Was Calling Arizona Early the Signal that the Steal was on?

Sir Humphrey Appleby: Oh is that you Norman? ‘Walkies’.

Yes Prime Minister One of Us 1986

As a rule I don’t like posts with question marks in the title as it means people are guessing but something hit me in the middle of work that made a lot of sense.

A lot of people were shocked at the VERY early Fox call in fact I recall reading how at the time of the call the 8-1 betting odds favoring Trump suddenly plunged to 2-1 which got a lot of bookies thinking something was up.

That’s when I remembered the 1919 World Series.

In the first game of the 1919 World Series, Eddie Cicotte of the Chicago White Sox went to the mound and promptly hit the first batter he faced, Cincinnati’s Morrie Rath, square in the back.

Too much adrenaline, most in the crowd thought, or perhaps a case of butterflies.

But for others more decidedly and deviously in the know, the 35-year old’s first delivery was deadly accurate.

It was a signal that the World Series was on its way to being fixed.

Cicotte’s beanball was the public signal that the game was on and when I remembered it it struck me that if you were going to have that meeting I speculated about a while back where everyone agreed to get blood on their hands

No each of them had to have blood on their hands so to speak. Each of them had to be sure that the other bosses necks would be on the line. Each of the had to be sure that they would be all in on the steal (and I suspect each of them had to be sure that the media and the tech giants would back them up, I would not be surprised if there was coordination with those folks during the pause in the count.) and I suspect only when they agreed to hang together rather than risk hanging repeatedly did the counts resume.

…then you need a public signal to get the ball rolling. Something out in the open that everyone could see to be sure nobody backed out and of course something for the foot soldiers who would have to get the ballots ready, fill them out and ferry them to the various places knew things were on.

I submit and suggest that the most logical way to send such a signal would be through the media and the best type of signal would be a move that would be considered inexplicable from a source that would not be expected.

Even better the call of Arizona also fed the narrative that would be necessary to sell the fraud, although to be fair, the media would have been more than happy to buy it for any reason.

Again I am just speculating and have absolutely no proof of this, but if I was the guy in charge of getting the word out on election night that the fix was in, that’s how I’d do it.

My idea for subscribers to save some newspapers and magazines and protect conservative voices

By John Ruberry

More than once President Donald Trump–and as most recently as this morning in a telephone interview with Maria Bartiromo–President Donald J. Trump has called with media “the enemy of the people.”

And for the most part he is correct. On the national side most writers are propagandists for the left. Things are slightly better on the local level, which the president noted in that discussion with Bartiromo. After all only local TV stations were pressing Joe Biden during the presidential campaign about whether he’d pack the court with liberal justices. This is a very serious issue as it would upend and transform one of the three branches of the federal government. Eventually Biden, like a typical liberal, punted the decision by announcing he’d form a committee to explore issues of injustices in the legal system. And the elite media once again practiced the sin of omission in their reporting.

Last year Warren Buffett–although excluding the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal–said of newspapers, “They’re going to disappear.” And this year Buffett disappeared from the newspaper business

Old line magazines such as New Yorkthe Atlantic, and the New Yorker are dominated by left-wing journalists. You know, the smug-elitists who got their jobs by way of nepotism and their attendance at an elite university, which probably admitted them because of one of their parents also attended that college. Actually these publications might not have any conservative writers. The last one, the New Yorker, offers a newstand price of $8.99. In my opinion it’s not worth 99 cents. All are behind an internet paywall. All of these publications are intellectually irredeemable and likely doomed to insolvency. 

Let’s get back to newspapers. I cancelled my print subscription to the Chicago Tribune years ago and although I toyed with the idea of subscribing online,being the enterprising sort I learned that the only thing, outside of an occasional sports story, that I cared to read in the Tribune was John Kass’ column, which I discovered I could find on other newspapers sites or Real Clear Politics for free. 

Buffett is right. Newspapers are dead men walking. And magazines. Mostly. Oh, Chicago’s other major daily newspaper, which was purchased by a consortium a few years ago that included the Chicago Federal of Labor for $1, isn’t going to make it. You can bet on it. 

