Liberty's Outpost 2.0

Pursue excellence

2011-01-28T18:17:00.001-07:00

(APPLES AND ORANGES, POTS AND KETTLES: Thoughts from several friends)

People who know me and who have read my columns over the last decade know that I was not ever a fan of "compassionate conservative" George W. Bush, who had a lot more in common with old-line "hawkish" liberals (Henry Wallace and Zbigniew Brzezinski come to mind) than with any sort of real conservative. I did (and do) defend him against people who portray him as an idiot, stupid, or incompetent. He made a lot of mistakes, but he did not usually deserve the venom expended on him - the ad hominem attacks. But it meant that no error of his could or would go unreported and uncondemned by the mainstream media.

Now we have who one friend calls "the First Citizen," in office now for 24 months - at the mid-point of his first term. There are lots of reasons that I am not a fan of the present incumbent of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW. Race is not one of them - I've served under black (and hispanic, and women) commanders - any one of which would have made a better president, regardless of their politics, than the current First Citizen. It is not because he was born (or not) in Hawai'i - Robert Kyosaki is also a son of Hawai'i - and would be (is) a good leader). It is not even because he claims Chicago as his hometown - I am sure that there are many good people who live in Chicago, even if I've not met any personally. It is not even because he is a lawyer (or at least played one in a college - I understand he is not licensed): I know almost a handful of lawyers whom I like, respect, and trust. It is not because he is a disciple of that hateful and hating advocate of black liberation theology, Jeremiah Wright; I've supported people of a wide range of denominations and sects for political office - including those who claim none.

No, I am not a fan of the First Citizen for very specific reasons which have nothing to do with his races or color, his adopted culture or hometown or alma mater, his religion, or all these other things. I am not a fan - and was not a fan when he was just another senator running for president - because of his upbringing, his experience, and his political beliefs and policies. Today, I must add to that list, his actions in the White House. He had demonstrated an incredible lack of qualifications - more than just birthplace. He has demonstrated all the traits that are wrong in any leader. Or for that matter, any manager.

He is both arrogant and subservient - and always to the wrong person at the wrong time. His is both a die-hard and a compromiser, again always at the wrong time and wrong place. He displays a memorable lack of knowledge, even about subjects which are officially within his area of expertise, such as the Constitution. He lies. He is both greedy and addicted to conspicuous consumption. His ego exceeds that of any past president - and they are, by and large, an egotistical lot.

If you believe that I am being unfairly critical of the present occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, answer these questions:

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

If George W. Bush had ordered the bust of Winston Churchill, a gift years ago from the United Kingdom, shipped back to the United Kingdom with no explanation, would you have thought it rude and ill-mannered?

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes (and not because they were opposed to taxes), would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States , would you have said that he is clueless?

If George W. Bush would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in Texas, would you have thought he was a self important, conceded, egotistical jerk?

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had misspelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?

If George W. Bush's administration had approved Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

If George W Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had told the nation that Democrats would have to ride in the back seat in bipartisan efforts to fix the economy, would you have cheered him on?

If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken decades to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He did this all in under a year (don't get me started on 2010) -- but don't worry, you still have two more years to come up with an answer.

George W. Bush was not a good president - his "conservative" credentials were tarnished from his first year in office. He did some good things, and a lot of bad things... in fact, many people understand that most (if not all) of the mistakes that the Obama administration has made in this 24 months since Obama took office are really the fault of George W. Bush: He made sure to point that out in the recent State of the Union address, reminding us that this economic crisis began ten years ago: January 20, 2001.

As a friend wrote a few months ago: "Of course, ... It's all George Bush's fault.

"George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies the White House, is to blame for it all.

"He broke Obama's promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

"He broke Obama's promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

"He broke Obama's promise to end earmarks.

"He broke Obama's promise to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

"He broke Obama's promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

"He broke Obama's promise to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America 's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

"He broke Obama's promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

"He broke Obama's promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.

"He broke Obama's promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.

"He broke Obama's promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

"He broke Obama's promise to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter of last year [2009].

"Yes. it's all George Bush's fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending, failed Bush administration.

"If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel . North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government. ...

"If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

"All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault. ...

"Need more proof?

"You might recall that when Scott Brown won ... election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts , capturing 'the Ted Kennedy seat,' President Obama said that Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. and they wanted change. Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts ... was George Bush's fault. Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats.
It is all George Bush's fault.

"Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?"

Well, here it is, the first month of 2011, and now the pundits are telling us that the current occupant is still the front-runner in the election of 2012, and getting more popular all the time. Two well-delivered and well-written speeches and he is suddenly the best thing since Ronald Reagan... For some of us. For some of US. What now?

A tattle-tale society filled with panicked people

2011-01-28T16:50:00.003-07:00

A couple of friends shared this with me - I've left off their names because I don't want them associated with this site: they are in enough trouble already!

Report of armed man leads to lockdown at Wal-Mart:

Kirksville, Mo. — A report of an armed man acting erratically in the
Wal-Mart parking lot Wednesday led to the store being temporarily locked
down before Kirksville Police responded to and defused the situation
with no injuries.

According to Kirksville Police Chief Jim Hughes, a passerby stopped a
Kirksville Police officer and said they had seen an individual acting
erratically in a truck in the Wal-Mart parking lot shortly before 2:30
p.m. The passerby believed the individual had a gun to his head.

As readers already know, Wal-Mart has recently publicly teamed up with the US Department of Homeland Security to encourage their customers, associates, and building-dwellers to be on the lookout for terrorists and other evil scum.

Person A wondered if this was the first-fruits of that partnership.

Person B responded: Probably not - just a nosy parker walking by. But it might make Wal-Mart think twice about the wisdom of teaming up with DHS.

Reminds me of a whole bunch of people in XXXXX who reported to the cops that they saw a "young man walking down the sidewalk wearing a holster" (empty holster) within a block of a school - led to an afternoon's lockdown on the school and terrorizing of an entire neighborhood as they searched for this "dangerous person."

And that in turn reminds me of the silly "dependent wife" (using the term specifically as a putdown, instead of the now preferred "family member: spouse) in a Fort XXXXXX housing area who called, hysterically, to the Post Engineer's work order desk demanding that someone come down to her housing area and immediately get rid of the horrible snake what was out in the middle of the street before one of the wife's children, or some other child, went to play with it and got bitten and turned purple and died. The work order clerk tried to calm her, and said that she could just keep the children away from that part of the street for a few minutes and the snake would go ahead and slither across the street and disappear into the woods, and nothing would happen and no one needed to come down to deal with it. "But you don't understand!" the wife wailed. "The snake is DEAD. It won't go away!!!"

Today, our society has become such a web of snitches, informants, tattletales, and "dependent" people who can't and won't do anything for themselves that we are incredibly lucky that we don't just turn into Brave New World voluntarily. (Some would say we are doing so right now.) We convince ourselves that nothing - and everything - is our business. We see our neighbor's patio on fire and we don't go over there with our water house: we call 9-1-1. We see a kid spraying graffiti on a church building and we don't try and stop him; we wait until we get home and call 9-1-1. We don't like the fact that our neighbor hasn't mowed his lawn in a month and instead of going over to visit (and, heaven forbid, offer to help), we call the code enforcement office. The list can go on and on: we are now conditioned to let government do everything possible for us. But we then complain about taxes and how we get in trouble. What a society!

$50 Lesson

2010-12-23T16:03:00.000-07:00

The folks down the street came walking by a few days ago with their seven-year-old daughter and stopped to say 'Hi'.

During small talk chat I asked the little girl what she wanted to be when she grows up. She said she wanted to be President some day. Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there, so I asked her, 'If you were President what would be the first thing you would do? '

She replied, 'I'd give food and houses to all the homeless people.'

Her parents beamed with pride.

'Wow...what a worthy goal.' I told her, 'But you don't have to wait until you're President to do that. You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and sweep my yard, and I'll pay you $50. Then I'll take you over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house. '

She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, ' Why doesn't the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50? '

I said, 'Welcome to the Libertarian Party.'

Her parents are no longer speaking to me.

A Canadian View of President Obama - Answered!

2010-12-07T16:58:00.005-07:00

This was sent to me by a friend, and I just have to share it with everyone.

Edward

Anyone with an active e-mail correspondence periodically gets one of these: a letter forwarded by a friend from a friend from a friend... Often, the ones that come from outside the US are supporting one or another political view of events here in the US, and this one is no different. But sometimes, the forwarded document is so blatantly wrong that it demands a response. This is such a one. I've removed any names or references that could identify anyone in the chain, and then put my own response in italics after each paragraph or section.

Sometimes, it takes an astute outside observer to show people what they are doing to themselves. This was forwarded from a Canadian friend ...
I just received this last night from a dear friend. Why is it that the rest of the world can see what is happening in the US, but people here are so blind? I thought this was well worth sending on to all of you.
With love, XXXX

America - He's your President for Goodness Sake!
By William Thomas
Posted: Friday, October 1st, 2010

There was a time not so long ago when Americans, regardless of their political stripes, rallied round their president. Once elected, the man who won the White House was no longer viewed as a Republican or Democrat, but the President of the United States. The oath of office was taken, the wagons were circled around the country’s borders and it was America versus the rest of the world with the president of all the people at the helm.

Suddenly President Barack Obama, with the potential to become an exceptional president has become the glaring exception to that unwritten, patriotic rule.

How incredible that Mr. Thomas sees Mr. Obama "with the potential to become an exceptional president" - exceptional in what way? In his "preparation?" In his "past experience?" In his writings? In his management skills? In his military background?
Not only that, but exactly how is Mr. Obama "the glaring exception?"

Four days before President Obama’s inauguration, before he officially took charge of the American government, Rush Limbaugh boasted publicly that he hoped the president would fail. Of course, when the president fails the country flounders. Wishing harm upon your country in order to further your own narrow political views is selfish, sinister and a tad treasonous as well.

Clearly Mr. Thomas did not bother to listen to Limbaugh's actual words (readily available on-line in many places) or to Limbaugh's explanation of what he said (which has never changed since that January 16th, 2009 broadcast). Nor is it appropriate to call it "boasting." Limbaugh explained that the President-elect's campaign platform, his political appointments, his actions before inauguration (no other president in the history of the United States has EVER created an organization the size of the "Office of the President-Elect" (much less a seal for a podium with that boastful phrase) before he took office), and Mr. Obama's own writings made it clear that he intended to transform America into a new entity little resembling that America of the past, and for that reason he hoped that he failed. Mr. Williams seems to have bought the line of the likes of Ed Schulz and other far-left, transnational-progressives. As for "when the president fails the country flounders," I have to make two comments. First, the country was already floundering in January 2009, and had been for a year or more. Second, American history has continually demonstrated that the "failure" of a president has always in the past been easily overcome and the Union has continued: whether we are talking the first Harrison, the first Johnson, Grant, Wilson, Harding, Hoover, Nixon, Ford, or even Clinton. Even though Mr. Williams may not agree with Limbaugh's views, he should (and could have) surely recognized that in Limbaugh's own eyes, his political views ARE for the good (not harm) of the country - his "sinister" and "a tad treasonous" is just adding insult to injury.

Subsequently, during his State of the Union address, which is pretty much a pep rally for America, an unknown congressional representative from South Carolina, later identified as Joe Wilson, stopped the show when he called the President of the United States a liar. The president showed great restraint in ignoring this unprecedented insult and carried on with his speech. Speaker Nancy Pelosi was so stunned by the slur, she forgot to jump to her feet while clapping wildly, 30 or 40 times after that.

Sadly, Mr. Thomas understands neither the United States Constitution nor its customs nor the value we place on honesty. The "State of the Union" address is a MANDATORY Constitutional obligation of the President to report to the Congress. It is NOT a "pep rally" and it is NOT the Queen's Speech to Parliament, NOR is the President a monarch by grace of God. Would that more Congressmen had had the guts and honesty to stand up not just at this speech but many others! Of course, Mr. Williams has to insult Rep. Wilson, branding him as "unknown," as if ANY M.C. is "unknown." Of course, the last sentence of this paragraph makes me wonder if Mr. Williams is actually being incredibly sarcastic.

Last spring, President Obama took his wife Michelle to see a play in New York City and republicans attacked him over the cost of security for the excursion. The president can’t take his wife out to dinner and a show without being scrutinized by the political opposition? As history has proven, a president in a theatre without adequate security is a tragically bad idea.
Remember: “Apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?”

Once more, Mr. Thomas twists the comments for the sake of making his argument. The attack by the GOP (and others) was not about "security" costs but about the total cost of that little excursion. Abe did not take Mary to the play by having the government hire a train to and from NYC, and the regiment of troops that was used to protect him on the road. And as a result, Mr. Williams misses the entire point (maybe he is so much a Monarchist that he believes that Barack and Michelle need to be treated as if they WERE Elizabeth and Phillip), that Mr. Obama has acted more like Nero or Caligula or Louis XVI than the elected leader of a free and republican nation.

At some point, the treatment of President Obama went from offensive to ugly and then to downright dangerous.

Of course, this may have been more because of how Mr. Obama's treatment of the American people and his political opponents (whom as I recall he calls "enemies") went from disdainful and condescending to arrogant and overbearing and even dictatorial.

The health-care debate, which looked more like extreme fighting in a mud pit than a national dialogue, revealed a very vulgar side of America. President Obama’s face appeared on protest signs white-faced and blood-mouthed in a satanic clown image. In other tasteless portrayals, people who disagreed with his position distorted his face to look like Hitler complete with mustache and swastika.

Again, Mr. Thomas seems to forget the long tradition of American politics and political lampooning - and especially the fact that Mr. Obama's immediate predecessor was treated exactly the same way (of course, the "satanic clown" image was taken from Heath Ledger's protrayal of the Joker in a movie that came out in July 2008 - else portrayal of GWB would have used the Joker imagery far more than they have. Hitler? Actually, I think virtually EVERY American president since FDR has been called Hitler by someone at some time. When your policies and your attitudes bear some resemblance to National Socialism or its tactics or its cult of personality, this should be no surprise..

Odd, that burning the flag makes Americans crazy, but depicting the president as a clown and a maniacal fascist is accepted as part of the new rude America.

Distasteful as the GOP, the Tea Party activists, and many Libertarians doing this is to me, I have to again point out - it is not the FIRST president to be so treated, and if Mr. Thomas thinks we are rude now, he would go into shock if he had seen how Americans behaved during (to name just a few) the election contest of Jackson vs. Adams in 1828, Jackson vs. Clay in 1832, the four-way race in 1860, or the three-way race of Wilson, Taft, and Roosevelt in 1912. But Mr. Jackson apparently thinks that America should follow the Roman system of making our head of state and government into a deified god.

Maligning the image of the leader of the free world is one thing, putting the president’s life in peril is quite another. More than once, men with guns were videotaped at the health-care rallies where the president spoke. Again, history shows that letting men with guns get within range of a president has not served America well in the past.

Oh, please, Mr. Thomas, how foolish can you be? For every man who ever fired or attempted to fire a shot at a president of the United States, there have been literally HUNDREDS of thousands of men and women carrying firearms within range of a serving (or do you prefer "reigning," Mr. Williams) president. Indeed, the presence of peaceful free citizens bearing arms in defense of themselves and others actually probably makes the president safer. Your blue nose is showing, Mr. Williams; remember, Canadians were once free subjects of Her Majesty with a Englishman's traditional (and God-given) right of self-defense by bearing arms, but that was in the past.

And still the “birthers” are out there claiming Barack Obama was not born in the United States, although public documentation proves otherwise. Hawaii is definitely part of the United States, but the Panama Canal Zone where his electoral opponent Senator John McCain was born? Nobody’s sure.

I now see that not only is Mr. Thomas unfamiliar (or willing to ignore) even common basic law (law which we share with Canadian provinces), but he is willing to not just twist but ignore the truth. Whether or not Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii as he claims or not, what is a matter of public record is that HE has taken action, through various means, to prevent the release of this "public documentation" Mr. Williams refers to - while attempting to foist off a variety of other documentation which has been demonstrated to be meaningless. This is entirely Mr. Obama's fault - he could have completely undercut the "birthers" by simply releasing his REAL birth certificate or authorizing the State of Hawaii office to do. (Assuming, of course, that he WAS born where he and his handlers say he was.) As for Senator McCain and the Panama Canal Zone, I cannot believe that Mr. Williams does not know that the PCZ issue WAS raised even before Senator McCain won the nomination and that he DID release a real birth certificate issed by Gorgas Army General Hospital and that the courts have repeatedly determined that the PCZ was as much a part of the United States at McCain's birth as was the Territory of Hawaii, Territory of Alaska, or District of Columbia. [Indeed, MOREso - because the US not only bought the PCZ from Columbia AND from the new Republic of Panama, but they bought every square inch from a private landowner as well. The Congress didn't pay Maryland a dime for what is now the District of Columbia.]

Last month, a 44-year-old woman in Buffalo was quite taken by President Obama when she met him in a chicken wing restaurant called Duff’s. Did she say something about a pleasure and an honour to meet the man or utter encouraging words for the difficult job he is doing? No. Quote: “You’re a hottie with a smokin’ little body.”
Lady, that was the President of the United States you were addressing, not one of the Jonas Brothers! He’s your president for goodness sakes, not the guy driving the Zamboni at “Monster Trucks On Ice.” Maybe next it’ll be, “Take Your President To A Topless Bar Day.”

Well, Mr. Thomas, you really can't blame the entire nation - or even a large section of it - for a woman who is either a flat-out liar or has really, really bad taste. Her inappropriate words remain her responsibility, and perhaps to some degree blame can be laid at the feet of her parents and the popular (check-out stand) media. But she obviously assumed that the president would accept her "compliment" based on his own actions - his "beer summits" and his comments about various people (including comments made on popular cable shows) and the mere fact that he was at a place called "Duff's" in a town like Buffalo. (Not that New Yorkers are exactly polite, but Buffalo has the misfortune of being both in New York AND very, very close to Canada.)

