but if we don't completely balance the budget, we are not sacrificing our principles. We are still moving toward our goals. We are preparing Congress and the people for a greater victory later on. The point is, that victory will not come until we take the intermediate steps.

On a personal note, Mr. Sowell also explains why I should not run for office:
Writers can advocate things that have no chance at the moment, for their very writing about those things persuasively can make them possible at some future date. But to adopt the same approach as an elected member of Congress risks losing both the present and the future.
* Robert E. Levitt (1926-1997) was a Republican state representative and longtime chairman of the Stark County Republican Party. I worked as his executive director 1978-1982, where I got quite an education in political reality.

Monday, July 18, 2011

Speaking in Vandalia July 25

It's been a while since I have given a speech to a political group. However, I will be speaking at a 9-12 group meeting at First Grace Brethren Church, 2524 Stone Quarry Rd., Vandalia on Monday, July 25, 7-9 pm., as part of a seminar on monetary policy.

My speech title will be "Monetary Policy in Plain English," breaking down the whole idea of money and policy in a way anyone will be able to understand. I will also be unveiling a proposal based on my post June 28.

I look forward to meeting all the friends of liberty in the Dayton area Monday night!

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Dry spell continues :(

I am wearing a splint in my right hand to treat a thumb-to-wrist injury, which is limiting my ability to use the computer. I expect to return to normal on The Ohio Republic around June 2.

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Back again

My Toastmasters friends know that I have been extremely busy with planning and carrying out the District 40 Spring Conference that was held this weekend (link to YouTube Skype connection with two other districts) which has made my posting in The Ohio Republic rather sporadic and perhaps not as throughly prepared as usual.

The Conference ended very successfully today. After I do some followup reporting, my plans are to resume my blogging and to finish the book I have been working on for nearly a year, Governing Ourselves.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

A poet's comment on today's foolishness

One of my favorite hymns, traditionally sung to the Old 124th in the Genevan Psalter. It is based on I Samuel 13:13.
Turn Back, O Man

Turn back, O man
Forswear thy foolish ways
Old now is earth
And none may count her days
Yet thou, her child
Whose head is crowned with flames
Still will not hear
Thine inner God proclaim,
"Turn back, O man
Forswear thy foolish ways."

Earth might be fair
And all men glad and wise
Age after age their tragic empires rise
Built while they dream
And in that dreaming weep
Would man but wake
From out his haunted sleep
Turn back, O man
Forswear thy foolish ways.


Earth shall be fair
And all her people one
Not till that hour
Shall God's whole will be done
Now, even now
Once more from earth to sky
Peels forth in joy
Man's old undaunted cry
Earth shall be fair
And all her people one.*

-- Clifford Bax (1916)
arr. Stephen Schwartz in the soundtrack to Godspell.

* I interpret this as being one in the Spirit, not one nation or of a single mind.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Blogs I like

Regular readers already know about Rebellion and DumpDC. Here are some other blogs I like:

For those of you who like your libertarianism on the more personal family/neighborhood level, I would like to recommend a blogger who is new to me. Karen DeCoster, a resident of Detroit,  writes on such topics as distracted walking, the nutritional snow job being pulled on schools by Domino's Pizza*, Coca-Cola, and terrorist backpacks. She also is one of the workhorses in Lew Rockwell's stable. Lew Rockwell, a radio talk show host and founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute (a libertarian economics think tank) publishes an extensive compendium of libertarian writing every day from a number of authors.

An Ohio writer I regularly follow is Wood County's Charlie Earl whose littlestuff-minoosha brings the big topics down to a human scale. I particularly like his curmudgeonly style, of which he is justly proud. His most recent posts deal with the bankruptcy of state governments. He was a state representative in the early 1980s, and brings that experience to bear in his political insights. Another Ohio-based blog that I check into occasionally is Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment, completely devoted to restoring the states' role in the federal government by returning to the election of U.S. Senators by the state legislatures.