The Tribune, once a strong conservative voice in heavily Democratic Chicago, has been drifting lefward for years. Now it’s “woke.” Except for columnist John Kass. And the Trib is a shell of its former self. Like Warren Buffett–and here the similarities between us end–I’m a former newspaper delivery boy. I hated Thanksgiving Day editions because the papers were jammed with Christmas shopping ads–making the delivery of those bulky papers take three times as long. I have this year’s Thanksgiving Day Tribune lying right next to me. It’s thinner than the Saturday editions–a low readership and therefore a low-advertising day–that I used to deliver. 

Here’s my idea for saving and perhaps transforming daily newspapers and magazines out of the liberal echo chamber that they are now. For instance, the cost of a Tribune subscription, once the promos end, is $3.99 a month. For a dollar more you can have the print edition delivered to your door too. Now, and union rules may have to be changed for this to happen, but I propose for subscribers to have one-quarter of their subscription fee to go directly to the columnist of their choice. If there’s a sports writer or a movie reviewer who you really like, then of course choose that person. And of course I have all newspapers, magazines, and online-only publications in mind. 

My selection at the Tribune would of course be John Kass, a strong conservative voice who suffered a demotion of sorts by seeing his column moved from the coveted page 2 location to the innards of opinion section. The impetus for that move was a rebellion by his leftist co-workers about a column explaining how George Soros funded the campaigns of far-left prosecutors such as Kim Foxx in Cook County, Illinois. Those propagandists called Kass’ column anti-Semitic, even though Kass never mentioned the faith of Soros in that article. Soros is a secular Jew, not a religous one, by the way. Kass was attacked by his colleagues not because he was wrong about Soros–but because he was right.

Kass on a personal level is the antithesis of the media elites of you find elsewhere on the Tribune or at the New York Times and the Atlantic and their ilk. He attended–but did not graduate from–Columbia. That is Columbia College in Chicago, which my daughter once also attended, not the “other” Columbia in New York. The mainstream media of of course is always calling for more diversity within its ranks. But never for more intellectual diversity. Or class diversity. 

So my proposal has two obvious merits. It can save newspapers and it can up the conservative presence at the legacy media. Before it becomes the extinct media. 

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit and is available for hire by a legacy media publication.

“Urich’s Sudden Acquisition of Guts is Cause for Organization Wide Concern”

There is a reason why the left / academic / media / social media has gone all in on both censoring people who talk about election fraud and magic ballots.

That reason is they needed us to fear.

They needed us to decide that this is just the way it is and that we are fools to push back against the Dem machines in Philly, Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Vegas. They need us to think that not only is it a losing proposition but that to do so will put us in severe social, financial and personal danger (and to some degree that is true). The need us to decide to run away and accept what they have done to the country in general and to us in particular by their attempt to steal this election.

I think this quote from my double down and re-endorse Trump piece after the release of the Billy Bush tape applies here.

No this is about convincing those who still have to values to allow the election of someone who not only is directly opposed to all you hold dear but will persecute you on every level.  This is about tricking you into letting go of your one chance to stop your own destruction.  They want you to lose your nerve. Furthermore they want the GOP to lose their nerve and the press will do all they can do enable it.

That’s why despite attempts to minimize what is happening in Pennsylvania noting losing PA is not enough to bring Biden under 270 this is huge.

Once one legislature and state decides to stand up to the attempt to steal the election other legislatures that has to potential to install courage in others. Like the GOP legislatures in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Nevada and Georgia may follow suit.

Just as the willingness of the reporter in the Daredevil comic I quoted from the 80’s broke open the Kingpin’s plot to destroy his alter ego (Daredevil 225-233) Pennsylvania has the potential to blow this thing wide open.

If I’m write and they keep their never then the next few weeks will go badly for the left in general and the Obama administration in waiting particular…

…and yes I said the Obama administration

Analyzing Mattis’ comments on China

It’s not secret that Jim Mattis and Donald Trump had issues working together. I was surprised to read that Mattis wanted to scrap Trump’s “America First” policy, and while I couldn’t get the full article from Foreign Affairs, the snippets I read said his main criticisms were:

  • Characterizing Afghanistan and Iraq as “forever wars”
  • Undermining our allies
  • Bad views on China

Let’s give the man his due and ask the question: is he right?