In President Barack Obama, Americans have a charismatic leader with a good and honest heart. Unlike his predecessor, he’s a very intelligent leader. And unlike that president’s predecessor, he’s a highly moral man.

At this point, words fail me. Charismatic Mr. Obama is - he is an accomplished demagogue (at least when he has a teleprompter available). But his actions both before his term began and since that term began lends very strong evidence that his heart is neither good or honest. Volumes have been written about his lies - and not including his "misstatements." His mastery of Chicago politics, and his adherence to the political philosophy of progressivism, are strong arguments that it is a vile slander to call him "good." If a man is judged by his companions, his allies, and his supporters, this characterization is even more at odds with his real character: from ACORN and the SEIU to Raum Emmanual, Jesse Jackson, Wright, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi, he is known by the company he keeps. As for whether he is more intelligent than George W. Bush, well, we don't really know, do we? Bush's scholastic and military records we can see and review; Mr. Obama has made sure that his school and college records are sealed, and of course, he HAS no military records. As for whether he is more "moral" than William Jefferson Clinton - well, I shall leave that to the Lord to decide, but I have my suspicions.

In President Obama, Americans have the real deal, the whole package and a leader that citizens of almost every country around the world look to with great envy. Given the opportunity, Canadians would trade our leader, hell, most of our leaders for Obama in a heartbeat.

Oh please, BE MY GUEST. I've known a few Canadian leaders, and I think I'd even be willing to accept Pierre Elliott Trudeau, much less a McDonald or a Harper. I've certainly not seen (at least not since the election of 2008) the mass appeal of Mr. Obama in the UK (which he has insulted repeatedly), Germany, France, and certainly not Korea, China or Japan. Indonesia does seem to like him, but then, he was one of them for a while; Kenya seems to really take after him - for the same reason, I guess. The fact that Canadians (according to Mr. Thomas - many of my friends in Canada would not agree) would trade for him demonstrates more of the shortcomings of the Canadian electorate (and political leadership) than the merits of Mr. Obama.

What America has in Obama is a head of state with vitality and insight and youth. Think about it, Barack Obama is a young Nelson Mandela. Mandela was the face of change and charity for all of Africa but he was too old to make it happen. The great things Obama might do for America and the world could go on for decades after he’s out of office.

Mandela is such a WONDERFUL role-model, isn't he? (Sarcasm intended.) Yes, Mr. Obama has youth, and he has physical vitality: his political vitality is just a wee bit enervated these days. As to insight, well, as Chicago politicians go, yes, he has insight. As far as REAL insight into anything: government, politics (outside Chicago and Democratic backrooms), the Constitution, economics, freedom, liberty, military affairs, foreign affairs, or how to treat people... I guess I'm from Missouri, Mr. Williams: Show me. As for his continuing "value" for decades after his out of office - well, we've learned from Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton just how painful THAT is; I don't think even many of Mr. Obama's supporters are looking forward to that.

America, you know not what you have.

Oh if that were only the case. But thanks to both his own machine, the Democratic Party, talk shows, the daily news, and bloggers, we know all too well what we have. Like I said, "be my guest." I'm sure that Ottawa will soon be trying to give him away to Bermuda or Jamaica or Kenya or someplace...

The man is being challenged unfairly, characterized with vulgarity and treated with the kind of deep disrespect to which no previous president was subjected. It’s like the day after electing the first black man to be president, thereby electrifying the world with hope and joy, Americans sobered up and decided the bad old days were better.

I agree, Mr. Thomas, that some of the challenges and characterizations are unfair, since Mr. Obama is reaping the lashing back of eight years of progressive/liberal and Democratic attacks on his predecessor: his opponents figure that they can use the same tactics used against one of their people. But you obviously were in isolation between 2001 and 2009 if you do not believe that previous presidents have never received this kind of treatment. To say nothing of your lack of knowledge of such presidents as Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, and Richard Nixon.

President Obama may fail but it will not be a Richard Nixon default fraught with larceny and lies. President Obama, given a fair chance, will surely succeed but his triumph will never come with a Bill Clinton caveat – “if only he’d got control of that zipper.”

No, at least for now, what Mr. Obama and his minions are stealing is being done "in accordance with the law" - however immoral their actions might be. But the lie part is already there - a long list of usurpations and abuses is tied with outright lying and shading of the truth that resembles graffiti on a railroad car more than it does the tones on a pencil sketch or painting. And given the obvious size of Mr. Obama's ego, I'd not think you wise to place any bets on him NOT following in Clinton's steps.

Please. Give the man a fair, fighting chance. This incivility toward the leader who won over Americans and gave hope to billions of people around the world that their lives could be enhanced by his example, just naturally has to stop.

Mr. Thomas, it is clear that we are fighting Mr. Obama for the heart, the soul, and the future of America and our liberties; when the stakes are that high, to paraphrase that great American Bill Cosby, "we ain't gonna play fair, and we ain't gonna give 'em a fighting chance. You Brits wear red jackets and march in straight lines and wear shiny brass and fire in volleys; we'uns will wear buckskin and hide behind trees and sneak around in the dark and bushwack you with every dirty trick we'un can think of. So there." Ditto for a transnational progressive elitist. The hope of the billions of people of the world rests in liberty and freedom which leads to peace and prosperity and a future worth living in. And America won't help reach for that hope if Mr. Obama continues to pretend to be the leader of this nation and of the free world. If they follow HIS example, may the Lord have pity on them in their chains and poverty.

Believe me, when Americans drive by the White House and see a sign on the lawn that reads: “No shirt. No shoes. No service,” they’ll realize this new national rudeness has gone way, way too far.

I won't even be able to respond to this last sentence, because you just aren't making sense, Mr. Thomas. But then, looking back at your writing, you didn't really make that much sense from the start. I am glad that so many Canadians don't agree with you.

OCTOBER 2010 SENIOR LIVING MAGAZINE
VANCOUVER & LOWER MAINLAND

I do applaud Mr. William Thomas' willingness to sign his name to this strange little article. I assume, though, that there are enough William Thomases in the BC phonebook to give him that luxury. But don't worry, here in the United States we still have (for now) and still honor (for now) free speech. I understand you used to have that in Canada, too, another of those legacies of being Englishmen.

Here ends my friend's commentary. I have deleted his name and address, just as he did for his correspondents, because I know how much trouble he is in already and don't want him to get into more for speaking the truth about this American President and refuting the claims of this British Columbian writer.

MADD's Addictive Behavior - The Solution!

2010-12-06T15:49:00.000-07:00

MADD for more than 25 years has demanded and received the passage of numerous draconian laws and a tyrannical enforcement of those same laws; today, a growing movement challenges their basic claims and their accomplishments, pointing out that not only did the harsh laws NOT solve the problems of drunk-driving deaths, but has actually aggravated other problems in society.

But if we get rid of the MADD solution which is no solution, what can we do about drunk driving, about the thousands killed and tens of thousands injured, many maimed, by alcohol abuse?

The libertarian solution is to hold parents responsible for their children, which today is defined as anyone under 18; and to hold anyone who is an "adult" responsible for the RESULTS of their actions as well as their actions.

While this might be done through various government actions (even in a minarchist society), history shows that it is best done through private, voluntary, society-wide actions. Indeed, the one good thing that MADD has done is to create a general condition in society that drinking and driving while intoxicated is wrong and that those who do so are shunned and punished voluntarily by their friends, families, and neighbors. It is a solution which has worked well in many other nations, and even in many elements of society and localities in the United States: consider Utah, tee-total Baptist and Christian communities, and indeed, many colleges. For these situations, the draconian federally-mandated laws about underage drinking often do serve only to weaken the society's own systems.

Failing that solution (which many will call utopian), there are many other alternatives to the current age-based strictures. Not all are libertarian, by any means, but offer advantages over the MADD-addictive behavior we now suffer.

One of the reason for high death rates in many areas in the pre-21 law era was the irresponsible behavior of those who lived near borders of states with lower drinking ages. For example, high death rates from alcohol-related accidents were a given in the 1970s and 1980s on US-85 between Greeley, Colorado (home of University of Northern Colorado) and Cheyenne, Wyoming; and US-287 between Fort Collins (home of Colorado State University) and Laramie, Wyoming (home of University of Wyoming). Wyoming was an 18-state, and Colorado a 21-state. It was NOT UW students or Air Force personnel from Cheyenne that were dying on those roads: it was 18-20 year-old Colorado college students who were going to Wyoming, getting drunk, and then driving 50-80 miles home that were killing and getting killed. Same thing in border college towns in South Dakota (next to Wyoming) and Kansas (next to Missouri). College students weren't being, and aren't being, held responsible for their actions.

I seriously doubt that fewer CSU and UNC students are drinking today (and drinking underage) - they are just doing it in their home town, instead of playing law games and doing it "legally" in another state. And so they are less likely to be driving, and not having to drive as far, while plastered. But they are, as the college presidents point out, growing used to ignoring, indeed scorning, the law and the breaking of the law just adds to the enticement of rebellion.

One size does NOT fit all - whether that size is measured in years of age or percentage of alcohol in the blood.

One (admittedly governmentally-based) solution is to allow only "responsible citizens" to drink. How do you define responsibility? It could be based on very easily measurable standards, like a high school diploma and a responsible job, degree from college, or completion of a first tour of duty in the military; or by more exact and not so easily determined standards, like supporting yourself withOUT government or parental grants and loans; or demonstrating maturity in some other way. (Those not demonstrating responsibility and competence might get "driving permits" which prohibit their driving during certain times of day, or which require additional safeguards like on-board testing of reflexes or breath.) But that will only work IF people are held accountable for their actions. If they demonstrate that despite their degree or their duty or their income-earning ability that they are NOT responsible, then they need to be treated accordingly: if they lose their right to drive, so too should their right to vote, their right to sign contracts, indeed, their right to be an adult, be removed.

The only real justification for prisons (as compared to restorative justice - paying back what is owed) is the same as for capital punishment: to protect society from someone who has demonstrated that they cannot be trusted to not harm others. No, I am not advocating prison for drunk drivers; but I am saying that instead of treating all 18-20 year olds as criminals and the lowest dregs of society, let us treat ALL abusers of alcohol as children who must be prevented from harming themselves and the rest of us.

This of course has to be tied into an accurate identification of what constitutes "impaired" and "under the influence." People ARE NOT THE SAME. One person may be dead drunk at 0.12 but another at 0.15; one may have their reflexes and judgment seriously impaired at 0.08, another at 0.12, but a third at 0.06. But tests for content (breath or blood) are simple and mandated. What is needed is a test of results: a modern day version of walking the line and other sobriety checks. Frankly, some people couldn't pass a proper range of tests demonstrating they are capable of handling an automobile at high speeds if they were stone-cold sober since Nixon resigned - and shouldn't be allowed to drive any more than the woman who blew 0.41.

Whatever is done, we have to end once and for all the idea that government - whether "guided by" MADD or not - is the solution to every problem.

Pearl Harbor 1941 - Lessons Learned

2010-12-05T23:05:00.001-07:00

There are lessons to be learned from Pearl Harbor, 69 years later.

The North County (San Diego) Times published the usual “Pearl Harbor Day” piece this year for the 69th Anniversary of the attack that began WW2 for most Americans.

There are only nine members of the Survivor’s Association in North County left, and most of them spoke to the reporter. Here is some of what they said:

Walsh said, he still considers it an important duty to speak to schoolchildren, telling them about that day, its consequences and what lessons it holds for current and future generations.
"Particularly the high school kids," he added. "Half of them don't even know where the hell Pearl Harbor is ---- that was really startling."
He was referring to a visit several years ago to an Escondido high school, where he was compelled to find a globe to point out the vast span of the war in the Pacific.

Another survivor:

Michelle Leslie's daughter, Lauren, wanted to know: "Is there anything our generation could learn from your generation?"
"Always be prepared, always be on the lookout," answered Greenhouse, who was stationed at nearby Marine Corps Air Station Ewa on Oahu at the time of the attack. "Get your training today, because it will sure help in the future. We were caught by surprise; the main thing is, be prepared for whatever happens."

Today, there are still lessons, great and important lessons, to be learned from Pearl Harbor. Let us ignore the events and the duplicity and conspiracies which preceded it, and which led to it. Let us ignore the propaganda that demonizes one or both sides, the arguments about legality and provocation, and all the rest. Let us even ignore the consequences of the nearly four years of the Great Pacific War which followed.

The lessons we need to learn, in the United States and elsewhere, from that Sunday attack on a huge and unprepared naval base in the center of the Pacific, are the same lessons that need to be learned from battles and events around the world, from the Rape of Nanking to the Soviet-Russian attack on Poland to the invasion of the Falklands to the invasion of Kuwait to bloody Troubles of Northern Ireland and the subways of Madrid.

First, we forget our history, or at least most of us do. Those who remember are both blessed and cursed: blessed because they can see that the same things can and will happen again, and perhaps they can take some action, however small, to reduce the possibility that when these things happen again, that the outcome will be different. But the failure of so many to take any action will haunt them all their lives. Those who forget (or never learned) the history of peoples and nations and wars and technology, are to be pitied indeed: they will suffer more when those events are repeated, and they will drag millions with them into suffering and cruelty and untimely death and all the rest of the evils that man can do to other men. Especially in 2010, there are billions of people – especially in the West and China – who believe that we are in some bizarre era of “post-history” – that the wars and attacks and invasions and diseases and atrocities of the past will never repeat themselves. They are doomed, for that has not been the case for six thousand years, and man has not changed in the last 60 or 50 or 40 years.

Second, Greenhouse’s words are not “trite” or “pro forma” or “hackneyed.” The lesson, for young and old, for today and tomorrow – the lesson that too many will not learn, and that those who learn seem to forget – is to “be prepared, be on the lookout, and get your training now.” Wise words from a very old man: words that 99% of humanity ignore time and again, and ignore to their peril.

Be prepared: enemies change, but the dangers of tyranny, of the power mongers, the sociopaths and psychopaths, the liars and perveyors of evil. Slightly changed perhaps, but still present. The enemies are both internal and external to a nation: as they were in 1941, so they will be in 2011. The tactics and strategies will given new names or scents or colors, but still will be used: lies and promises, appeals to fear and patriotism and always, ALWAYS, twisting of good into evil. And people will still bleed, still scream, and still die. Prepare for the worst, and enjoy anything better. As part of being prepared, set your goals and your objectives. Is it security or liberty, long life or health or family? Events should not set aside your goals as a free man or woman, IF you are prepared.

Be on the lookout: eternal vigilance is necessary, whomever the enemy, whatever the cause, whatever the methods of attack and defense. Do not take first appearances, or “common knowledge” for the truth. Do not listen to any one side of anything. Question everything – especially authority. Understand that what appears to be a solution to one problem will cause other problems, and that opportunity exists for both the good and the evil. Above all, do not allow yourself to be blinded by wishes or ‘normalcy.’

Get your training now. Being prepared and being alert is nothing that you simply happen to do. Americans in the 1910s did not train for the manmade catastrophe of the Great War; Americans of the 1920s did not train for the Great Depression, and those of the 1930s did not train for the Second World War. Americans of the 1990s did not train for the events of the 2000s. Most did not, at least. The list of training to get is endless, but the objectives and the plan must be clear and set forth. Train to survive, with and without technology. Train to raise a family (which includes educating them and helping them survive). Train to create a community, and to identify the threats and dangers faced by a community and OF a community. Train to defend yourselves, your family, and your community against those threats and dangers. And above all, train yourself to do what is necessary so that you are prepared to reach your goals and accomplish your objectives. Such training is physical, economic, academic, political, and spiritual. Without it, no attempt to be prepared or be on the lookout will succeed.

And you will join the 99% of humanity who cannot and will not learn from history, including Pearl Harbor.

MADD's Addictive Behavior - The Problem

2010-12-04T21:38:00.006-07:00

MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) and its associated organizations (Students... Teachers... etc.) is one of the most prominent and active of the Nanny State's "non-governmental organization" (NGO) allies in remaking American society. Organized as an advocacy and lobbying group, they have more in common with ACORN than virtually any of their members or leaders is willing to admit, and have totally skewed the national scene regarding highway safety.

The referenced article (click on the headline) is a brief look from a politico-religious perspective (and one somewhat right-libertarian) on a growing movement to FIGHT MADD, and to repeal or at least revise the current nationwide ban on drinking under the age of 21.

The legal ban (hardly an absolute ban) on drinking for almost 1/4 of our nation's population is a product of the era of the end of federalism. It is an example of the nanny-state at its worst, and of the triumph of emotion and hype over reason. Passed in 1984 and signed into law by President Reagan in a betrayal of his principles of federalism, it was the product of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, (http://www.madd.org/About-us/About-us/History.aspx) an organization which is the epitome of liberal AND conservative hypocrisy.

Although it was claimed (then and now) that forcing all states to treat thousands of its adult citizens as second-class would "end" the drunk driving menace on American highways, the evidence of the last two+ decades has shown otherwise. MADD claimed (and still does) that it was THE solution to drunk-driving fatalities in this continent, a steady stream of further attempts to solve the problem which supposedly has already been solved is impressive, and sickening: the zero-tolerance laws, the 0.08 blood-alcohol laws, and more. All done in violation of the Constitution and through a very nasty (and sadly effective) mechanism: withholding of highway user trust fund money from the states until they lick the boots of the Congress that supposedly works for them - a form of extortion, since the money being withheld was stolen from the people of the States to begin with.

Like anti-gun activists who push for "just one more" law - indeed, like the drunk who wants "just one more" for the road, MADD and their ilk are addicted to lobbying and laws, proven by the way that they continue to push for more and more laws, more and more punishment, more and more "enforcement" - claiming each time that THIS will once and for all solve the problem.