If you want to follow the secession and nullification movements across the U.S. of A., you can get brief news summaries from Bill Miller's Secession and Nullification -- News and Information, and from the Tenth Amendment Center (which also provides model nullification legislation and extensive resources to learn about, and persuade others to support state sovereignty).

Links to other Ohio and libertarian blogs are available on my Links page. 

And if you are suffering from insomnia, and want a sure-fire sleep aid, there's my old blog (2005-2006) on theology and politics, The Middle Way. I suppose it's conceited of me to put it under "Blogs I like," but it was a learning experience that helped train me for the blog you are now reading.

* I'm sure Donato's in Columbus won't mind :)

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

The perils of punditry


Experience has shown that relatively few posts in The Ohio Republic draw comments. This is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, commenters to this space are either supportive, or are thoughtful in their criticism. We have been blessed by the absence of the childish sniping that too often occurs in comments to media and other blogs. On the other hand, there are times when I crave feedback and receive none.

My post on Monday so far has drawn an unusually large response – eight comments from others, three of them on the Facebook page. I would like to share one from an old friend, whose sympathies I know to be decidedly liberal:
Instead of trying to defend the indefensible (and how on earth do you defend Sarah Palin’s "reload" ...comments let alone all her other violent metaphors?),  why don't we just all agree the political rhetoric (from all sides) is poisonous and contributes to the agitation of those who are unbalanced. We need to respect each other despite our VERY different viewpoints on how to achieve progress for mankind.
I would not go so far as to argue that all political rhetoric is poisonous; but we clearly need to work toward eliminating all poisonous rhetoric. We need to reject all political rhetoric that calls for violence, even metaphorically.  Everyone of good will agrees that our society is very broken. Our (good) rhetoric should aim toward its rebuilding.

I do not apologize for my appeal to the Left (the need for which was thoroughly documented by Michelle Malkin); but as two commenters pointed out, the Right is not blameless. They support their charges with examples of a vitriolic statement by Glenn Beck against filmmaker Michael Moore and some tasteless t-shirts offered for sale to Tea Party followers.

In my second anniversary post (Sept. 13, 2009), I cited State Rep. Ted Celeste (D-Upper Arlington), who has campaigned for greater civility in political discussion. He said:
We politicians are as much to blame as anyone. Our discourse has become partisan and angry, thoughtless and hurtful and totally lacking in civility. We are headed down a very dangerous path, and this is not the type of leadership that our constituents expect of us.
Last Saturday, we saw where that dangerous path ends. While we are not responsible for what Jared Loughner did, we are responsible for what we say and the way we say it. Freedom of speech carries with it the responsibility to use it wisely.

Being human and passionate about the cause of liberty, I will make mistakes. And I am thankful for the commenters who make the effort to keep me honest, because it is the truth that will set us free.

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Thought for the day

An original:

The only solution to political correctness is to:
  • Take great care with what you say, 
  • Not care what other people think when you say it; and 
  • Never take offense at what others say, when they intend to be reasonable.

If enough people will do this, this problem will go away -- but for enough people to do this, they will have to be taught.

Friday, December 10, 2010

On revolution

The Ohio Republic has repeatedly written on the possibility of revolution. I have thought for some time that a revolution is in the air in this country; even though I think Glenn Beck’s assertion that it has already begun is premature. However, given the rate at which the degradation of our liberties is taking place, as evidenced by the TSA scanners, the Food Safety Act, and (possibly) the proposed rules on “Net neutrality,” I can see the revolution beginning in 2011, instead of 2012 as I had originally thought.

Every revolution is unique, and each affects its society in a unique way. Each is the explosion that follows when pressure builds up beyond the ability of a society’s institutions to contain it. Since the pressure builds up gradually, it is impossible to predict when the explosion will take place – but those who are watching can see the pressure building, and know that one is imminent.