We’ve been in Afghanistan (officially) since 2001, and Iraq since 2003, although we withdrew all forces in 2011 per our Status of Forces agreement, and were invited back again in 2014. The Iraqi parliament has been working since early 2020 to get US troops to leave. In sum total, we’ve been in Afghanistan for 19 years (and counting), and Iraq for 8 plus 6 years, total of 14 years, assuming we leave this year.

In comparison, World War Two was from 1939-1945 (6 years), Vietnam was 1964-1975 (if you pick Gulf of Tonkin as the start, 11 years), Korea was 1950-1953 (3 years). The longest of these, Vietnam, has been characterized as a “forever war” before, so its no surprise that to the average American, Iraq and Afghanistan look like forever wars.

But are they investments in peace and stability? I’ve heard them compared to our time in Germany and Japan shortly after World War 2. We’re still technically stationing military in both countries. In Germany, our occupation started in 1945, but by 1949 we had already formed West Germany, and by 1955, West Germany was a member of NATO, and our forces were no longer “occupying” Germany. Japan was similar, with our occupation ending in the Treaty of San Francisco in 1952. While we are still in those countries today, we aren’t there to occupy or provide security. In fact, we expected significant insurgency issues (such as Germany’s Werwolf program), yet they never materialized.

Contrast that to Afghanistan and Iraq, where our troops are providing significant combat support and basic policing. That’s a massive difference between the two, and not dissimilar to Vietnam, where we still had to provide basic protection against an insurgency because of the host government’s inability to perform it themselves.

So to recap, if you militarily stay in country and have to fight an insurgency inside the borders, it feels like a forever war. If you stay and the country does its own policing, it doesn’t feel like a forever war. Or, from a military perspective, if you can’t bring your family to your new duty station, it might feel like a war zone.

What about undermining our allies? President Trump has been on record saying a lot of mean things. The Foreign Policy article argues that he is “undermining the foundations of an international order manifestly advantageous to U.S. interests, reflecting a basic ignorance of the extent to which both robust alliances and international institutions provide vital strategic depth.”

So the question is, has Trump undermined our alliances? Is the international order we have now worse off than before? The United States has mutual defense pacts with NATO, Australia, New Zealand, The Phillipines, Japan, Republic of Korea and the Rio Treaty with a smattering of South American nations. It also supports Taiwan, but the treaty is a bit vague as to whether we would respond to a PRC invasion.

Here we’re probably batting 500 at best. President Trump has worked to expand relationships with India and Japan, and has maintained a normal course with Australia and New Zealand. Trump’s push to pull out of Korea isn’t new, we’ve asked the Koreans to own their defense before. His attempts at directly negotiating with North Korea put us on a much better path to peace…I never thought I’d see a sitting President shake the North Korean dictator’s hands ever. Our relationship with South America hasn’t expanded much militarily or economically, and I’d call that a negative. The economic treaties throughout the world are mixed. In some cases, it got better (USMCA), in other cases, it stagnated (TPP).

NATO is a mixed bag. On one hand, he pushed for and got much needed investment by NATO nations in their own defense, something that nearly every previous Secretary of Defense and President has been asking for years. On the other hand, Europe wanted an Iranian deal so they could get back to buying oil, while Trump wanted to stop Iranian aggression in the Middle East. There’s no resolution to that short of Iran dropping its nuclear weapons program (it didn’t) or Europe or the US dropping their arguments (neither side has). Trump’s response of neutralizing the Israeli issue, first with the UAE and Bahrain and (maybe) with Saudi Arabia is some out of the box thinking. I would argue that NATO is stronger now than before, but some of the individual countries like Germany aren’t happy with the US.

Overall, point to Mattis on this one. Negotiating hard makes sense, but it could have been done with some more finesse, and creating hard feelings isn’t worth it in many cases.

Mattis’ comments on China are odd, given his time as Secretary of Defense and his shift towards Great Power Competition. From the Foreign Affairs article:

“Crucially, the United States should not press countries to choose outright between the two powers,” they said. “A ‘with us or against us’ approach plays to China’s advantage because the economic prosperity of U.S. allies and partners hinges on strong trade and investment relationships with Beijing.”