Like the gun-haters and the alcoholic, MADD is ever willing to lie to themselves and others to get their way. Even in the early 1980s, the majority of DUI deaths were not caused by the 18-20 year olds who have been turned into plebes by this law; far more were the result of older (if not "more mature") chronic drinkers who often are multiple offenders. But to read MADD's own propaganda you would think it is the 18-20 age group - until you study their own statistics very closely. (After all, old alcoholics and drunks make poor "poster children.")

In the same way, in one place they claim that 30,000 lives have been saved "each year" by the 21-law. But when you look at the chart on their home page (use "print screen" to look at it for more than 10 seconds), you find that almost 10,000 of the 30,000 per year drop that they claim happened BEFORE the 1984 law was passed. In fact, in 1986, drunk-driving deaths were back at pre-law levels. And it took a decade (and apparently a lot more laws) for the "30,000" drop to be reached. In fact, since about 1992, the number of drunk-driving fatalities has basically been frozen at just about 20,000 per year. Nor can they deny that (again, by their own claim) there are still 500,000 alcohol-related injuries on highways each year: some "final solution." Worse, they exaggerate about other highway fatalities increasing (claiming a 34% rise in 25 years) by ignoring the billions of miles more we drive each year, and the tens of millions more motorists on the roads in 2007 as compared to 1982. And they totally ignore the last half-decade of steadily dropping fatalities, in both real numbers and per miles driven.

The college presidents (135 of them as of December 2010) have some strong points (http://www.amethystinitiative.org/):

A culture of dangerous, clandestine “binge-drinking”—often conducted off-campus—has developed.
Alcohol education that mandates abstinence as the only legal option has not resulted in significant constructive behavioral change among our students.
Adults under 21 are deemed capable of voting, signing contracts, serving on juries and enlisting in the military, but are told they are not mature enough to have a beer.
By choosing to use fake IDs, students make ethical compromises that erode respect for the law.

Obviously, there are many pros and cons, but they are not calling for an outright change - merely an informed debate. MADD and the usual knee-jerk liberals who believe that NO one can control themselves, don't want to talk about it - except to slander and revile the people suggesting we talk about it.

Both sides are, to a degree, wrong. It is NOT government's place, and especially not the FEDERAL government's place, to regulate alcohol sales, except to prohibit states from collecting tariffs or duties on imports and exports from other states, as provided by the Constitution and the "Commerce Clause" when properly understood and applied. It is ESPECIALLY not government's place to tell people how to raise their children, and to take action which takes away the responsibilities of parents for their children.

In the next part, I’ll look at the solution to the problem.

Armed People are Polite People

2010-12-02T21:16:00.004-07:00

"No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion."
-- James Burgh (1714-1775) was an English Whig politician
Source: "Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses" (London, 1774-1775)
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/James.Burgh.Quote.E94F
A "kingdom" of course, means a nation, an "earthly kingdom." That kingdom may be part of a larger nation, and therefore a community, a neighborhood, a rural area, or a town, county or region.
History shows us that if only warriors (whose reason for existence is to defend the tribe, the vill, or whatever) are armed, their dedication to defense against external threats soon takes second place to bullying the very people that they supposedly are defending. As Burgh says, the unarmed man (or woman) "lives... at discretion." The discretion of the bully. This starts out as a kind of "parental" toleration which becomes contempt and disdain for the unarmed person - who is now somewhat "lower caste," and goes from there.

"A people armed and free forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition and is a bulwark for the nation against foreign invasion and domestic oppression."
-- James Madison
(1751-1836), Father of the Constitution for the USA, 4th US President
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/James.Madison.Quote.3944
Notice that Madison speaks of both internal and external threats. The two are often (but not always) related. Foreign invasion is often triggered by the actions of the same government which is oppressing its people domestically: either because they are greedy and seek more power and more wealth that their own subjects can provide, or because they are willing to seek foreign adventures to distract their subjects from their condition.

But when we consider "domestic oppression" we need to remember that it is not just government that is a source of such oppression: it can be bandits and outlaws (as was often the case in England in the Middle Ages and in the United States in such places as "Bleeding Kansas" of the 1850s and strife-torn Missouri in the 1860s and the vicious gangs of pre-vigilante San Francisco and the mining camps of the 1850s), it can be landowners (such as some of the cattle ranchers of which Louis L'Amour writes) or corporations such as the railroad companies in Texas or the mining companies of Colorado in the 1910s.

Even the most vicious and nasty of thugs - whether hired guns or the owners or the foreman - tend to back down and be much more polite when the people they face are armed and able and ready to defend themselves.

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States."
-- Noah Webster
(1758-1843) American patriot and scholar, author of the 1806 edition of the dictionary that bears his name, the first dictionary of American English usage.
Defined the militia similarly as "the effective part of the people at large."
Source: An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, Philadelphia, 1787
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Noah.Webster.Quote.5114
Sadly, this has changed from 1787 to 2010: the Federal Government found pretense to raise a massive band - bands - of "regular troops" - not so much the Regular Army, Army Reserves, and National Guard (which are concerned more with external duties - foreign occupation) but the massive numbers of police agencies and police officers of all types from the small local town forces to the oversized (and heavily armed) urban police forces and sheriffs' offices to the massive State Police and dozens of Federal "law-enforcement" agencies and branches of agencies which are an internal occupation force: THIS is the modern standing army which has taken away liberty.

At the same time, the disarming of American citizens NOT in one of these agencies has proceeded apace: more and more types of weapons considered "military" or (even worse) "law enforcement" in nature have been taken out of the hand of civilians on a variety of pretexts. Reduced to hunting weapons and semi-automatic weapons of small caliber and small capacity, without modern technology such as silencers and night-vision-scopes and specialized rounds, this makes possible the domination of the modern standing army.

And with this disarmament and rise of the standing army of police, the contempt and disdain for the civilian - relatively if not totally disarmed - grows more evident with each passing year. Witness the attitude of the TSA - perhaps not EVERY TSO, but certainly many including supervisors right up to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the White House. Witness the attitude and the evidence of corruption, of concealment of lawbreaking, and rejection of civilian control on anything but a pro forma basis of too many metropolitan and even state forces. As in Europe and Latin America in the past, the uniformed (and plain-clothed) police see no more need for true politeness: the words "sir" and "ma'am" in the mouths of too many police officers is nothing but rote mouthings. When spoken by a man or woman in uniform, one hand on the belt near their pistol, the other hand out for "papers" or on the key of a radio microphone connecting to back-up, the words are meaningless.

In a truly free society, politeness is a necessity because an offended person need not look to a "protector" for succor or assistance - the offended person is armed and capable of responding appropriately to the offense, regardless of age or size or sex or physical condition.

Stupidity rampant in Arizona

2010-11-27T11:18:00.003-07:00

This was posted by a friend to a website in response to the article cited. While his rhetoric is a bit overblown, I think he still makes some great points. - Edward

Arizona: State Senator Proposes New Militia [sic]
http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2010/11/24/harper-proposes-state-sanctioned-militia-to-patrol-border/
Arizona Capitol Times
Sen. Jack Harper, a Republican from Surprise, said he plans to introduce legislation next year that would create a government-sanctioned militia that would be allowed to patrol the border to observe illegal activity and report it to enforcement authorities. Under Harper’s plan, the civilian force would be under the supervision of the Arizona National Guard. Its members would be allowed to carry weapons for self defense. Volunteers would need a fingerprint clearance card or undergo a background check to qualify... The proposal is yet another example of Arizona’s attempt to take matters into its own hands, which arose from a widely shared belief among the state’s residents and lawmakers that the federal government has failed in its job to secure the border. But the idea of deploying a state-sponsored militia on the U.S.-Mexico border raises red flags for some legal scholars. Paul Bender, a professor of constitutional law at Arizona State University, said a civilian militia would not be allowed to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border because that authority is reserved for the federal government. Any direct action by the state or a militia to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border may violate the U.S. Constitution, he said...
Arizona Border Patrol by the numbers: National Guard deployment along the U.S.-Mexico border: 559 in Arizona; 284 in Texas; 260 in California; 82 in New Mexico[.] Estimated cost of National Guard deployment for a year: $135 million, which will be shared by U.S.[.]
Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Department of Defense Border Patrol troops along the Southwest border: 17,500[.]
— Source: National Guard Bureau

Commentary

Where to begin? With this many stupid people out wandering around, I’m afraid to even drive through Arizona, much less get out of my car there. Harper may have thought about this a lot, but a scholar - especially a MILITARY scholar, he ain’t. First, militia ARE military when they are called up by ANYONE: local sheriff, state, or federal. They aren’t “civilians” any more. Second, there is no such thing as a “state-sponsored [or “government-sanctioned”] militia” - the state would be activating a PART of the militia under state control. Harper is an idiot, who can’t write a law: he probably can’t READ one, either, and I wonder if he could write directions on how to go home.

Now, on to the next idiot, this “constitutional scholar” at ASU, Bender, who says: “a civilian militia would not be allowed to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border because that authority is reserved for the federal government. Any direct action by the state or a militia to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border may violate the U.S. Constitution.” Let me say it again: Bender is an IDIOT. The Constitution gives Congress authority to do exactly TWO things related to immigration IF THAT. Article 1 Section 8 gives Congress power: “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” and Section 9 of the same article gives Congress one other power: “The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.” This did NOT prohibit many states from prohibiting the migration or importation of slaves before that time - or AFTER. It would presumably apply to ANY other persons, as indeed states like California determined that people from certain oriental countries could not migrate to the state, and many states prohibited migration by American Indians.

Now, some people claim that another part of Section 8 gives Congress power over immigration: “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;” This clause, the Commerce Clause, is perhaps THE most abused clause of the Constitution, and is used to justify almost anything. But logically, it does not work: if immigration (actually, migration - emigration AND immigration) is “commerce” then Congress would be able to enact and enforce laws regulating the movement of people across STATE lines as well. And so far, at least (giving no one ANY ideas), they haven’t and can’t do that. The closest they have come was the idea of federal law making it a crime to drag women and minors across state lines for “immoral purposes” - but since the courts have determined that there ARE no immoral purposes any more, that law is gutted. AND IT DOES NOT PROHIBIT STATES FROM ENACTING AND ENFORCING THEIR OWN LAWS. For decades, northern states, smug in their hypocrisy, prohibited slaves from being imported into NY, MA, PA, etc. even when it was still illegal for the FedGov to prohibit importation. States can STILL ban importation of certain fruit from other states, based on health and agricultural issues.

However stupid Arizona’s idea may be, it just is NOT “unconstitutional.” And both Harper and Bender are IDIOTS. There are a few more idiots quoted, but let me move to the end of the article, written by the IDIOTS who call themselves the staff (newsroom and editorial, no doubt) of the Arizona Capitol Times. Two things, and I’m going to drop it: First, the Border Patrol is NOT a part of the “Department of Defense.” It probably SHOULD BE - because there is no authority for anyone OTHER than military troops to be used to defend the country, but it isn’t. No, it is part of that bureaucratic rathole for money called DHS. Second, Border Patrol have “CIVILIANS” and not “troops.” There may be 17,500 “sworn Border Patrol civilian officers” along the SW Border, but everyone tells us that COPS are NOT soldiers. If Border Patrol “sworn officers” are soldiers, then so is EVERY federal “sworn officer” whether they work for the Federal Protective Service or the FBI or the Secret Service or the EPA or the Park Service; and so likely is every state and local police officer, right down to that parking-meter maid and the local dog-catcher. But the “fine newspapermen” (and women) at the ACT are too STUPID to know any different: they are IDIOTS. Of course, if they weren’t so stupid, they would point out that Harper and Bender and the rest ARE stupid.

"I won't quit."

2010-11-25T19:13:00.002-07:00

Ah, yes, we WERE warned. At the one-year anniversary of the First Citizen's accession (or is it ascension?) to power, Mr. Obama told us that he won't quit. And it is clear that he has not, as we pass the 22-month anniversary.

Others have commented on his arrogant stance, his egotism, his concentration on himself and not the Union, his insults and commands, all contained within the incredibly long and stirring speech he made back in January of this year; the same kind of speech we've heard (or at least some of us) from Sgnr. Mussolini, Herr Hitler, Sr. Franco, Sr. Peron, Gospodin Lenin, and Gospodin Stalin. And through the rest of the year, including the mid-term elections, he said the same thing over and over again.

But I want to concentrate on what this promise means to my nation, and to my Union. What does this mean to Wyoming, to Montana or my original homeland of Texas? What does this mean to myself, my children, the rest of my family, my friends, my neighbors, my clients, and the rest of the American people and the people of the world?

It appears that "not quitting" has included:

- Not quitting spending money -another 1.5 trillion on top of the FY2010 budget was planned for FY2011, and so far, as we pass the midpoint of the first quarter, the spending is on track.
- Not quitting borrowing money - as the spending gallops away, the national debt is past $11 trillion and climbing, while more accounting games are played with the Fed's Quantitative Easing 2.0, and more to follow.
- Not quitting printing money - banks and others will continue to "create" more FRNs, either electronic or paper, and inflate the dollar still more.
- Not quit treating more and more Americans as enemies of the state: not just the new TSA procedures (the scanners and patdowns and arrests), but treating soldiers and ex-soldiers, tea-party movement members, conservatives, even some cops like dirt, and worse.
- Practicing reverse racial profiling: black extremists get additional "Get-out-of-jail" cards even after they AGAIN try to intimidate voters; Muslim women are promised "special consideration" by TSA; more and more services are provided for Spanish-speaking clients of government; and more.
- Wasting more and more money - Obama is the most-traveled president in US history, flying in an aircraft that costs nearly $200,000 PER HOUR to fly, and taking hordes of syncophants, including hairdressers and basketball players around the world.
- Continuing to demean US allies like the UK, ROK, and Germany, while sucking up big-time to Arabs and Chinese.
- Enslaving us more and more through evil actions like the ObamaCare edicts, even to the extent of ignoring Congress when it doesn't do what he wants, like taxing carbon emissions.

How much longer can and will this go on? Americans have become extremely long-suffering: we put up with 8 years of Bill Clinton and center-left "socialism lite" and then with 8 years of George W's "compassionate conservative" brand of socialism and a growing police state; are we going to put up with four or eight years of even more blatant socialism and Gestapo-type tyranny? Are we so desperate for life and security and a nanny to tuck us in at night that we give up everything that makes us Americans? Forbid it, Almighty Lord!

"Let this be our last Thanksgiving under duress."

2010-11-25T18:55:00.002-07:00

Please visit this link and read the article by Murray Sabrin, We are all German Jews now? and comment and support it.

This is a good analysis, and a reminder of what can and has happened in the past.

Liberty = NO TSA

2010-11-24T09:21:00.003-07:00

A friend gave me this website (click on the headline above), which contains images (one or two of which are rather graphic) which encourage people to fight against the TSA.

He pointed out that it is NOT just the latest outrages that should cause us to demand that TSA be outlawed, but the entire concept of illegal searches (whether they are "administrative" or not) and the idea that government has any authority to provide security for private businesses. If terrorists start to threaten to blow up Wal-Marts (and maybe do blow up one or two), is it now suddenly necessary (and does Congress have the authority) to create the "Shopping Security Agency" or SSA?

I, for one, am thankful this holiday for the many, many people who have decided that enough is enough and are fighting back against this kind of gross abuse of our liberty with the excuse of security.

Too Simple and Too Easy?

2010-11-22T21:18:00.003-07:00

Wayne Allen Root today weighed in on the TSA controversy, in which a barely tolerated situation has suddenly aroused a lot of anger and gotten a lot of press. This was forwarded to me by a friend:

There are two simple solutions to this TSA mess. First and most importantly, hand airline security over to the private sector. Let airlines manage their own security, with their own private security forces. Get government out of the way. Government isn't the solution, they are the problem.

We must put Delta, American, U.S. Air, Southwest and all the other airlines in charge of their own security -- just like all other private sector companies. That puts incompetent bumbling idiots, creeps and perverts, aka TSA agents, on the sidelines. It also ensures the usual private sector success. American business usually gets it right. Businesses will weigh the right amount of security versus customer privacy, civil rights, and satisfaction. And if they fail we as consumers can simply stop using that airline and choose another. The ones who get it right will succeed. The ones who don't will fail. That's called free markets. Capitalism works. Perhaps the U.S. government should allow for it sometime.

....

The simple Part Two of this solution is to end political correctness -- private airlines can best prevent terrorism by adopting the Israeli model of PROFILING. No, not racial profiling, but rather "terrorist threat profiling." No need to argue -- it works to perfection. Israel has the safest airports and the safest airline (El Al) in the world. There has NEVER been a successful terrorist attack at an Israeli airport or airline. Why? Because their security experts rely on profiling, not political correctness. They ask a series of rapid-fire questions of all passengers. There is no time to lie. If you try to lie, it is easy to detect inconsistencies in your story. At that point you are pulled aside for a more detailed screening or body search. But everyone does not need to endure the health threat of major radiation, or the privacy violation of intrusive cavity searches. It is time to leave grandma and my baby daughter alone, and look for real terrorists.

Freedom Filks

2010-11-21T22:11:00.003-07:00

For those that do not know the science fiction and fantasy communities, filk songs are a style of folk song in which different words are set to familiar tunes. The saga of the TSA Porn-scanners and Fondling-Pat-Downs has generated several. Here is my nomination for the best two:

Steve Varus, for using Kris Kristofferson's ballad:

Take the ribbon from your hair
Shake it loose and let it fall
Leave your shoes right over there
Now get up against the wall

I'll run my hands inside your thighs
Up your legs and out of sight!
But you can trust the TSA
To help you make it to your flight

We don't profile that'd be wrong
Just ask the ACLU
We'd rather check your nooks and crannies
Every inch of you

Got no life except my job
But I don't mind it's all right
I get to grope you legally
If you want to take a flight

This badge and uniform we wear
Might look like a rent a cop
But your life is in our hands
We like it that way, especially if you're hot

Awful lonely being me
No girlfriend, boyfriend, husband, wife
So let me squeeze you, oooh, right there
If you want to take a flight

You can trust the TSA
You'll be in our dreams tonight

See and hear this at the first link.