How a revolution ends depends on whether the instigators prevail, as they did in Russia in 1917; and how prepared they are to govern, as the French were not in 1792. It also depends on how the people react to the revolution. Do we surrender to what appears to be an unstoppable force, or do we try to stop the revolution, as the French did in 1968? History shows that revolutions hardly ever end in exactly the way the instigators expect. Hegel’s dialectic is true, albeit not in the way Karl Marx anticipated: the thesis (revolution) is always met by an antithesis (reaction), resulting in a synthesis (society following the revolution). If revolutions do not always end as expected, its ideas (or its scars) will nevertheless continue to influence the society.

Glenn Beck is correct on this point: revolutions begin by creating chaos. No one (including Mr. Beck, if he is honest with himself) can know right now whether his particular recipe is accurate. His theory is that the revolution will involve a bottom-up approach (by union thugs and “progressive” activists on the street), coupled with a top-down one (by officials in the Obama Administration and rich and influential people like George Soros). There certainly is evidence that the radical left will try to pin the chaos on tea party activists and “right-wing extremists.”

We may not be able to avert a revolution, but we can prevent the left from imposing its dictatorship of the proletariat on our country. The left has an Achilles heel: its intellectual arrogance. Every statement they publish, every plan they make, reeks of contempt for the intelligence of the American people and their willingness to act. They think that we will fall for every trap they lay, that we will immerse ourselves in football and Desperate Housewives on the tube until it is too late. They think that those of us who do resist, will do so violently. After all, what other reason can there be for asserting our right to bear arms? The rest of us, they think, will engage in a feckless quest to use our corrupted institutions to reverse decades of policies that they have developed in preparation for this day. The key to stopping the left, then, is to act in ways they do not anticipate.

However, to act in ways they do not anticipate, we need to develop some new ways of thinking. Once the revolution begins, the United States of America-as-we-know-it will cease to exist. Not may, will. All of us who treasure our history and our institutions will experience the stages of grief: denial, anger, loss and, acceptance.

In the war of ideas, the Eastern Establishment must be countered by a libertarian intelligentsia; which, fortunately we do have. We have the Mises and Cato Institutes, Walter Williams, and Chuck Baldwin. In Ohio, we have the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law and the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions. Ohio has another asset, not evident in very many other states: a cohesive liberty movement. That movement made a mistake in this election by trusting too much in the Republican Party; but it will soon realize that it was a mistake. In our state history, we have protected civil liberties much more effectively than most other states. The reason for this has been the fidelity of our courts to the Bill of Rights in our 159-year-old Ohio Constitution. Obviously, we’re not perfect (as Manna Storehouse and the Constitution Day kerfuffle in Andover attest), but we can be proud of our overall record.

With one exception, we have everything we need to protect our freedom. We have the brains, the movement, and the laws behind us. What we need, and this does not come naturally to Ohioans, is the willingness to use them in creative ways.

In revolutionary times, we must think of ourselves as Ohioans first and Americans second. While the nation remains in some semblance of domestic peace, we must continue to use our existing institutions to resist tyranny; for example, by using our new Republican General Assembly and Governor to nullify unconstitutional federal laws in Ohio. We must uphold the rule of law as long as we can.

But when that peace ends, the rule of law at the federal level will go with it. In preparation for that day, we have three very high priorities: we need to strengthen our organized state militia to augment the National Guard to protect us from externally-generated violence; we need to establish a mechanism for using silver in everyday transactions (honest money); and we need for all of us to start thinking, buying, and as practicable, manufacturing locally. And we need to start on all three priorities now. As I wrote earlier, we cannot predict the day the revolution will begin, but we can sense that it will begin very soon. It could be today – it could be a year from now; but we need to prepare now.

In so doing, we will do one of two things, both protecting our liberties. If the rest of the United States proves to be of the same mind as we are, we will all defeat the “progressives” and save the union. Otherwise, we will be prepared to declare and sustain our independence.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

A Thanksgiving Prayer

Lord, on this Thanksgiving Day, we pause to remind ourselves that all glory and power belongs to You and to You alone. We rejoice that our Creator is a God both just and loving, who seeks only our joyful obedience in return for Your abundant blessings.