So, we should work with China? I’d be all about it, and so was William Cohen, opening up US military relations with the PLA in 1999. How did that work for us? China continued to steal technology, threaten its neighbors, build fake islands in the South China Sea, bury US industry with practices illegal to the WTO, and in general act in ways completely at odds of the US. The only difference between Russia and China is that China is happy to pay for this influence. When they needed a port in Sri Lanka, the Chinese invested their own money and worked with Sri Lanka, right up to the point the Sri Lankans couldn’t pay back a loan. China is happy to flex its muscles on every deal it makes, from the one-sided Vatican recognition to its territorial dispute with India. Unlike most other countries, there is no good faith in any of the past deals China made.

The Cohen Group has been happy to look the other way. Yes, there is a ton of money in China. Plenty of Americans are making money in China. Our hope in 1999 was that as China grew, it would naturally democratize. That wasn’t a bad call back then. It’s a terrible call now. The Cohen Group continues to look past this however. It’s founder, William Cohen, not only sided against Trump in 2016, he also has personal connections with the late John McCain and was his best man after he dumped his first wife.

Jim Mattis joining a group of academics that are already naturally anti-Trump and pro-China, and then coming out with a pro-China statement, isn’t that surprising. If we continue to view China like we did in 1999, then yes, everything Trump is doing is a terrible idea. But the last 20 years have shown that Afghanistan is not Germany, NATO wasn’t ready for high-end conflict, and China’s One Party system is happy to crush the United States if we let it do so. If the Cohen Group is happy to make money from this world view, good for them, but don’t be surprised when it doesn’t jive with the average American.

This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency.

“Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed” Nate Silver hardest Hit.

Nate Silver of 538 is upset that betting sites still President Trump an over 10% chance of winning election 2020.

I thought my reply was pretty witty but I think Judge Patricia A. McCullough reply was better.

To say this is a game changer is an understatement, this may force this into the “mainstream” media and into general conversation and as I’ve said before the biggest danger for the left is that the fraud done in election 2020 is very easy for average people to understand and if it wasn’t easy enough before the folks at Doug Ross Journal have a handy dandy set of illustration to explain it to even the dimmest person on the left.

I wonder what the oddsmakers will have to say about that?

In Damavand’s Shadow

In the shadow of Damavand, Iran’s highest mountain peak, unidentified assassins attacked and killed top Iranian nuclear physicist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. A bomb hidden in an old truck exploded near Fakhrizadeh’s car as he travelled east in the town of Absard, 70 km east of Tehran. Several assassins then raked his car with machine guns. Iranian reports indicate he died at the hospital. Fakhrizadeh was an officer in the Revolutionary Guards and head of the Iranian Defense Ministry’s research division. Western intelligence agencies identify Fakhrizadeh as the (now former) head of the country’s secret nuclear weapons program.

Fakhrizadeh’s assassination comes nearly 11 months after a U.S. drone strike killed Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force and one of Iran’s top military leaders. The man called Iran’s Oppenheimer is the 6th Iranian nuclear scientist killed since 2010. In Tehran in August of this year, two Israeli operatives on a motorbike shot and killed Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, Al-Qaeda’s second-in-command who also used the nom de guerre Abu Muhammad al-Masri.

Pity the person considered Iran’s number two nuclear physicist, who just had his last night of peaceful sleep.

Iran has implicated Israel in the newest assassination, and Iranian leaders have vowed to strike back at those responsible. Of course, Israel isn’t the only party dreading an Iranian nuclear bomb, and relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia and the Gulf kingdoms have been at a nadir in recent years.

The timing of the assassination – weeks before Joe Biden apparently takes up residence in the White House – suggests that whoever did the deed perhaps saw their window of opportunity for action closing. Biden has already announced his intention to re-enter the nuclear accord President Obama “negotiated” with Iran, and to undo Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign against the Iranian regime.

One think-tanker even claimed that Biden himself was as much a target of the attack as the Iranian nuclear program.

But as former CIA career officer Norman Roule told PBS, an operation like this would take months to plan and prepare, so it could not be simply a response to the presidential election. Still, no one doubts the Trump Administration will look on the action differently than the Biden Administration would. Biden’s former Obama Administration colleagues John Brennan (CIA director) and Ben Rhodes (National Security Council) have already denounced the killing.