Another excellent one uses an old Frank Sinatra song, Come Fly With Me:

Comply With Me*
(With deepest apologies to Sammy Cahn, Jimmy Van Heusen & Frank Sinatra)

Comply with me, before you fly away
Remove those shoes and take a cruise
Through my peekaboo X-ray
Comply with me, I'm your friendly TSA

Comply with me, you domestic coach class bums
If you opt out I'll just give a shout
To my icy-handed chums
Comply with me, bend over here it comes

Once I get all up there where your hair is ticklish
I'll just fish
Got my wish
Once I get all up there you'll be squirming like an eel
You may squeal
At the feel
When we're together

Proctology is such a lovely trade
I'll show you love with my rubber glove
Try not to be afraid
I'd be a perfect gentleman, if you had just obeyed
Comply with me, I'm GS8 pay grade

Janet Napolitano says to spread 'em wide
Have you tried Astro-glide?
Janet Napolitano knows your clothes are off
Head aloft
Turn it and cough
When we're together

Don't crack wise or I'll ruin your whole day
Please don't frown when I pat you down
It alerts the CIA
It's perfectly legal practice except at Gitmo Bay
Comply with me, comply comply
Comply with me, obey, obey, obey!

Check out the security risks on that one! Yeah!

New owner - Fighting Mad

2010-11-19T17:45:00.002-07:00

Liberty is threatened and freedom is in danger.

A very good friend (and distant relation) of mine started this blog and maintained it sporadically for several years now, but has had to give it (and others) up due to a combination of work pressure, political pressure, and just plain a lack of time. So he asked me to take over, and he challenged me to try to make this live up to the potential that it has to spread a message of hope and liberty to Americans and to the world.

Liberty is such a precious and rare commodity through history, that we often fail to appreciate how much we had in the past - and now that we are losing it, it seems little more than a dream. But it is a dream that we CAN reclaim - that we MUST reclaim.

I don't pretend to be the writer or to have the breadth of knowledge that my friend did - and if it weren't for spell-checkers, more people would know that. But I shall strive to live up to his dreams - and to my dreams, of freedom and liberty.

I do (and must) remain even more anonymous than my friend was, but I suppose some secrets will inevitably get out. Of course, in some eyes I am already a marked man for what I've done in the past. So we cannot hope to hide as completely as some folks do. But then, what I am doing is standing up for what is right: I will try not to flee into darkness if someone does not like what I say.

Let me know what you think - I DO like feedback, and ask anyone reading this to toss back some thoughts to me.

Lessons Learned from our Southern Neighbor

2010-09-16T09:42:00.000-06:00

American front - Failed states
Mexico celebrating 200th birthday - Arizona Republic (see link)
"Mexico celebrates its 200th birthday tonight, kicking off a two-day bicentennial extravaganza of lasers, fireworks and music aimed at lifting citizens' spirits in the midst of a recession and a bloody war against drug cartels. Even as crews tested hundreds of lights in Mexico City's main Zocalo Plaza on Tuesday, riot police and armored vehicles practiced crowd-control techniques because of worries that cartels might stage an attack during the festivities. Two years ago, attackers hurled grenades during an Independence Day festival in the central city of Morelia, killing seven people and wounding 132. 'We're in bad shape, as far as violence goes ... but you can't deny people a party if they want to celebrate something,' said Francisco Segura, 52, a building contractor." (09/15/10)

This news story gives us an opportunity to reflect back on the past and present conditions in Mexico. As I’ve mentioned before, borders - whether between two totally separate polities (“national”) or between two associated polities (“states of the Union” for example) are MORE than just imaginary lines on the ground and pretty lines on maps: they are REAL in the minds and actions of people, AND in the differences between the two sides of the border. Nowhere in my personal experience has that been more visible than on the Inter-German Border (IGB) between the Ostzone (East Germany) and the Bundesrepublik Deutschland in the mid 1980s, whether from the ground or especially from the air. But the border between the United States of America and the Estados Unitos Mexicanos (United Mexican States) is also very distinct: from the ground, from the air, and from the society and people. It was the first international border I crossed as a child, and even then, I saw the difference. Today that distinction is even clearer based on the way bullets fly and bombs shatter the night and the way bodies are found, day after day after day.
Why? It is clear in the history of the two nations - and of the states on both sides of the border. The land called Mexico today has a VERY long history - much of it has been “civilized” by the usual standards of historians and archaeologists since 1800 BC. By the standards of libertarians, most of it has NEVER been civilized: its history is one of bloody tyranny and repression and a constant trading of masters and varying degrees of slavery that make pre-1865 slavery in the United States look almost benign. Modern Mexico, like ancient Mexico, is a land and society and people which is VERY different - starkly contrasted - from the United States.
Unlike Anglo-French North America (that is, the part to the north of Mexico), Mexico does not have a history in which a dominant civilization came in and overwhelmed a number of various smaller (and weaker) civilizations and large barbarian areas; a dominant civilization (English-British) built on a painfully developed foundation of human freedom and liberty forged in centuries of conflict and migration and a series of fortuitous events. Rather, Mexico is the product of a clash and then merger of two civilizations that were themselves products of long cruelty and abuse and evils. The clash was initiated and “won” by a newly-merged Spanish civilization that had just emerged from 700 years of bloody tyranny by Islamic forces and a similar period of rebellion and warfare to overthrow that tyranny. In the process, that Spanish civilization had taken on many of the characteristics of its enemy. Facing it was perhaps the most evil and tyrannical empire known in mankind’s long and black history: the Azteca rule over central Mexico. Why do I make that claim? No other human “civilization” has been documented as having not just killed hundreds of thousands (or millions) of its enemies and subjects on the battlefield or in killing fields but by planned and carefully orchestrated mass-human sacrifices in their temples - and no other “civilization” has made a common practice of actually eating the dead bodies of its enemies and subjects. None that I am aware of. Ironically, this clash was initiated by what was essentially a private-enterprise (though officially approved by the crown) free-booting expedition. What they found was a tyranny and society that was even more evil, more perverse, more tyrannical than the Islamic system which they had finally driven off their home peninsula mere decades earlier; and they responded as they had been bred to do.
What developed, in Mexico and the rest of Meso- and South America, can be readily identified as the product of its antecedents: Iberian Islamic, Visigothic Iberian (Hispanic), and Aztec. Even in 2010.
Perhaps the difference between this Mexican civilization and Anglo-American civilization can best be illustrated by looking at this 200th Anniversary of Mexican “Independence.”
The United States celebrates its Independence Day on 4 July, the date of its Declaration of Independence. That incredible document was the product of many, many hours of work, deliberation, prayer, argument, and thought by a body of men which represented all of the thirteen British colonies that formed the original United States, meeting in the most populous and important city in those colonies. Contrast that to the Independence Day of Mexico, which celebrates 16 September, the day that a lone priest (Miguel Hidalgo) in a small and unimportant town (Dolores, Guanajuato) and about 300 of his followers proclaimed rebellion against a French-installed (and therefore technically usurping) Spanish monarchy in support of the deposed Spanish king, and then led an “army” (mob) on a months-long killing spree, failed to conquer Mexico City, and was defeated. Hidalgo was ultimately betrayed and captured on 21 March 1811 and executed on 30 July 1811. It was not until 06 November 1813 - more than two years later - that a Congress was assembled in Chilpancingo and wrote and signed the "Solemn Act of the Declaration of Independence of Northern America" that was followed by six years of war before Spain recognized their independence as the “Mexican Empire” - complete with an emperor. So much for freedom and liberty.
There is NOTHING comparable to this in the history of the United States. NOTHING. It is as though we claimed Independence Day as celebrating the day that Nathaniel Bacon began his Rebellion in Virginia in 1676, or perhaps the 5th of March (the day in 1770 when some Boston citizens attacked British troops and triggered the Boston Massacre), or maybe 16 December (the Boston Tea Party in 1773). But only if Samuel Adams had been a dissolute, immoral, Church of England priest who then led a mob of crazed killers in an attempt to occupy New York and Philadelphia in support of Bonnie Prince Charlie as rightful king of Britain. And only if eight years of war had led to the Treaty of Paris in which the UK recognized American independence and George Washington then declared himself Emperor of United America.
We may, as Americans, decry the many, many mistakes that these United States made, up to the most recent abrogation of our Constitution - mistakes which many of us believe include replacing the Articles of Confederation with that Constitution, the “imperialism” of the Mexican-American War, Abe Lincoln’s Republican (Socialist)-led tyranny and its catastrophic fallout, the nanny-state progressive imperialism of Wilson and Roosevelt, and all the rest. But when we compare American history to the series of catastrophes and evils that make up Mexican history since 1810, it is light contrasted to utter blackness.
Mexico was built on class warfare between the pure Indio (the survivors of centuries of Aztec and Olmec imperialism), the mixed-blood Mestizos, and the relatively pure European descendents, and on religious-political conflicts. Its first empire lasted only two years, followed by the 1824 republic which quickly deteriorated into a military dictatorship (Santa Ana’s) (and led to independence movements in Texas, the Yucatan, and on the Rio Grande). That was followed by the war with the United States and a new attempt to establish a republic, a military occupation by France (and the Second Empire), another republic deteriorating into a dictatorship (Porfirio Diaz), followed by another revolution and another republic (Constitution of 1917), which slid into a one-party “republican” state for more than 70 years. This is a pattern followed by most Hispanic societies and rooted in the 700 years of the Reconquista struggle against Islam in Iberia itself. Only for a brief period of time (from perhaps 2000 to 2006) was there even a shadow of the political life and relative lack of tyranny enjoyed by the United States; then the current troubles began which by 2010 have deteriorated into yet another war: call it “revolution” or “civil war” or “narco-war” as you will. Mexican condemnation of American “imperialism” in annexing California and New Mexico in 1848 and the Gadsden Purchase in 1853) is hypocritical at best, given its several attempts to reconquer Texas, its annexation of Chiapas in 1824, the Soconusco Annexation in 1842, and the Annexation of the Republic of Yucatan in 1848, to say nothing of Mexico’s Indian Wars, which lasted until 1830. At best, Mexico’s imperialism has been less successful than the United States, but no less fervent.
I have many friends and even relatives that are of Hispanic and Mexican descent - virtually NONE of them would ever want to live in Mexico or “enjoy” Mexican (or Hispanic) culture and society and politics. Some of my ancestors were Mexican citizens (in Texas) - others of my ancestors “enjoyed” the attention of the Ejercito Mexicanos (Mexican Army) and Federales for a long time - and the Spanish army and militias for centuries. It was not pleasant, even when compared to having to deal with the US Army for a few decades of the 1800s. Sadly, for 200 years, Mexican celebration of Independence Day has been as great a bitter farce as Independence Day threatens to become in the United States in 2010. At the same time, we should be grateful for object lesson so clearly displayed just on the other side of that “imaginary line” called the border.

Shrove Tuesday

2010-02-16T20:18:00.001-07:00

Terrible Tax Tuesday (Shrove or Pancake Tuesday)
Ah yes, welcome to the end of Carnival (Goodbye to Meat; Latin carnem levare, meaning "to take away the flesh"), Shrove Tuesday. For modern lovers of liberty, this day and its history has a lot of meaning. Originally, saying goodbye to meats, fats (hence, French "Mardi Gras" or "Fat Tuesday); was a fact of life: in ancient and medieval times, you finished eating the last of the fresh produce (meat-includinig fats, vegetables, sugar, fruit, etc.) from the last Harvest: in a pre-freezer/refrigeration society, and even before the invention of modern home-canning, that day came inevitably, and you were reduced to the preserved stuff. You had to make sure that you didn't eat eggs that needed to be next season's chickens; that you had enough left to provide the next generations of animals and protein for the spring planting (and wartime) before the new litters were big enough to be able to eat. You had to eat everything up before it went bad: it was better to store as fat in your body than as something moulding and stinking in the root cellar. As it so often did, the medieval (Roman Catholic) church made virtue out of necessity, and dictated that there was to be no consumption of meat, eggs, and sweets during the forty holy days leading up to the Spring festival of Easter; which became Lent. So the three days before the official beginning of Lent (Ash Wednesday) and its contemplation and fasting was supposed to be a period of preparing yourself for the Lenten feast: clean out the house, use up the last of the prohibited foods (the last slices of meat were traditionally eaten on Collop (Slice or Chop) Monday (Rosenmontag) and the fat saved until Tuesday to cook pancakes in), and go see the priest to shrive yourself: hence the English term "Shrove Tuesday" (Also known as Pancake Tuesday, to use the last of the jams and preserves and fat and eggs.)

The clearing out of the foods became (especially for the upper classes, who didn't have to worry as much about starving to death in the next six weeks before the winter wheat and other crops came available and the litters started dropping) an excuse for feasting - and feasting of course means parties. The shriving on Tuesday evening was an excuse to go out and be quite debauched - since the priest would be told everything and "forgive" everything shortly, and you entered the holy season in a state of grace. But. Three days of partying was too much for the medieval and Middle Ages Catholic Church and Carnival was reduced to just one day (officially - by the way, don't tell the Germans). So people partied harder, just shorter, and the Age of Reason gave an excuse to forget the shriving (and any associated repentence, penance, or restitution). When the tradition was carried from France, Portugal, and other European climes to the Americas, it became more, shall we say, intense or concentrated, and today, we have the BIG parties in N'Orleans and Rio-de, and the smaller parties all over the place: excuses for wholesale debauchery and lewdness and all that even Paris or Lisboa would have shunned. A virtue turned on the wheels of if and became a vice - actually, a whole collection of vices.

In the same way, all the virtues of the Republic, here as we enter into an accelerated decline, have spawned vices. As if we know we are entering the Lenten season of the second American civilization, we gorge ourselves to excess, bloated deficits and cataclysmic spending; expansion of military actions and occupations; expanding of government size and "duties" and privileges; fresh and new and huge crops of enemies - usually barbarians - internal and external. The emperor (or First Citizen) parades in his new clothes; the whores of L Street occupy their corners and push out into the street, stopping the traffic; the sluts of the legislative branches invite more and more lovers into bed with them and try to outdo their sisters with more and more obscene tricks. Almost totally oblivious to the fact that tomorrow is Ash Wednesday; when not just repentence but penance and punishment come due: the "Little Judgment" is upon us, however unaware we are of its coming.

It is ironic, and fitting, that all these days of commemoration, days of remembrance, all fall together this year: Lincoln's Birthday, the Iranian Islamic Revolution, St. Valentine's Day, Lunar New Year, President's Day, Collop Monday and Shrove Tuesday and Ash Wednesday. Some predict the end of the "world as we know it," in two and a half-years time, more or less; but the signs of the coming doom are there for us to read. Too many of us are too drunk (or too hungover) to make it to the chapel at midnight and get that cross of ashes marked on our forehead, too blind and too distracted to stop and confess and repent and turn away from the evil of our days; too submersed in the filth of a spiritual and political Bourbon Street to recognize our danger. The meat and fat and sugar and eggs and fresh fruits and vegetables that were laid down in the early days of the Republic, paid for by the blood of tyrants and patriots, has been eaten: the cupboard, the pantry, the cellar, and the silo are all empty - the time of self-denial returns instead to its earlier pagan incarnation as the time of starving and fear and evil expectation: the joy of looking forward to the Eternal's resurrection is not there; because our society's, our civilization's faith is dust. Groundhog or not, shadow or not, the days of winter lay long and heavy before us: and no ordinary political or social or physical winter. No, a fimbulwinter, perhaps, an ice-age winter and spring and summer; a nuclear-winter.

Is there any hope? As the Lord told Elijah (I Kings 19:18) - "Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him." Even in these days of the First Citizen's Carnival, a circus the like of which has not been seen since Nero Caesar, there are still those people who have not bowed the knee, who will still stand for liberty and our rights as God's children: the heirs of Hebrews and Greeks and Romans and Schweitz and Englishmen and Americans who will keep that heritage. I hope that you and I are among that number: who will wear the ash humbly, repenting and making restitution for what we have and for what we look forward to. As for the rest, well, let me quote Sam Adams: "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down
and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

The Critical Unraveling of U.S. Society

2009-11-24T17:34:00.000-07:00

The Critical Unraveling of U.S. Society

WHAT IS COMING?
Today (Tuesday morning), two friends sent me an article I've seen before, a "Firearms Refresher Course" that starts out by quoting George Washington ("A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."). It gets more "radical" from there.

It was interesting that these two should send this to me today. Yesterday, two of the transnational progressive web-magazines (Amped Status and AlterNet) published an article called "15 Signs American Society is Coming Apart at the Seams." (AlterNet and the full report is at Amped Status.)

Reason #14 was that ammunition and gun companies are making billions of dollars and cannot keep up with the demand for weapons and ammunition - "Americans are arming themselves to the teeth!"

Reason #15 was that it is claimed by the august Southern Poverty Law Center that more than 100 NEW militia groups have been formed while the total number of militia members has doubled in the past year. Since millions of us are starving and have no health care and no jobs and no future (according to them), all that is needed is a spark for the nation to be flooded with violence!

The logic of David DeGraw is that the "economic elite" are waging war against the American public, the environment has been destroyed by these elite, current government measures are ineffectual and inadequate and causing still more harm, and we are all gonna die (quickly, in this vast "worldwide" and "national" emergency) unless "the people" does something to retaliate against these "economic elite" and the government that is supporting the "coup." To DeGraw and the progressives he claims to speak for, the First Citizen is nothing but a shill for the "economic elite" and the rest of the Administration and Congress are all tools or members.