We thank You for our lives, our health, our sustenance of food, clothing, and shelter. We thank You for the gifts of freedom and opportunity that you gave our nation more than two centuries ago.

We confess, Lord, that we are unworthy of these gifts. We have become ignorant of Your Word, and forgotten that Your gift of freedom can only continue while we are ever watchful for those who seek to use against Your purposes.

You gave us plenty, and we made ourselves fat;

You gave us opportunity, and we made ourselves selfish;

You gave us inventiveness, and we used it for our own entertainment, to dull ourselves from the reality of this life, and to create engines of war that have brought terror and destruction to the world;

You gave us a Republic, and we turned it into an Empire for the benefit of greedy and unscrupulous men, who are now set to turn it against us, taking away everything that we have worked for.

Because You are a just God, we are entering a bitter winter of our own making; but because You are a loving God, we can hope that, by humbling ourselves before You and relying on Your strength and not our own, we will find the strength to put ourselves right, so we may feel the warmth of Your spring.

You have given us Your son, Jesus Christ, who taught us the ways of love and faithfulness. Following his example, we do not seek to strike down our enemies, but pray instead that You will create a miracle – one that will convict us of our wrongdoing and draw us closer to You, and will turn the hearts of our enemies – foreign and domestic – to the truth of Your love and justice.

Give us a lust for integrity, a greed for Thy wisdom, and rest from our petty worries. Give us a zeal for teaching and leading our fellow men to Your perfect ways; so that, when we face Your judgment, we may be allowed by Your grace to feel the warmth of Your love forever.

And let us never forget that You gave us Your perfect example in Your son, whose name we adore and cherish, and in whose name we humbly pray.

Amen.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

9-12

Today, I celebrate the third anniversary of The Ohio Republic. I do so with great satisfaction. It is hard for me to believe that this is my 826th post; and that within the next month, the Blogger page will have attracted its 60,000th page view. In addition, many people read The Ohio Republic as notes on my Facebook page, and in the Libertarian section of Before It's News.

Most heartening, however, has been the response of my fellow Ohioans to the crisis of freedom that we face with an increasingly oppressive federal government. Three years ago, I could not have imagined the widespread support that the Tea Party and similar movements enjoy in this state; nor how nullification, and even secession, have begun to enter the political discourse in this state.

I do not take credit for this change of attitude, but I take satisfaction in my effort to influence opinion in those directions. There remains much to say -- and The Ohio Republic will be here to say it.

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Governing Ourselves

Readers may have noticed that my blog posts have been getting rather sporadic lately. One of the reasons for this is that I have been working on my first book. Entitled Governing Ourselves, it articulates a libertarian vision for America in the near future. My plan is to have the book ready to publish by the end of the summer, so it can be released in time for the fall campaign season. This is a challenging schedule, however.

I have posted a preview of the book, which includes the contents, introduction, and first chapter. All of it is in draft form, and subject to change; but you are welcome to comment on what is up so far.

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Government is a necessary evil

Government is both necessary and is evil. It is necessary, because it is human nature to be selfish. Those who are not educated (or educable) to appropriate behavior in society will attempt to cheat and steal to get what they want. The force of government, therefore, is needed to restrain such people from harming us. This applies as much to the foreign and terrorist army as it does to the common criminal. Martin Luther wrote that if everyone be a practicing Christian, there would be no need for government. However, we all know this is not so.

However, those who wield the powers of government are capable of great evil, as we are seeing more clearly every day.

The statist sees government as necessary, but not evil.
The anarchist sees government as evil, and not necessary.

I suggest that the most appropriate approach is that suggested by our Founding Fathers. Keep government as small and as local as possible (decentralism), bound as tightly as possible to a set of rules (the Constitution) and to representatives who are conscientious in carrrying out the will of the people. This way, government is strong enough to do what is necessary, and restrained from doing what is evil.