With its enemies killing its friends in the middle of its capital, the Iranian regime will have trouble resisting the urge for retribution. Inaction will appear weak to regime critics and supporters alike. Yet any sizable reaction by Iran could make it difficult for Biden to re-enter the nuclear accord, and might even bring the two powers into open confrontation. Watch for Iran to wait to attack until after Biden’s signature is affixed onto the nuclear accord – but probably before the ink has dried.

Active Dynasty Leagues All Pathetic and SD Jones (New Players Welcome)

Here is the state of the 2nd season of my Dynasty Baseball All Futility League (all teams lost 96 + games). Last season the 1970 White Sox defeated the 2012 Astros 4-0 to win the World Series. Teams available for those interested are listed.

Teams AL Division BWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1970 Milwaukee Brewers1911.633—–No
1970 Chicago White Sox1614.5333No
2002 Tampa Bay Devil Rays1518.4555 1/2Yes
2003 Detroit Tigers1119.3678 1/2No
Teams AL Division BWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1970 Kansas City Royals2013.606—–Yes
1970 Chicago White Sox1716.5153No
2002 Tampa Bay Devil Rays1419.4246Yes
1973 Texas Rangers1020.3388 1/2Yes
Teams AL Division CWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
2009 Cleveland Indians2013.633—–No
1957 Washington Senators1815.5452No
2019 Baltimore Orioles1815.5452No
1967 Kansas City A’s1221.3648 1/2No
Teams NL Division AWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1998 Montreal Expos2013.606—–No
2001 Pittsburgh Pirates1914.5761Yes
1998 Florida Marlins1617.4854Yes
2009 Washington Nationals1518.4558 Yes
Teams NL Division BWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
2015 Atlanta Braves1515.500—–No
2000 Philadelphia Phillies1617.4851/2Yes
2012 Houston Astros1317.4332 1/2Yes
2017 San Francisco Giants1320.3943 1/2No
Teams NL Division CWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1993 New York Mets1911.633—–No
1982 Cincinnati Reds1914.5761 1/2No
1993 San Diego Padres1617.4854 1/2Yes
1974 Chicago Cubs1317.4336No

I am also running an all average team league called the SD Jones memorial .500 teams league. All teams were no better than 2 games over .500 or no worse than 2 games under. Here are the current standings. Teams still available are listed. This is our initial season.

Teams AL EastWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1993 Boston63.667—–No
1967 Washington54.5561Yes
1973 New York (A)54.5561Yes
1957 Baltimore27.2224Yes
Teams AL CentralWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
2010 Detroit42.667—–Yes
1973 Minnesota33.5001 No
1998 Chicago (A)33.5001No
1975 Cleveland24.3332No
Teams AL WestWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
2017 Kansas City63.667—–Yea
2005 Toronto45.4442Yes
2010 Oakland45.4442No
2018 Los Angeles (A)45.4442Yes
Teams NL EastWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1967 Pittsburgh63.667—–No
2018 Washington54.5561 No
1975 New York (N)45.4442Yes
1957 Philadelphia36.3333Yes
Teams NL CentralWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1975 St. Louis63.667—–Yes
1996 Cincinnati54.5561 Yes
2000 Colorado54.5561Yes
1973 Houston27.2224Yes
Teams NL WestWinsLossesPCTGBAvailable
1975 San Francisco72.778—–Yes
1982 San Diego54.5562Yes
2007 Los Angeles (N)36.3333Yes
2012 Arizona36.3333Yes

Sometime in January we will be starting the 3rd season of our great teams league. Last season the 1955 Brookyn Dodgers repeated as world champs defeating the 2010 Texas Rangers 4 games to two. Can they three peat? And what team would YOU like to manage to try and stop them?

All perspective players welcome no matter what side of the political fence your on

How to Create an Electronic Prototype

Building an electronic prototype of a device is an extremely important and necessary part of electronic product development. Not only does this step let you see the potential of your product, but it also lets you spot any flaws with it.