Now, this may all sound very anti-statist, and despite the irrational nature of many of the arguments (in the same paragraph we are told that 50% of ALL American children are short of food and have to have government food stamps, and then a few lines later the statistic of 1 in 4 is cited; health insurance is equated with "healthcare;" and such things fill the article), this will find a ready audience among many libertarians, especially "left-libertarians."

But in reality, this is nothing more than the same "anti-statis" rhetoric that has been the stock-in-trade for the bogus ("black-flag") anarchists and the socialists (whether Communists, National Socialists/Fascists/Peronistas/Falangists/etc., the "Christian Socialists" or today's Transnational Progressives) from the beginning. The "CURRENT" State is evil and corrupt and destroying us all, and worse, the current state is allowing the great unwashed masses to be destroyed and at the same time, forcing the populace into a massive (and always unsuccessful) popular uprising. They will be destroyed and the revolt will fail, of course, unless the populace accepts and follows the lead of the elite vanguard provided through sheer altruism by the... by the Progressives which include (strange how this works) some of the very elites and their proclaimed doctrines of salvation that are waging the war in the first place!

THEIR state, of course, will be "darned near-perfect" (to quote a friend) and won't have any of the faults of the current regime: everyone will be fed and have all the medical care and all the jobs and all the education that they need, and everyone will contribute to their maximum ability, and we'll all cut greenhouse gas emissions back to 1900 levels and the grass will be green and the rivers will flow and... ultimately, of course, when all the problems are solved (permanently), the state will wither away to be replaced by (take your pick based on the kind of socialism being highlighted - but some form of the Millenium).

We can't buy into it: this is what the demagogues of Athens and Corinth and Rome and Byzantium all promised; this is what the Levellers (and those who preached the Crusades) proclaimed; this is what those who urged on Wat Tyler and his peasants whispered; what the revolutionaries in the Tuileries fervently believed in 1789 and 1791 and 1848 and 1871; what the rabid Abolutionists in Bleeding Kansas and Harpers Ferry preached; what the Bolsheviks in Petrograd announced; what the Brownshirts in Muenchen and Firenza and Madrid and Buenos Aires marched to support; and the tune that the Red Guard and the Ba'athists and Jim Jones and the Khmer Rouge spilled blood to. Indeed, those who "made" Aaron cast the golden calf, the Caliphs that followed the husband of the widow - and no doubt the first Pharaohs of Kemet (Egypt) - spouted this same line. Self-proclaimed human messiahs are not interested in seeing the state wither away or even be violently put down; they work only for a new state in which THEY call the shots - in some cases, CONTINUE to call the shots, and in which the other 99% of humanity are little more than cattle or (at best) favored pets.

God did not make us to be pets - nor cattle. We cannot let ourselves be seduced into either embracing the man on a white horse or the self-appointed vangaard of the masses - we have to be free and independent and answer to God for our own actions. Otherwise, we have never truly lived.

South Dakota - Declaration of Sovereignty Mark I

2009-05-16T23:41:00.002-06:00

I am printing this in its entirety: South Dakota has taken a first (albeit very small and faltering) step back to real freedom. It may not succeed but I pray that it does.

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 1013
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION, Reasserting sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers and serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates.
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."; and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more and the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and
WHEREAS, today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government and many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and
WHEREAS, any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America, or Judicial Order by the judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of the United States of America by the Constitution of the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of any of the several states or their citizens constitutes a nullification of the Constitution of the United States of America by the government of the United States of America; and
WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the House of Representatives of the Eighty-fourth Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the Senate concurring therein, that the State of South Dakota hereby reasserts sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this concurrent resolution serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

Adopted by the House 3 MAR 09, Sustained by the Senate 5 MAR 09. (Note: governor's signature is not required.)

South Dakota is not alone: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/02/23/state-sovereignty-resolutions/

Why the Mainstream Media is dying out

2009-04-12T20:30:00.001-06:00

I am far from alone in bashing the old-style mainstream media (MSM) for their behavior - as indeed the continuing bankruptcy and even disappearance of a lot of them (the Rocky Mountain News, San Francisco Examiner, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, etc.) demonstrates. This Sunday is a perfect example of that. It was not a really busy newsday for a Sunday: that merchant captain made another, successful escape attempt from his pirate captors and three pirates got the justice they deserved; three children were shot execution-style in Louisiana; massive riots in Thailand caused the ASEAN meeting to be cancelled; the Zimbabwe dollar is officially toast; Mexico is officially blaming the USA for its druglords being so well armed; and more - yeah, the Obamas went to church today for the first time in months. The Washington Post - that flagship of the liberal, Tranzi, bleeding press - has a special E-mail alert service that you can sign up for to get important news fast. News like the airliner that went into the river in NYC, like Daschle withdrawing his name for HHS secretary, like the pitiful excuse for human trash that shot up an ICE center in NY. You get the picture. If I'd expected anything on their e-alert today, it would have been that Captain Phillips saved the First Citizen's political bacon by making a successful escape attempt there in the Indian Ocean. But no, of course that is not what the publishers who believe that "free flow of information is essential to a successful democracy" chose to fill my in-box with. No, THAT privilege of place was the flash announcement that Mr Obama had "fulfilled a campaign pledge" to give his daughters a puppy. Now, THAT is "essential" to successful democracy, indeed. And the old media wonders just why it is being flushed down the toilet and we are finding other things to line our birdcages with!

Democracy

2008-11-10T20:31:00.002-07:00

"Democracy, n.:
- A government of the masses.
- Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of
direct expression.
- Results in mobocracy.
- Attitude toward property is communistic... negating property rights.
- Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate,
whether it is based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice,
and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.
- Result is demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, [chaos]."
-- U. S. Army Training Manual No. 2000-25
(1928-1932)
Source: published by the US War Department, Washington, D.C., November 30, 1928
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/U..S..Army.Training.Manual.No..2000-25.Quote.7CCA

Last week, 04 NOV 2008, we practiced "democracy." The Electoral College worked the way it was supposed to, making a fairly close victory (52% to 46%) into a clear "mandate." Of course, only 119 million people voted, out of a total population of 300 million, of which at least 200 million (and probably closer to 240 million) are eligible by age, lack of felony convictions, lack of proven insanity or feeblemindedness, and residence in one place long enough to register and vote. So even with the low number, Mr. Obama is the "choice" of less than a third of the qualified electors: no much of a "mandate."

But more to the point, Electoral College or not, one man-one vote or not, is WHAT we were electing: is it a government administrator; a chief executive? Or is it a monarch? Even dictators can and are elected by popular vote: consider Hitler, Mussolini, and Peron. (Or if you dare, consider Lincoln and Roosevelt and Bush II.) Do we, by the mere act of voting once in four years (twice if you count the primaries), surrender our destinies, our daily choices, to a single man - even if that man is sharing the power to some degree with 535 people in Congress and 9 in the Supreme Court? It appears, too often, that is what we think - or at least, that is how we act.

Whether through the Electoral College or not, the modern American presidential election process claims to be, and appears to be, a "form of direct expression" of the will of the American people.

It is a will I challenge, a process I deplore - not because it is not a good idea to decide peacefully who will be a coordinator, a facilitator, or a organizer, but because NO ONE has the God-given power to determine what I and any other of the 300 million of us can do in our lives, and NO ONE should be given that power through ANY method.

P J O'Rourke has accurately described democracy as "two wolves and a lamb sitting down to vote on what's for dinner." Democracy, sooner or later, comes to the point where it reverses the ancient motto, "Vox populi, vox Dei" (the voice of the people is the voice of God; that is, people will speak in accordance with God's will, or to put it another way "Under God, the people rule") to where the people claim to have BECOME God and believe that EVERYTHING is subject to majority rule vote. It is evil, and more insidiously evil than most, because it sounds so good on the surface.

We will suffer through eight more years of "democracy:" we already have the demogogism, the license, and the agitation; the true discontent and chaos (not anarchy, but chaos) will be here soon enough.

Self-Destruction of a Nation

2008-09-11T19:34:00.003-06:00

This news story was published recently in one of England's major papers.

UK: Jury decides that threat of global warming justifies breaking the law
Independent [UK]

“The threat of global warming is so great that campaigners were justified in causing more than £35,000 worth of damage to a coal-fired power station, a jury decided yesterday. In a verdict that will have shocked ministers and energy companies the jury at Maidstone Crown Court cleared six Greenpeace activists of criminal damage. Jurors accepted defence arguments that the six had a ‘lawful excuse’ to damage property at Kingsnorth power station in Kent to prevent even greater damage caused by climate change. The defence of ‘lawful excuse’ under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 allows damage to be caused to property to prevent even greater damage — such as breaking down the door of a burning house to tackle a fire. The not-guilty verdict, delivered after two days and greeted with cheers in the courtroom, raises the stakes for the most pressing issue on Britain’s green agenda and could encourage further direct action.” (09/10/08)

I am moderately familiar with Kent and the Maidstone area, having flown in and out of Kent on my last visit to the United Kingdom. It is a pleasant land, lush and green and densely populated (at least by Western standards), but increasingly, it is filled with evil people. Not viciously evil, mind you, but mundanely evil and lacking in thought. I don't know if these Greenpeace activists were local Kentish types, or if they came from elsewhere to do their damage. But clearly, the good burghers of Kent, or at least those sitting on this jury, agree with them.

The particular evil involved here has several elements:
First, there is environism. For all intents, modern "environmentalism" has become a religion with very little reason or rational mental processes involved: thus the "mental" is removed. A particularly large cult within the general "environist" religion is the Global Warming crowd, which these people firmly believe in.
Second, there is a general streak of Luddite belief and practice here. These people presumably live in houses or flats with electricity, running water, and flush toilets. They presumably drive or walk or ride at night. They also work (those that DO work) for the most part in places in which the owners or managers would not be able to employ them without benefit of electricity and all the work it does, including pumping the water (Kent isn't as flat as Kansas, but certainly is flatter than most American states) and treating the waste water that they use and generate. Yet they are willing to destroy one of the plants that provides this basic necessity of life. Luddites are, I am convinced, related to the grasshopper of Aesop's fable.
Third, there is (in addition to the environist lack of intelligence) a general lack of intelligence exhibited both by the vandals and the court (specifically the jury). Even IF shutting down the Kingsnorth power station would prevent an imaginary threat (global warming caused by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse glasses) from coming about, a mere thirty-five thousand pounds sterling of damage is hardly going to shut down such a station for more than a few days. Not only that, but if the wrongdoing is so minor relative to the "needed" action to stop the "greater harm," the applicability of the Criminal Damage Act is questionable at best.

Regardless of the evil demonstrated by the act and the acquittal, this opens a door - a barn door, even a hanger door, for more mischief, more evil, more destruction, more insanity. A court has determined that global warming is a threat which justified £35,000 of vandalism in one location in one county. Now, thousands or perhaps tens of thousands of Greenpeace terrorists and their ilk have a blank check to ravage the infrastructure of England, if indeed not the entire United Kingdom. It applies not just to power stations, but to ANY source of carbon dioxide or some other greenhouse gas: such as cows (methane-generators; methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2), automobiles, motor coaches (buses to Yankees), various factories, and even the Houses of Parliament, which main product is the hot air of its Members, chock full of carbon dioxide. Yes, in that I am being rather silly, but much of the rest is now fair game for vandals - and there will no doubt be an amazing number of pyros, arsonists, and yobs who are suddenly converted to militant Greenpeace-ism if they are caught by the peelers.

It will spread, no doubt, just as the Saxons and Angles and Jutes who invaded Britannia through Kent spread to destroy the ancient Celtic-Roman civilization. And with this sort of tacit approval of the vandals, modern British civilization is doomed.

E-mail scam spam!

2008-03-09T19:48:00.000-06:00

Having fun.

Well, lookee here! I just got this wonderful opportunity in my e-mail (actually, in my spam drawer). I'd ask you to share in the "booty" with me, as well, if you are really interested, but...

It looks almost real. On a whim, I googled Andy Burnham, MP, and found out, lo and behold, that he is a REAL person! And even a REAL Labor MP in the UK. Your usual Nigerian scam letter is from some wrong-side-of-the blanket by-blow of some African general or president who isn't even a real person, or some made-up ex-colonial bureaucrat going on about mysterious plane crashes and secret diamond deals from fake mines in Angola. But EPE (UK) Ltd is a real company, and they really do specialize in filtration products; they are located in northern Wales and a a subsidiary of a German firm headquartered in Ketsch, a few miles southwest of Heidelberg. Mr Burnham is 38, an up-and-coming young star in the Labour Party and really is in High Chancellor Gordon Brown's cabinet. And being a Labor MP, he is probably crooked enough to have done an under-the-table deal like that with his bent counterparts in Moscow!

Of course, like almost all Nigerian scam letters, this one doesn't quite live up to the standards necessary for a really good scam. It is easy enough (at least for the select audience I'm sending this to, but sadly NOT to the general American public, especially many under the age of 30 or so) to see that the grammar is not up to the standards of a graduate of Fitzwilliam College in Cambridge, even if he HAS been a Labourite since age 14 and a good trades union member. And while Mr. Burnham was the Chief Secretary to the Treasury (though with no background in economics or finance; I don't know what he read at Cambridge), until 24 JAN 2008, he is now Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, a vastly more important job which indicates that he is being groomed for bigger things in the Labour party. The letter is almost two months out of date.

Much as I would LOVE to turn this over to the local Leigh constituency branch of the British libertarian party, or even the Tory or Social Democrat-Liberal branch to use as ammo to attack the most likely corrupt "Honorable" Burnham, MP, it probably is obvious even to the average Leigh voter that this is bogus.

Now, my point. If we can see this as the fraud it is, why on EARTH do we allow politicians to constantly defraud us on similar "share-the-wealth" schemes like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, oil-company taxation, $700 billion "investment schemes" and such like? Mr. Burnham most likely is NOT the author of this pathetic little scam spam, but based on his career and his associations, he is probably party to far bigger swindles than the mere 14 million GBP supposedly involved in this; like the vast increase in NHS funding which has been so touted by both the Blair and Brown Labourite governments and which has led to longer waiting lines than ever for basic medical care in the UK.

I will bet that if I were incredibly stupid and wrote back to "Burnham" I could not get him to give me any references or testimonials as to the 1.7 million he is offering to share. But every day, I read glowing reports in the newspapers and hear much the same on radio about how wonderful single-payer health care (like Britain's NHS or Canada's) is so wonderful and needed in the USA, and how the politicians in Congress and the Legislatures and the Administration are going to solve all our problems and make us all wealthy and healthy and happy... It doesn't make what the politicians are promising today in the USA any less a scam than what "Burnham" is offering in this e-mail. Much of government today is nothing more than a more carefully crafted and more successful Nigerian scam, Ponzi scheme, or pyramid scam. And I hope we can not forget it, and help other people to see that is the case, as well.

The original scam e-mail:

Dear Friend,

I am The Rt Hon. Andy Burnham MP, (Chief Secretary to The Treasury UK) I was a member of a committee that Brokered a deal between EPE (UK) Ltd, an oil Filtration Company that executed an oil filtration contract for the Russian Government during the regime of Tony Blair who just stepped down for Gordon Brown our New Prime Minister. We the committee members had an Over invoiced amount of £14,000,000.00 which we Had kept aside for ourselves but could not share Immediately. The Change of the office of the prime Minister has presented an opportunity for us to share The money amongst ourselves hence my contacting you.

My share of the booty is (£1.750,000.00) One Million seven hundred and fifty thousand GBP. Due to my Position as an MP in UK here. I can not invest the Money here or have a foreign account hence I am Seeking a reliable person who will receive this money on my behalf for investment purposes. The money was Deposited in a non investment holding account with a Bank here in UK.

I am sincerely seeking your assistance to receive this Amount. Please if you can assist in investing this Fund in any good investment in your country or any Country of your Choice. If you agree to Help, you will be entitled to 10% of the total amount While we will agree on your commission on the Investment later. If you are willing to assist, get back to me with Your Full Name, Address and contact details.

The Rt Hon Andy Burnham MP

Augustine on government

2007-12-27T09:46:00.000-07:00

Taken from "The City of God" Book IV, Chapter IV:

Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies? For what are robberies themselves, but little kingdoms? The band itself is made up of men; it is ruled by the authority of a prince, it is knit together by the pact of the confederacy; the booty is divided by the law agreed on. If, by the admittance of abandoned men, this evil increases to such a degree that it holds places, fixes abodes, takes possession of cities, and subdues peoples, it assumes the more plainly the name of a kingdom, because the reality is now manifestly conferred on it, not by the removal of covetousness, but by the addition of impunity. Indeed, that was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when that king had asked the man what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride, "What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you who does it with a great fleet are styled emperor."

Augustine here talks about a situation which libertarians today recognize, a principle which IS taught in Scripture: that morality is defined neither by numbers (democracy) nor by power (all the various forms of tyranny): it is defined by God. It is just as wrong, just as evil, just as sinful for ONE man to use the threat of force to steal a penny from you as it is a band or community of 100, 1000, 10,000 or 300 million. And the other way around.

What Augustine did NOT elaborate on is that there IS no justice in great nations or kingdoms, or even in lesser ones: there is pretense of justice but only God is just. Men who employ force to impose their will on others are by definition, unjust.

HOPE? (intro)

2007-11-17T20:51:00.000-07:00

Is there hope for freedom, for liberty, anywhere in the world in this year of Grace 2007?

Do we have anything to tell us that we CAN enjoy the freedom that is our heritage?

A plug, a plug

2007-10-21T21:03:00.000-06:00

A plug, a plug: although Mama Liberty ( www.thepriceofliberty.org ) just published the article last week about JPFO’s “Goody Guns” I had already ordered several sets, some to use and some for gifts (great Thanksgiving or Christmas gifts).

A pair came in on Friday, and the first batch of cookies baked Saturday (using JPFO’s kosher recipe) went over very well, especially among the younger set) at the monthly congregational pot-luck this (Sunday) afternoon. We didn’t bring any home, and the recipe was almost shortbread tasting, in the thicker version we used. (Too thin breaks such large cookies too easily.) Debby and I intend to use them as one of the “standard” refreshments for training classes that we do, and for meetings of such things as Character Council, Local Emergency Planning Committees, and such. And I’m waiting for the revolver version. We are looking at making Jello (TM) versions, also.

Whatever we make from them, the purpose shouldn't be forgotten: to make sure that people understand that guns are an important part of American life, not something evil as airports, schools, and courthouses want to make them out to be. Goody guns are perfect for teaching children safe gunhandling (my sons were doing that to the kids at the pot-luck) but they also are great conversation starters: especially if you are wearing an empty or full holster.

Which brings me to my second plug of the week: Starting today, Sunday, 21 OCT 2007, a lot of folks are participating in "Empty Holster Week" on college campuses around the US, reminding people that tragedies like the Virginia Tech killings aren't caused by a lack of laws prohibiting guns on campuses, or trying to make sure that mentally ill people can't buy or steal guns; they are caused by a lack of people able to defend themselves and their classmates, students, friends, and even neighbors in "gun-free zones" like so many college campuses are today.

I personally don't expect to be on a college campus this week but am going to wear an empty holster, anyway, to support those students and teachers and staff who ARE on college campuses doing this. I hope that you will join me. It is an important cause. I am, of course, going to continue to carry: I normally carry concealed, but for those who openly carry - this week, wear an extra holster, okay? And it is a great opportunity to spread the messages:

1. A free society is an armed society.
2. An armed society is a polite society.
3. Being armed to defend yourself and others against aggression is living the Golden Rule.
4. Not all people that carry guns are either police OR evil-doers.

And many more.

Mark Twain's War Prayer (1898)

2007-10-14T23:13:00.000-06:00

I first read this many years ago, in an old collection of Twain's writings, and later saw it as a small book, published during the era of the Vietnam war. Written as a criticism of American aggression against Spain in 1898 (the Spanish-American War), this poem still stands as an excellent condemnation of militarism. It should serve as a warning to christian and non-christian alike, but especially to those who know that prayer is indeed answered by God.

The War Prayer

by Mark Twain

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms,
the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the
drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched
firecrackers hissing and sputtering; on every hand and far down the receding
and fading spreads of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags
flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue
gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters
and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they
swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot
oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts and which they
interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears
running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached
devotion to flag and country and invoked the God of Battles, beseeching His
aid in our good cause in outpouring of fervid eloquence which moved every
listener.

It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that
ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness
straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal
safety's
sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came - next day the battalions would leave for the front;
the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their faces alight with
material dreams-visions of a stern advance, the gathering momentum, the
rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult,
the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender! - then home
from the war, bronzed heros, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas
of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and
envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send
forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag or, failing, die
the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from
the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed
by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house
rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous
invocation - "God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest, Thunder thy
clarion and lightning thy sword!"

Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of it for
passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its
supplication was that an ever-merciful and benignant Father of us all
would watch over our noble young soldiers and aid, comfort, and encourage
them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in His mighty hand,
make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them
to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable
honor and glory.

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the
main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in
a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending
in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale,
pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he
made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher's side
and stood there, waiting.

With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his
moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent
appeal, "Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord our God, Father and
Protector of our land and flag!"

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside - which the
startled minister did - and took his place. During some moments he
surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes in which burned an
uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said:

"I come from the Throne - bearing a message from Almighty God!" The words
smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no
attention. "He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd and grant
it if such shall be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained
to you its import - that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto
many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it
is aware of - except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken
thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two - one uttered, the other not.
Both have reached the ear of Him Who hearth all supplications, the spoken
and the unspoken. Ponder this - keep it in mind. If you beseech a blessing
upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a
neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your
crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon
some neighbor's crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

"You have heard your servant's prayer - the uttered part of it. I am
commissioned by God to put into words the other part of it - that part
which the pastor, and also you in your hearts, fervently prayed silently.
And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard
these words: 'Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient.
The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words.
Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you

have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory - must
follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God
the Father fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me
to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth
to battle - be Thou near them! With them, in spirit, we also go forth
from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord
our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells;
help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their

patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks

of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble

homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their

unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out
roofless with their little children to wander unfriended the wastes of
their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun
flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn
with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it
- for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their
lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water

their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their

wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source

of Love, and Who is ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore

beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(After a pause)

"Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak!
The messenger of the Most High waits."

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic,
because there was no sense in what he said.

Good article series starting

2006-09-07T23:52:00.000-06:00

Over at the Gospel Sower blog (http://www.gospelsower.blogspot.com/) is the first in a series of articles on Islam. While the first one is looking at Islam from a christian's viewpoint, the next in the series will be viewing Islam from a libertarian viewpoint, and then from a viewpoint of a defender of Western Civilization. Others may follow.

Feel free to visit and comment here or there!

Minarchist, Anarchist or other? Part II (Draft)

2006-04-18T07:06:00.000-06:00

In part one, I looked at why the "congregational" model of government as practiced by many christian and jewish congregations is neither minarchist, anarchist, or statist, and why this model has been successful for several millenia. Unlike "human government," this model is non-coercive. Let's look at the various points in more detail:
* Voluntary in nature – adults (those who are able to believe and act on their own) volunteering to participate, and remain in association with each other. Generally, since Pentecost, or in the case of Judaism, since AD70 (the Fall of Jerusalem), there has been no legitimate force used in any church or synogogue. God Himself does not command or execute any sort of immediate punishment on those who fail to act as He has commanded - judgment and punishment is reserved for Judgment Day. If a person fails to voluntarily abide by the norms of the community (congregation), the closest thing to coercion allowed is a withdrawal of fellowship (see below) - arguably only a confirmation of something the person themselves has done by refusing to cooperate. Even for those who are supported (financially, physically) so that they can work more on behalf of the congregation do so voluntarily, and cannot be constrained by any action of the congregation to be forced to work. Most important, there is no legitimate force or "automatic" enrollment in this body - the Bible teaches that even though circumcision (for Jews) is done to an infant to mark them as one of the community, they cannot truly participate in the community until they are old enough to decide for themselves (the ritual of bar mitzvah, as I understand it). In christian communities, although some would practice infant baptism, it is clear in the New Testament that belief is essential - which is exactly why those groups that practice infant baptism (not found in the Bible, by the way) have some sort of confirmation of that faith later in life. You are not automatically under the control of some "government" merely by accident of birth or residence or ancestry.

* Organized – as a body, functions are given out and accepted voluntarily, but they are specific in nature, not open-ended nor amorphous. Virtually all human governments are characterized by very vague limits on power and function of offices, agencies etc. This is either "de jure" (such as the British "constitution" which is vague or nonexistant) or "de facto" (such as the American constitution which is very specific but ignored in practice). (Tribal governments and that of most kingdoms are even more loosy-goosy: whatever the market will bear.) In contrast, both rabbinical tradition and the New Testament identify the various organizational elements clearly, and the duties are specific (even if often ignored).

* Leadership is local, collective, limited in power, voluntary, and must meet certain agreed-upon qualifications. This is perhaps the most critical, and apparently the most difficult part of the congregational model. There is no "one-man rule" and there is no wide area of "control:" the elders or directors or shepherds are always plural and responsible for the "flock" in which they themselves are. There are no provinces, colonies, or empires. The other elements have been discussed already, except for the qualifications. Most human government deals with essentially unimportant "qualifications" - age, place of birth, heredity, percentage of votes, etc. The congregational model identifies those personal traits which make for effective and trustworthy leaders: honesty, reputation, fidelity, etc. And they are expected to uphold a certain standard of conduct at least as strict as those they are leading are to follow.

* Power is limited, especially the power of punishment – anything more than withdrawing from the offender (refusing to allow the offender to continue to associate and benefit from the organization) does not exist. As discussed above, there is really only one punishment found in the congregational model. All other power is similarly limited: there is no corporal punishment to force someone to follow the leaders, no loss of freedom to avenge some wrong action. And as pointed out, no one can be forced to join or remain. This is stated again in the next aspect: No use of aggressive force – the members cannot be forced to do anything; persuasion is the only way of obtaining cooperation and participation.

* Justice in resolution of conflicts and righting of wrongs done is by consent – and limited to restitution, not punishment. This is one of the major areas in which "human government" has usurped the responsibilities of the historical congregational governments around the world, to the detriment of society and people individually. Justice, real justice, hinges on this: what was done which was wrong is made right, as much as possible. Failure to do so is "punished" only by those actions necessary to separate the unrepenting offender from other potential victims - not so much to punish them (that is God's sphere) but to protect the community from further harm. This is similar, perhaps, to the modern concept of "restorative justice" and to the ancient practice of "outlawing."

* The scale and scope is limited to a relatively small number of participants in a fairly small geographic area – from a few families and individuals to perhaps several thousand. There is, therefore, competition between the organizations for members, and mobility between organizations without requiring physical relocation. Obviously the limited power of the leaders and of the congregational government dictates this, but this is also important from the point of view of individual liberty: competition in this, as in all other parts of social life, is generally good (although it can get carried away) - for it provides freedom of choice. With a congregational government essentially operating by concensus, it is essential that people are able to move from one to another, or even to organize their own congregation free and independent from any other. Therefore, by necessity, the groups tend to be somewhat small, and thus limited in power - and less likely to be able to effectively become aggressors and build "empires."

However well this model might work, we do have to remember that humans seldom function ideally, and even this limited organization will (and has) become corrupt and stopped following the model. This happened in ancient Israel, when the people demanded a king, "like the nations around us." It happened in Reformation Geneva, and in Pilgrim Massachusetts, and we can see examples in many churches and synogogues today and in very recent history. But the very nature of the model reduces the impacts of such departures, as we shall discuss in the next installment.

Minarchist, Anarchist, or Other? Part I

2006-04-02T14:22:00.000-06:00

"The current LP membership pledge does not allow for limited government," writes Dr. Carl Milsted (see link). "Some initiation of force is required for a government to do its job. Some taxation is necessary."

So states Tom Knapp in his excellent article “Yes we have no banarchists” in http://knappster.blogspot.com/2006/02/yes-we-have-no-bananarchists.html.

Well, here is one Libertarian who is also a libertarian who says that Dr. Carl is wrong – and might even argue with Tom about his conclusions (not that THAT has ever happened before, you know).

Now, we are supposedly known by the company we keep, and I admit to keeping some pretty bad company in the form of a whole bunch of anarcho-capitalists (I know, don’t you just hate hyphenated terms, but the Black Flag anarchists have so tainted the name “anarchist” that you really have to specify) like Mama Liberty (www.thepriceofliberty.org) and Lady Liberty (www.ladylibrty.com) and all the rest of my fellow Knights of Non-Agression at www.lrt.org. Most folks probably figure I am an anarchist or anarcho-capitalist – and probably wouldn’t consider me a minarchist, based on my writings of the last four or five years (my word! One-tenth of my life!). Well, they’re wrong. And if they think I’m a minarchist, they are wrong, too.

HEY! Easy there! IF you care to look under the table, you’ll see I’ve already got this little Hi-Point shucked. Just move your hands away from the holsters, pardners, and keep reading. That’s better. No, you don’t need that rope, either, pure hemp or not. Easy, easy. Did I happen to mention that I'm a "small-mouthed" pacifist, also?

Anyway, as I was saying, I really don’t fit into either camp, and I tell-you-three-times I am NOT a statist or anything like that. The reason is tied up in that quote from Dr. Carl. He’s wrong: Neither taxation (please, let us stop with the mealy-mouthed words – neither THEFT) nor any other initiation of force (see “aggression”) are necessary for a government to exist and function. Not to say that 99% of all human governments don’t use one or both of those methods, but it is possible for such to exist, and in fact, they have existed, pretty much continuously, for about 2600 years. No large percentage, but enough to know that they CAN function. Today, there are probably about 10-20 million people (not many, out of 6.5 billion, I know) that spend at least part of their time in voluntary participation in such governments.

To cut to the chase, what I am talking about is the way that hundreds of thousands of congregations, Jewish and christian, have been organized since the Babylonian Captivity and the days of Peter and Paul. It is not quite unique to them, but by far their version is the most successful and best organized of such groups. (And I must point out that not all religious organizations, christian or otherwise, meet the standards and criteria I will discuss here.) There are several keys to their success, and to the reason that they are an apt model for non-coercive government:
* Voluntary in nature – adults (those who are able to believe and act on their own) volunteering to participate, and remain in association with each other.
* Organized – as a body, functions are given out and accepted voluntarily, but they are specific in nature, not open-ended nor amorphous.
* Leadership is local, collective, limited in power, voluntary, and must meet certain agreed-upon qualifications.
* Power is limited, especially the power of punishment – anything more than withdrawing from the offender (refusing to allow the offender to continue to associate and benefit from the organization) does not exist.
* No use of aggressive force – the members cannot be forced to do anything; persuasion is the only way of obtaining cooperation and participation.
* Justice in resolution of conflicts and righting of wrongs done is by consent – and limited to restitution, not punishment.
* The scale and scope is limited to a relatively small number of participants in a fairly small geographic area – from a few families and individuals to perhaps several thousand. There is, therefore, competition between the organizations for members, and mobility between organizations without requiring physical relocation.

(Continued in Part II)

Massa Says We Can Blog!

2006-04-02T13:42:00.000-06:00

In the old days, you know, before "democracy" and all that, we had it pretty simple. A "wiring diagram" for 99% of us was pretty simple:
GOD (maybe)
KING
DUKE
COUNT
KNIGHT
PEASANT
US (SLAVE)

There was just one "massa" - yeah, he might have a boss, but as far as we were concerned, when that ol' farmer said jump, we asked how high, and didn't have to worry about what his boss (the knight) or HIS boss (the count) thought - that was way beyond our paygrade.

Even when we got all high-flautin' in this country, it wasn' much different, at least for slaves:

GOD
MASSA
BOSS (Straw boss or Overseer or Foreman)
US (SLAVE)

But in 21st Century America, for most o' us supposedly free descendents of freed slaves, liberated Indians, and paid-off indentured servants, we got mor' massa's than I knows what tae do wit' - we gots Special District massas, and Town or City massas, and County massas, and State massas, and Federal massas, and prolly NATO massas and UN massas, too. And it isn't just one at each level, or even one COMMITTEE at each level: at the County, the massas sit on the County Board of Commissioners, the County Planning and Zoning Board, the County Elections Board, the County Health Board, and the County Environment Board, to name just a few. It's worse at state and federal level. It's not that straight line but more like an inverted pyramid, with one poor guy at the bottom, holding that point, and what seems like half the rest of the world standing on the upside base.

One, mind you, just ONE of those multitudinous massas at Federal level, right here in the good ol' USA, is the Federal Elections Commission, or FEC, which is supposed to make sure that we all properly know how to, and do the right thing to elect a new massa every two or four years, especially the "massa of massas" with that mystic name of POTUS (President of the United States). Well, one of the things which has really been bothering the massas that sit on the FEC and make sure we all do all the elections right is to do with "exemptions" for media and bloggers from all those limits on such triffles as free speech, right to trial by jury, private property, free assembly, etc. (I'm sure that the hoploclasts [gun-haters] will soon come up with a way that the FEC can also weigh in on our right to defend ourselves - maybe by claiming that concealed guns can be intimidating to other voters.)

One of the BIG (read, can be used to raise lots of funds for those lobbying for or against it) issues before the FEC in recent months has been whether bloggers can say anything they want to about political ballot issues and candidates within a certain time, before elections. Those people of the ilk of Senatoads McCain and Feingold don't want people to be able to publish nasty things (or even good things) about incumbents and challengers that might influence an election (read, let the challenger win), and got the rest of their fellow id... Kongrus-kritters to pass it, and POTUS to sign it; and now it was being interpreted to applying to bloggers and little old ladies in tennis shoes writing letters and posting them on-line. I think part of the argument was that, like the radio and TV stations, we are using the "public media" (you know, airwaves, electrical power lines, phonelines which cross or are located on public rights-of-way, and therefore have to be monitored and regulated, lest we create a CRISIS or "take away someone's rights."

It was sounding pretty serious in there, for a while, but... Finally, the FEC has announced that the Internet can have, courtesy of their glorious wisdom and inate modesty and love of the common folk, FREE SPEECH. WithOUT any (undue) government regulation! Wow! Some of our massas have said that it is okay for us to talk about some of our other massas, provided we don't get carried away. (Folks, if you think I'm being sarcastic and rude in this blog, read Paul Jacob's article, but wear an ovenmitt.)

As Paul points out, this is like DoD making a public announcement that they've decided to continue NOT to make private homes provide troop billeting, or the Supreme Court announcing that trial-by-jury can continue (provided they judge only the facts and not the law, mind you). It is stupid, it is insulting, but it is apparently taken at face value by many if not most political commentators on both left and right as being a wonderful affirmation of the way our political and regulatory system works.

Garbage! This, like 99.5% of what comes out of DC (and for that matter, every state capital and the entire Beltway), is nothing more than a sickening affirmation of what slaves we have turned into, of what tyranny we have accepted, and of how brain-dead we have become in this nation. We are indeed a nation of too many "massas" but only because we have become a nation of slaves - unwilling or unable to do anything without first having permission granted by twenty different agencies, boards, and petty tyrants on a stack of paper that demands a forest to make and a landfill full to dispose of. Free speech, on the 'net or anywhere else, is one of those many freedoms that are honored in memory, but only exist when they are not an annoyance to one of the hundreds of thousands of "massas." Including this blog.

Commentary on News week of 1 OCT 05

2005-10-10T17:06:00.000-06:00

Libertarian Commentary on the News 3-7 OCT 2005 as normally published in ThePriceofLiberty.org. With Mama Liberty in the middle of moving, this will be the location! (For my comments and response on "Smartest and Dumbest States" go down to the next posting!)