Anyone can develop an electronic prototype of a product, regardless of their technical ability. It doesn’t matter if you’re a startup maker, an entrepreneur, a small business owner or an inventor; creating your own electronic prototype is possible. If you want to create an electronic prototype, but don’t know where to begin, then here are some pieces of advice to help you:

1.      Product Development Strategies

While most of us don’t have the necessary skills or knowledge we need to design and build an electronic prototype on our own, don’t let this put you off giving it a go. If you don’t have the necessary skills or technical knowledge to build it on your own, you could always consider asking for help or advice from a specialist. Here are some options available to you:

  • Develop the product yourself – very few people have all of the skills they need to develop an electronic product on their own. Even experienced engineers require help from specialists.
  • Bring in co-founders – ideally those who have technical knowledge
  • Outsource to a freelance engineer – freelance engineers will be able to fill in any gaps in your technical ability. Just remember that most products will need multiple engineers of different specialties and you will be responsible for managing the build.
  • Outsource to a development firm – these firms can be extremely expensive, but they will ensure your project is a success
  • Partner with an overseas manufacturer who already makes similar products – this can save money

2.      Develop Your Prototype

The development of the electronics inside your product can be broken down into the following steps:

  • The preliminary product design – this focuses on the cost, the production components, the performance, the features, the profit margin, the manufacturability, and the feasibility of the project
  • The schematic diagram – The schematic diagram is an extremely important document. It is a picture that shows the significant components of a system. This diagram shows how every component from the resistor to the microchip connects together.
  • The PCB layout – When the schematic diagram is complete you can design your PCB. This is the board that will connect all of your electrical components together.
  • Generate the BOM (Bill of Materials) – this should list every component you will need to use in your PCB. Most of the electrical parts you need to build a PCB can be found at Octopart.

3.      Build Your Prototype

As we mentioned above, you can do this yourself or you can ask a specialist to do it for you.

4.      Test Your Prototype

Once you’ve built your prototype, you will need to test and evaluate it. Check to see if there are any issues with the design or any parts that you’re not happy with. Now is the time to make necessary changes to the design.

5.      Get Your Product Certified

All electronic products require certification. If you plan on selling your product in the future, then you will need to make sure you have the right certification in place.  

Building an electronic prototype can open your eyes to the constraints or possibilities of your product. Prototyping is all about testing your ideas to see if they will work when fully complete. If you want to create an electronic prototype, then make sure you follow our advice above.

This Thanksgiving we should all take time to read the Mayflower Compact

In the minds of Americans the Mayflower Compact should rank right up there with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.  Unfortunately this document has been all but forgotten by us Americans.  I’m a history fanatic and I never read it before seeing it spread across conservative and libertarian websites which marked the 400th anniversary of the document’s drafting and signing on November 11th.

This Federalist Article describes in detail the importance of that document.  As you can see from this quote that free exercise  of religion was central to the drafting of the Mayflower Compact and the founding of Plymouth Plantation.

We think of the Pilgrims as our forebears, and it is legitimate to do so. But it’s important to remember that the Pilgrims, and the other Puritans who settled New England in the seventeenth century, did not imagine that they were establishing the United States of America. Nothing could have been further from their minds. They were doing something entirely different. They were about the business of establishing a haven where they could enjoy a pure and uncorrupted church.

Religious freedom was at the heart of the Mayflower compact because the pilgrims fled England because of religions persecution which led to a painful exile.

After 11 years of living in increasingly difficult exile in the city of Leiden in the Netherlands, they secured a land patent from the Virginia Company permitting them to establish an English colony where they could practice their faith freely. That was their dream. Across the ocean, they came aboard the Mayflower and made landfall at what is today Cape Cod — outside of the Virginia Company’s jurisdiction, and indeed, outside the jurisdiction of any known government.

Self governance was also at the very heart of Mayflower compact.

This would turn out to be one of the most primal constitutional moments in history, one that established the foundational principle of self-rule that would become the heartbeat of the American republic and its free institutions.

As you can see from this quote from the Text of the Mayflower Compact that Pilgrims were deeply religious individuals who were still loyal to the King of England.  You can also see that they were creating a colony that they would govern themselves.

In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereigne Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britaine, France, and Ireland king, defender of the faith, etc., having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honour of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northerne parts of Virginia, doe, by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politick,

This next quote is very reminiscent of the Preamble of the United States Constitution.  Self governance and equal protection under the law are spelled out quite clearly.

for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enacte, constitute, and frame such just and equall laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meete and convenient for the generall good of the Colonie unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.