Our fourth week as a weekly newsletter and commentary. The views expressed herein are those of the author and don’t necessarily reflect anyone else’s opinion, whether affiliated with one of the news sources, the news digests, The Price of Liberty, the Libertarian Party or its affiliates. My purpose is to reflect a libertarian and christian point of view in all these matters, and to encourage you to think, plan, and react to the key events which are taking place in our world and nation today. If I step on your toes, it is because they are in the way!

This week, we’ll concentrate on some overseas matters, our right to defend ourselves, and follow-up to Katrina and Rita. Overall, the major news story this week has been the nomination of a White House aide to President Bush to replace Mrs. Justice O’Connor – and the firestorm of betrayal being produced by the conservatives who still thought that President Bush would do something to redeem his “conservative” credentials. None of us knew much about Miss Meirs last weekend, and we don’t know much more today: she may be more conservative than Janice Rogers Brown and Clarence Thomas and Barry Goldwater all combined, but somehow, I doubt it: the hope of the Supreme Court changing for the next two decades is probably gone.

Our Right to Defend Ourselves

Virginia: Judge rules defendant acted in self-defense
http://tinyurl.com/dj2nl
Richmond Times Dispatch
"A charge of murder against Donald Arman Terrien, who shot and killed Richard Jason Gooding on Aug. 14, was thrown out of court Thursday when the judge ruled Terrien acted in self-defense. Gooding, 31, was the ex-boyfriend of Terrien's girlfriend, Bess McAteer, 24. McAteer testified in Henrico County General District Court Thursday that she started to leave Terrien's house about 9 p.m. that Sunday evening. She had walked to her car parked in the street when Gooding drove up and confronted her, yelling. ... Terrien came out the front door with his pistol in hand, held at his side, and called out to her, asking what was going on. He stepped down to the bottom of the steps from the small porch. She said she remembers Gooding saying: 'A gun? You've got to be kidding me,' and that he would 'kick his ass,' referring to Terrien. She said she called to Terrien to go back inside and call 911. She said Gooding ran to the house's front steps and attacked Terrien, who had turned to go inside, from behind. The exact sequence of events was not clear from testimony, but during the struggle with Gooding, Terrien fired two shots from his Sig Sauer 9 mm handgun. The first was into the air, holding the gun at arm's length, McAteer said. The second shot was the one that killed Gooding. It was fired 'dead center in his chest.'" (10/01/05)
A domestic dispute turned bad, but apparently a clear case of self-defense. There may have been enough questions to justify it taking 6 weeks to resolve this, but that is still a bad idea.

Airport hassles spur rise of private flights
http://tinyurl.com/8tc5o
Boston Globe
"Lionel Andre recently found a new way to deal with the hassle of big airports and big airlines, namely, avoid them altogether. Andre, 30, a business analyst with Siebel Systems Inc., lives in South Boston, barely 3 miles from Logan International Airport, but since June he's been heading almost every week to Hanscom Field in Bedford to fly to New Jersey. Andre takes Linear Air LLC, a new private-plane service that flies four days a week to Teterboro, N.J., across the river from New York City. Flying takes longer in the 10-seat Cessna Caravan turboprop than in a commercial jet, but the overall trip can be shorter when factoring in security lines and other traffic at Logan. At $438 round trip, it can cost roughly the same as a commercial flight. Pretzels and cookies are served, Andre can spread out to work on his laptop, and valet parking at Hanscom can make it a 10-foot walk from the plane to his car. 'It's superconvenient, and it's really first-class treatment,' Andre said." (10/02/05)
In many parts of the country, private aircraft have been cheaper than the ridiculous airline rate structure, and avoids most of the garbage that passes for “security” for the commercial airports and airlines. It also allows for greater security for the individual, who does not turn his luggage or laptop or weapons over to a TSA goon.

Supreme court okays frivolous gun suit
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9584450/
MSNBC
"The Supreme Court refused Monday to block a lawsuit against gun manufacturers accused of negligence for firearms violence in the nation's capital. An appeals court had said the District of Columbia government and individual gun victims -- including a man who was left a quadriplegic after being shot in 1997 -- could sue under a D.C. law that says gun manufacturers can be held accountable for violence from assault weapons [sic]." (10/03/05)
This is another “Imperial Court” decision – despite the fact that dozens of state courts have determined this sort of harassment is illegal. But of course, this is DC we are talking about.

Alaska: Anchorage expands recognition of RKBA
http://www.ktuu.com/cms/templates/master.asp?articleid=151&zoneid=1
KTUU News
"If you go to the mall, stop to get gas, have an after-work drink out with friends, be aware -- the people around you may be packing heat. The list of places you can carry a weapon in Anchorage is about to expand. In just a few weeks you can add city buildings to that list. So KTUU-TV is taking a look at just where you can and cannot carry a firearm. 'The vast majority of Alaskans think they ought to be able to carry a firearm wherever they wish,' said Wayne Anthony Ross, National Rifle Association board member. ... It may surprise you to learn that in addition to being allowed to carry a concealed weapon, you can also carry one in plain sight. But realize it may raise some eyebrows." (09/30/05)
The TV anchor sounds shocked, doesn’t she? Well, too bad. Open carry should be as common as concealed carry – or even more so. Especially in the West and Alaska.

Nevada: Elderly man fights back
http://www.kvvutv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3935198
KVVU TV
"Police say an 82-year-old man was washing his car near E. Sahara and Bruce around 10 p.m. last night when two men approached him with weapons and demanded money. The elderly man told the suspects that he had left his money at home. According to police, one of the suspects got into the back seat of the victim's car, demanding to be taken to the victim's home. The victim had a pistol hidden inside of his car, and he shot the suspect. The suspect in turn fired at the victim, striking him in the chest.The victim was transported to the hospital where he is in serious condition. The suspect died from his gunshot wounds." (10/04/05)
Our prayers that the elderly victim survives. At least in Nevada he won’t have to face murder charges or charges of carrying a loaded pistol in his car.

Washington: Man justifies shooting as self-defense
http://heraldnet.com/stories/05/10/04/100loc_trial001.cfm
Herald Net
"Stanley Douglas Nyberg was pushed off a river bank and was injured moments before he scrambled back up, pulled a pistol, and shot and killed his neighbor, Dina Camp, 44, with whom he had a longstanding property line dispute, Nyberg testified Monday. After he climbed up from the bank, he said that Camp took one or two steps toward him, and that's when he fired, Nyberg told a Snohomish County Superior Court jury." (10/04/05)
I covered this when it first happened, and months later it is finally being tried. It is a shame, as I frequently point out, that a full fledged jury trial is necessary for this: a coroner’s inquest should be adequate.

California: Wounded store owner shoots robber
http://tinyurl.com/a94qt
Record Net
"A wounded liquor-store owner shot a would-be robber around 9:30 p.m. Monday after being shot in the buttocks. Steven Groce of Stockton was shot while closing his El Dorado Liquor store, on El Dorado Street near Churchill Street, Stockton police said. He and the man he shot were taken to St. Joseph's Medical Center and San Joaquin General Hospital, authorities said. ... Police said men with bandannas pulled over their faces entered the store armed with handguns, one of them a long-barreled revolver." (10/04/05)
Hmmm – are long-barreled revolvers more evil than short-barreled ones? But I’m glad he was able to fight back.

California: Victim fights back
http://tinyurl.com/dugmt
Redondo Beach News
"On Sept. 29 at about 11:50 a.m. a subject entered the Hollywood Riviera Car Wash in the 1500 block of South PCH and brought an item to the counter with money to purchase it. When the cashier opened the register, the suspect allegedly threatened him with a gun. He was pointing the gun at the cashier and taking money out of the cash drawer when the cashier grabbed the gun. The suspect ran out of the business. The victim, armed with the suspect's .22 caliber revolver, chased him through the parking lot to Avenue H. As a white pickup truck slowed for the suspect to jump into it, a passenger in the truck allegedly pointed another handgun at the victim. The victim fired four to five shots at the suspects." (10/04/05)
Whew! A brave man, and hopefully these thugs won’t come back.

Cayman Islands: Draconian new victim disarmament laws
http://caymannetnews.com/2005/10/939/law.shtml
Cayman News
"With the Government's continuing focus on crime part of a new bill to strengthen the judiciary and sentencing could see some offenders incarcerated for considerably longer periods than in the past. At a recent Cayman Islands Chamber of Commerce luncheon at the Wharf Restaurant, the Leader of Government Business Hon Kurt Tibbetts announced a number of new measures to address crime including changes to laws to help in the process of capturing and convicting criminals. Bullet Proof vests are soon to be outlawed in the Cayman Islands and firearms offences will land perpetrators behind bars for a minimum of 10, and up to 20 years." (10/06/05)
This makes even less sense than the normal hoploclast/hoplophobe legislation: outlawing bullet-proof vests? They would do better to encourage them, as well as encouraging peaceful citizens to carry weapons regardless of location.

The Fall of Europe
Britain in the dock for human rights failures
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article316691.ece
Independent [UK]
"Britain has one of the worst human rights records in Europe and faces investigation over its failure to comply with a series of European court rulings. More than 100 findings have been lodged against Britain to which the Government has not adequately responded, five years after Tony Blair said he had fulfilled his promise to 'bring rights home' by implementing the Human Rights Act. These range findings from violations of the rights of mental health patients to the failure to protect children from unlawful corporal punishment in the home." (10/02/05)
It is only in the eyes of the Brussels bureaucrats that these are “human rights” – virtually all of these are procedural violations, or common sense actions now made illegal in Europe together with pure beer, milk chocolate, and preaching the Bible.

British tolerance of forced marriages wanes
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1005/p06s02-woeu.html
Christian Science Monitor
"In a drafty railway station cafe in England's Midlands, Ayesha, a young Muslim girl whose family is from Pakistan, is trying not to cry as she talks about her wedding day. 'When I was young I always expected to have an arranged marriage,' she says. 'But I also thought that I'd get a chance to know the man first.' Instead, at 17, her family forced her to marry a man she had never met. When Ayesha, not her real name, tried to have the marriage annulled, she was disowned by her family, and forced to flee her hometown of Birmingham. Although every year hundreds of Muslim, Sikh, and Hindu women in Britain, according to figures from the government and aid agencies, are forced into marriage to fulfill traditional ideas of family honor or parental prestige, Britain's government has so far been reluctant to interfere in the private lives of immigrants." (10/05/05)
This is an example of how the British are “ignoring human rights” – by taking away the power of Muslim families to force their children into marriages and by refusing to recognize polygamous marriages. IF the Blair government has the guts to protect the rights of these young people, expect more condemnation from Brussels.

UK: NHS doctors back private hospitals plan
http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/news/0,8363,1583350,00.html
Guardian [UK]
"A healthcare entrepreneur has raised more than £100m from the City to kickstart plans to build a chain of private hospitals across England in partnership with hundreds of frustrated NHS consultants. The venture, probably the biggest private investment in hospital construction since the NHS was founded in 1948, has been triggered by the government's plans for patient choice, identified by Tony Blair in his speech to the Labour conference as the big theme of his third term. From 2008 people needing an operation will be entitled to select any hospital - public or private - that can work within NHS cost limits. The treatment will remain free for the patient and the hospital will be reimbursed by the taxpayer." (10/02/05)
Hopefully we are seeing the beginning of the end of the socialized health care system in the UK.

Germany: Schroeder signals willingness to bow out
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1180141
ABC News
"Gerhard Schroeder signaled on Monday he might be ready to drop his demand to remain chancellor after Germany's inconclusive election, by saying he would not stand in the way of the creation of a stable new government. Schroeder, who has led Germany since 1998, said in a brief interview with RTL television that his fight to stay in the chancellery was for the good of his Social Democrats (SPD) and their center-left policies -- and not for personal gain. His refusal to step aside since his party finished a close second to Angela Merkel's conservatives in the September 18 vote, has been one of the chief hurdles to the formation of a coalition government." (10/03/05)
He should have quit some time ago, but he hadn’t finished ruining Germany.

EU opens talks to admit Turkey into bloc
http://tinyurl.com/9abgx
Tampa Tribune
"The European Union opened membership talks with Turkey early Tuesday -- a historic first step that would transform the bloc by taking in a predominantly Muslim nation and expanding its borders to Asia and the Middle East. Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul flew late Monday night to Luxembourg for a late-night ceremony to formally open entry talks, following an agreement reached after two dramatic days of diplomacy that included strong U.S. lobbying for Turkey's candidacy." (10/03/05)
As I’ve pointed out before, this would be the worst thing the EU could do: the continent is already flooded with Muslims, both the “normal” kind and the radical Islamistic kind, and with guest-workers from Turkey and elsewhere. This will flood Europe with both. I don’t know WHY the US is lobbying for it, unless we are playing real-politick and hoping it will trash the EU.

Gulf War Three
News from the aftermath of Katrina and Rita was much less prominent this week, for the first time in a month.

Louisiana: $40 billion protection plan sparks debate
http://tinyurl.com/al2hs
USA Today
"A $40 billion plan to hurricane-proof the Louisiana coast has ignited a battle over how best to prevent a repeat of this year's double flooding of New Orleans. Endorsed by the state's congressional delegation, the proposal would create a nine-member independent commission that would give Louisiana a large say in how the federal money is spent." (10/02/05)
It would appear to me that LA should have NO sayso in how to spend other people’s money: if they want a say, they need to pay their share. Many folks like my idea: if we MUST recreate New Orleans (and it appears that economics demands it, mostly for transportation purposes), then lets use it as a landfill for the millions of tons of rubble created by the hurricanes, create a mound and cap about 50 feet high (30 feet above sealevel) and build a new city (Newer Orleans, or perhaps New Gulfport might be better) on top, safe from flooding. And at a fraction of the cost.

Parish president: FEMA still fumbling
http://tinyurl.com/86q6w
CNN
"The president of St. Tammany Parish accused the Federal Emergency Management Agency on Sunday of continuing to mismanage the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, a charge denied by an agency spokeswoman. 'I met the president personally,' Kevin Davis told CNN's 'Late Edition.' 'I actually drafted a note, and he signed it. It said, 'We are going to help you,'' the parish president said. 'I think he was sincere. He hugged me, and I believe in him. There is a disconnect apparently from that point down through the FEMA program.'" (10/02/05)
He expected something different? He’s one of the problems – he and his Parish failed to prepare adequately, but now it is the Feds fault he’s in a mess? As the story explains, it appears that the usual LA and NO corruption (on the part of Davis) is part of the mix: he wants them to use HIS construction company and HIS land for the temporary housing, so he can make sure his own house is rebuilt.

Louisiana: Search ends with 964 dead
http://tinyurl.com/7vm2g
Indianapolis Star
"The search for Hurricane Katrina victims has ended in Louisiana with a death toll at 964, but more searches will be conducted if someone reports seeing a body, a state official said Monday. State and federal agencies have finished their sweeps through the city, but Kenyon International Emergency Services, the private company hired by the state to remove the bodies, is on call if any other body is found, said Bob Johannessen, a spokesman with the state Department of Health and Hospitals." (10/03/05)
Far, far below the 10,000. Panicked exaggeration is typical in such situations, and this was made worse by the incompetence, not of government agencies (which we have to take for granted) but of the individual people who would not deal with dead bodies and other facts of life.

Post-Katrina easing of labor laws stirs debate
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1004/p01s01-woam.html
Christian Science Monitor
"Mario Pérez, muscular and 16 years old, is a budding carpenter. Next to him is Samuel Sánchez, 32, an experienced roofer. Fed up with earning $4 a day in Mexico, they recently arrived at this tiny town on the Mexican-New Mexican border to start the two-day walk to the US. They talked about where they would go. 'Probably Texas,' said Sánchez. 'What about New Orleans?' suggested Pérez. In the wake of hurricane Katrina, recent moves by the US government may help would-be migrants like Sánchez and Pérez decide where to go. And decisions in Washington are reigniting the immigration debate." (10/03/05)
Here we see an example of mainstream media playing switch and bait: the “easing” of laws concern things like Davis-Bacon wage rates and “child” labor laws which prevent people under 18 from virtually any job except babysitting – but they use this to make readers assume that the “easing” will yet further increase immigation: an effort that is separate on the part of Bush and his officials.

Arizona: Sedona Buddhists save dogs left after hurricane
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/1005buddhistsdogs05.html
Arizona Republic
"Tibetan Buddhists see reincarnation as more of a circle than a straight line. One past life can lead to any other life, which means a person could come back as a lost dog. That is why Buddhists based in Sedona are now caring for more than 100 dogs at an Arizona ranch. The dogs had been abandoned in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. 'The traditional teaching from the Buddha is that any animal could be somebody you love,' said Alana Elgin, a Buddhist nun with the Kunzang Palyul Chöling in Sedona. This particular group of animals has survived the horror of the hurricane, the danger of the flood and being abandoned by their families." (10/05/05)
Have they considered that they are interfering with Karma by not allowing the supposedly reincarnated souls in these dogs to migrate to their next body – which they would have done if the dogs had been killed in the hurricane? Still, whatever cockeyed excuse they use, it is a good work that they are doing – if not as good as taking care of people. But then, we are talking about Sedona here.

New Orleans: Mayor lays off half of city staff
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051004-104447-4800r.htm
Washington Times
"Mayor Ray Nagin said yesterday the city is laying off as many as 3,000 employees -- or about half its workforce -- because of the financial damage inflicted on New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina. Nagin said only nonessential workers will be laid off and that no firefighters or police will be among those let go. 'I wish I didn't have to do this. I wish we had the money, the resources to keep these people,' he said. 'The problem we have is we have no revenue streams.' Nagin described the layoffs as 'pretty permanent' and said that the city will work with the Federal Emergency Management Agency to notify municipal employees who fled the city in the aftermath of Katrina, which struck about a month ago. The mayor said the move will save from $5 million to $8 million of the city's monthly payroll of $20 million. The layoffs will take place over the next two weeks." [RRND editor's note: Only half? I thought NOLA was still almost uninhabitable, and likely to remain so for a year? What "city services" are these "essential" ones providing ... for people who are no longer there? - SAT] (10/05/05)
If 3000 people only account for 25-40 percent of the payroll, then one thing is for sure: New Orleans (which had a half-million population) had WAY too many employees, and way too many are getting VERY high pay. Steve has the right of it: I would expect that New Orleans might not even need a full-time mayor (not that it has one) for a year or more.

Nine face Katrina aid fraud charges
http://tinyurl.com/azjfg
CNN
"Nine Californians have been charged with fraud for allegedly participating in a scheme to pocket Red Cross hurricane relief funds from a call center in Bakersfield, Justice Department officials announced Tuesday. None were Red Cross employees. 'So far we've documented a loss of at least $25,000, but we expect that amount to go up,' said U.S. Attorney McGregor Scott, of Sacramento, speaking in Washington." (10/04/05)
These scams will crop up more and more in coming months as the con-men rake in their share of the cost of Katrina and Rita. But why is this a federal investigation? California can’t handle this sort of crime? Sigh. Where is Joe Friday when you need him?

Survey foresees $34.4 billion in Katrina claims
http://tinyurl.com/8odhg
Cincinnati Enquirer
"Hurricane Katrina is likely to result in at least $34.4 billion in personal and commercial property loss claims, according to the first publicly released survey of the nation's insurers. ISO's Property Claim Services Unit said Tuesday that the preliminary estimate of damages to homes and businesses in six states would make Katrina the most costly U.S. natural disaster ever, surpassing the inflation-adjusted $20.8 billion in losses from Hurricane Andrew in 1992." (10/04/05)
At the same time, the estimates of the $250 BILLION that supposedly need to be spent in the region have started to drop greatly, just as the body count has: Sadly, with 62 billion already spent, a similar 1/10 ratio won’t happen.

Hotel chains ask Katrina evacuees to leave
http://tinyurl.com/axvx5
Yahoo! News
"At least one hotel chain has asked some Hurricane Katrina evacuees to check out so it can honor the reservations of incoming guests. Hilton Hotels, the parent company of Hampton Inn and other brands, is trying to find other rooms for the evacuees but said they were warned when they checked in that their stays would be limited by room availability, said Hilton spokeswoman Kathy Shepard. 'We're doing our very best to accommodate these people,' she said. It's an uncomfortable situation for the hotel industry: risk bad publicity for kicking out hurricane evacuees, or anger big-spending repeat customers who travel for business. ... A Hampton Inn in Brookhaven, about two hours north of where Katrina struck, asked Barbara Perry of Folsom, La., to move out last week. She was living in the hotel with her parents and her three young children, and she was driving almost 90 miles a day to work. ... Had Perry found shelter in Louisiana, she would have been protected by a Sept. 1 executive order issued by Gov. Kathleen Blanco that bars hotels from displacing a refugee who guarantees payment. In Mississippi, no such protection exists." (10/06/05)
I fail to see how Blanco has the authority to write and enforce such an act: as we all know, there is no martial law, and this is certainly on the same order as boarding troops in homes. It is best left to the hotels to work out arrangements with their customers: both voluntary and involuntary.

Stupid Government Tricks

Demoted DeLay vows to stay active in House
http://tinyurl.com/7dqlb
Cincinnati Enquirer
"A defiant Tom DeLay, removed as House majority leader because of a criminal indictment, said Sunday he can do his job even without the title and pledged to continue his close partnership with House Speaker Dennis Hastert in pushing the GOP's agenda. The Texas Republican known for keeping colleagues in line and raising prodigious amounts of cash to help elect GOP candidates said he is only guilty of working to defeat Democrats. 'But that's not illegal,' he said." (10/02/05)
Not for lack of trying, of course.

Critics file suit against Georgia voter ID law
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170958,00.html
Fox News
"Advocacy groups including the NAACP, AARP and League of Women Voters have filed a federal lawsuit challenging the new voter identification requirements. 'Georgia passed an absolutely obnoxious law,' said former President Jimmy Carter, who lives in the Peach State. 'It was specifically designed to prevent old people, poor people and African-Americans from voting,' he said. Carter co-chairs a private, bipartisan commission that last week recommended that every eligible voter in the United States receive a free, government photo ID card by 2010. He says Georgia's law is too restrictive. The new policy in Georgia eliminates utility bills and employee badges as valid identification at the polls. Voters must now present a government-issued ID card such as a driver's license or passport." [RRND editor's note: Libertarians might see something even more sinister here, as as pilot program for a required national ID - SAT] (10/02/05)
Carter’s stupidity is amazing: and his objections to the current law (which requires some kind of ID with a picture – not just an address and name) smell suspicious. As Steve points out, this strikes me as bad.

Canada: Ruling strikes blow to tobacco firms
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1003/p07s01-woam.html
Christian Science Monitor
"Canada is now the first country outside the US where governments can sue tobacco manufacturers to recover billions of dollars in smoking-related health costs, thanks to a unanimous Canadian Supreme Court ruling last week. Tobacco foes hope other countries will follow Canada's litigious lead. 'Canada is a pioneer in this,' says Richard Daynard, president of the Tobacco Control Resource Center. 'The legislation would obviously be available as a model for legislation in any other country.'" [FND editor's note: I just bet his Momma's proud of her ambulance-chasing little boy ... - SAT] (10/03/05)
For once, I’d like to see a national or state government stop its hypocrisy and just attempt to plain BAN tobacco products – and watch the sparks fly! Seriously, we are seeing a new prohibition developing, but using “modern” techniques which allow the state to profit more and more.

New law would exempt spies from Privacy Act
http://about.upi.com/products/perspectives/UPI-20051006-105238-8736R
United Press International
"An intelligence bill currently before the Senate would authorize a four-year experiment, during which intelligence and other federal agencies would be exempted from some Privacy Act provisions and able to freely share information about Americans -- if it is relevant to a foreign intelligence, counter-terrorism or anti-proliferation activity. Privacy and civil liberties advocates immediately condemned the legislation. ... Others were more sanguine. Angeline Chen, who teaches national security law at George Mason University, said she felt the authors of the provision were 'Trying to strike a balance' between privacy and the need to share information identified by several inquiries into the failure to interdict the Sept. 11 plot." (10/06/05)
The only balance this will achieve is the same sort of balance you get on a see-saw (teeter-totter) when one child gets off: keep an eye on this one, folks, and fight it!

Theft By Government

Florida: City considers land theft
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051003-122623-2136r.htm
Washington Times
"Florida's Riviera Beach is a poor, predominantly black, coastal community that intends to revitalize its economy by using eminent domain, if necessary, to displace about 6,000 local residents and build a billion-dollar waterfront yachting and housing complex. 'This is a community that's in dire need of jobs, which has a median income of less than $19,000 a year,' said Riviera Beach Mayor Michael Brown. He defends the use of eminent domain by saying the city is 'using tools that have been available to governments for years to bring communities like ours out of the economic doldrums and the trauma centers.' Brown said Riviera Beach is doing what the city of New London, Conn., is trying to do and what the U.S. Supreme Court said is proper in its ruling June 23 in Kelo v. City of New London." (10/03/05)
Funny, I thought the “common wisdom” was that Kelo wouldn’t amount to much – that no one would follow its example and that Congress and legislatures would quickly close the abusive loophole. Guess the common wisdom (once again) was wrong: isn’t it time to get rid of this pernicious practice?

New Jersey: Legislator calls for referenda on land thefts
http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051006/NEWS/51006016
Asbury Park Press
"A state lawmaker wants to forbid municipalities from condemning property for private economic redevelopment without first having a public referendum on the matter. Assemblyman Patrick J. Diegnan Jr., D-Middlesex, announced Thursday he will introduce a measure this fall requiring public votes on eminent domain. He also wants the state to have to approve all municipal resolutions designating redevelopment areas, some of which can now take effect if the Department of Community Affairs fails to issue an opinion." (10/06/05)
As expected, the opposition to this bill is something fierce, with claims that it will “destroy” local government and eliminate all hope of economic development. New Jersey is already infamous for its abuse of small business and homeowners, and while this would be only a small improvement, anything would help – but I don’t expect it to pass.

DC: Thieves move in on ballpark land
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051006-120902-5838r.htm
Washington Times
"The District will begin using eminent domain to acquire parcels of land at the site of the Washington Nationals' ballpark by the end of this month, after unsuccessful negotiations with nearly half of the landowners. City officials said they expect to file court documents to take over at least some of the 21-acre site in the coming weeks and have $97 million set aside to buy the properties and help landowners relocate. The city made offers to all 23 landowners on the site last month but received no response from 10. ... Many property owners on the site said the city's offers are inadequate. Others are suing the city on the grounds that it has no right to use eminent domain to acquire land at the site. ... In April, the city notified property owners on the site that they would be required to move out by Dec. 31." (10/06/05)
“Unsuccessful negotiations” with eminent domain powers generally mean “We made them an offer that was too low, and they refused it, like we knew they would, so it is time to send in the lawyers and cops and dogs.” Watch the abuse: will it resemble New London or Zimbabwe more? I’m betting on Zimbabwe, given DC’s common roots in the Third World.

World Wars (Terrorists, etc.)

Chilling video shows Bali bombing suspect
http://tinyurl.com/93ujh
Indianapolis Star
"Police raised the alert level for Indonesia's capital and the president warned of more attacks Sunday as a chilling video shot the day before showed a suspected bomber clutching a backpack and strolling past diners moments before one of three suicide bombings killed 26 people on Bali. The near-simultaneous bombings on the resort island also injured 101 people, including six Americans." (10/02/05)
Biggest news on the war front this week was the new attack in Indonesia, which shows that even talking to the US is bad for you, if you are an Islamic country.

US: Colombia should fumigate coca
http://tinyurl.com/7f5pq
Detroit Free Press
"The U.S. ambassador urged Colombia Sunday to spray weed killer inside the country's spectacular nature parks to destroy cocaine-producing crops, insisting the chemicals will not cause widespread damage to the reserves' ecosystems. Harried by eradication campaigns elsewhere, drug traffickers have in recent years streamed into the parks, where spraying is banned. In the parks, they have torn down thousands of acres of virgin rain forest to plant coca, the raw ingredient in cocaine. In response, Colombia's government is debating whether to lift a ban on aerial fumigation in the reserves." (10/02/05)
It would appear that the parks have already had their ecosystem destroyed, but that does not mean that the chemicals will not cause more damage. Again, we have to ask, who is to blame for this? American consumers continue to buy the stuff, and desperate for a living, these people grow the stuff.

Nathan Barton is a libertarian writing from the Black Hills. Your comments are appreciated!
We hope to resume our daily commentary next week.

Smartest and Dumbest States?

2005-10-10T14:00:00.000-06:00

A friend sent this article to me, and after choking on my tea, I had to respond. See my comments at the end!

The smartest state in the union for the second consecutive year is Massachusetts.

The dumbest, for the third year in a row, is New Mexico.

These are the findings of the Education State Rankings, a survey by Morgan Quitno Press of hundreds of public school systems in all 50 states. States were graded on a variety of factors based on how they compare to the national average. These included such positive attributes as per-pupil expenditures, public high school graduation rates, average class size, student reading and math proficiency, and pupil-teacher ratios. States received negative points for high drop-out rates and physical violence.How does YOUR state rank?

#1 Massachusetts
Connecticut
Vermont
New Jersey
Wisconsin
New York
Minnesota
Iowa
Pennsylvania
Montana

#11 Maine
Virginia
Nebraska
New Hampshire
Kansas
Wyoming
Indiana
Maryland
North Dakota
Ohio

#20 Colorado
South Dakota
Rhode Island
Illinois
North Carolina
Missouri
Delaware
Utah
Idaho
Washington

#30 Michigan
South Carolina
Texas and West Virginia (tie)
Oregon
Arkansas
Kentucky
Georgia
Florida
Oklahoma

#40 Tennessee
Hawaii
California
Alabama
Alaska
Louisiana
Mississippi
Arizona
Nevada
#50 New Mexico

COMMENTARY:

What a marvelous piece of garbage!

"These are the findings of the Education State Rankings, a survey by Morgan Quitno Press of hundreds of public school systems in all 50 states."

Morgan Quitno, though based in Lawrence, Kansas (home of the University of Kansas), is the epitome of the "beltway bandit" firm: they specialize in putting together and publishing "Best of/Worst of" studies and lists for states and cities on all kinds of subjects: safest and most dangerous, most and least livable, etc. KTGF-TV of Great Falls has this about them: "Morgan Quitno Press is an independent private research and publishing company located in Lawrence, Kansas. Founded in 1989, the company specializes in reference books and monthly reports that compare states and cities in several different subject areas. The corporation is not a subsidiary of any other company nor is it subsidized by any outside interest group. Its books are found in reference libraries throughout the United States and around the world." No, they aren't subsidized by any "outside interest group" - they are subsidized by the thousands of government and school libraries and agencies that buy their books avidly, and ARE an "outside interest group."

The first thing we see about this "smartest/dumbest" state is that it is based on surveys of PUBLIC schools (that is, government-run, tax-funded schools) - not on the population as a whole, or even the whole student body of a state (and with some states having 11% or more K-12 students in home school or private schools, that can make a difference). But there is more.

"States were graded on a variety of factors based on how they compare to the national average."

At first, this doesn't seem untoward, but think - it is not compared to a true baseline, the way quality of gasoline is judged, or the way teachers (used to) grade tests - this is grading on the curve. It would be like doing a survey of countries in Africa on which allow the "most and least freedom" to their people, but using the average situation in Africa, rather than even the whole world, as the standard. But let's look at what the 50 states are being judged on-

"These included such positive attributes as per-pupil expenditures,"

Dozens of studies have shown that "per-pupil" spending has little to do with the quality of an education - much less with whether the products of that education (students) are smart or dumb.

"public high school graduation rates,"

In an era where high-school graduates cannot properly balance a checkbook nor read a newspaper, much less calculate the volume of a tank or understand an MSDS, this is a complete hoot as a "standard" - it is meaningless.

"average class size,"

Again, studies have demonstrated the worthlessness of this factor - and if class size were really important, then I have two questions: (1) why don't we go back to one-room schools where each teacher only has 10-12 students, and (2) why do enormous (but successful) universities put virtually all of their freshmen in core classes where the class size is in the hundreds?

"student reading and math proficiency,"

This is really the only thing listed that MIGHT have some relation to "smartness and dumbness" for states - except that the basis of these proficiency scores is based on a plethora of state and even local "standard tests" and evaluations all designed to demonstrate that the public schools reporting have as much state and federal money as they want, and that their teachers continue to draw a paycheck. So I don't rank this very high as far as telling what states are "smart" and "dumb."

"and pupil-teacher ratios."

This is completely bogus, as it is just a slightly different way of saying "class size."

"States received negative points for high drop-out rates"

Also bogus, as this is just another way of stating "graduation rates." Nor does it necessarily account for those people who get GEDs, nor possibly even for those whose parents have pulled them into home schooling or private schools.

"and physical violence."

Again, this MIGHT be a good indicator of school quality and conditions, but has little to do with judging smartness or dumbness: even SMART people can be prone to violence, and DUMB people are often peaceful (or cowed, which is a different thing entirely). But the sources of information on school violence are themselves highly suspect: a tremendous amount of in- and school-related violence NEVER gets reported: not just not reported to a teacher or administrator but not reported to cops or courts.

In short, this survey is absolutely worthless except for selling ads in papers and on television. But it MIGHT be useful, if not for determining the intelligence of the PEOPLE of a state, for determining the intelligence of the state agencies and public schools in those states: any organization which buys this report (either in the sense of purchasing the book or agreeing with its rankings) has just demonstrated, on an objective scale, and not a curve, that they are dumber than rocks.

Baker’s Dozen ™ Hints - Tasks for a Community Emergency Response Team

2005-09-14T08:37:00.000-06:00

Every community should have volunteer, informal groups that are prepared to respond to help neighbors and deal with disasters that threaten the community. There are many tasks that can be done by a CERT, and often a community should specialize and have several teams to deal with different situations. In many cases, these teams will support other community resources, like the volunteer fire department, sheriff’s office or posse, ambulance service, or homeowners’ association. In other cases, they must function on their own, either because the situation is not of a scale to trigger those, or because the disaster is so serious that the normal emergency response resources are completely swamped either locally or someplace else. Here are some of the common tasks that a CERT in the Western US might need to do:

1. Assist in the evacuation of community members with handicaps, elderly, with small children, or other unique situations.

2. Coordinate for emergency transportation for people, food, water, medicine, etc.

3. Provide for purification of water in case of disruption or contamination of the water supply.

4. Provide for emergency sanitation in case of failure of normal sanitation facilities.

5. Fighting small wildfires.

6. Searching for lost children or elderly.

7. Delivering emergency messages door-to-door.

8. Providing food and water for emergency response personnel or from people evacuated from their homes.

9. Providing supplies and assistance for shelters in community centers, church buildings, or other locations for refugees.

10. Assist other first-responders with crowd and traffic control.

11. Provide a place where people in the community can come to get questions answered, leave messages, donate assistance and materials, and otherwise help.

12. Provide a forum for helping people plan individually for disasters, distributing information, sharing ideas, and other actions BEFORE an emergency.

13. Recruit people to form other community emergency response teams.

These are just a few of the many tasks that a CERT, often only four or five people, can perform to help a community pull together in case of disaster, whether we are talking a wildfire, a blizzard, windstorm, power outage, influx of refugees, hazmat incident, or other emergency. Even preparation and cooperation on a completely voluntary and small scale can save lives and communities.

©2005 Information Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.

Bakers Dozen (TM) Hints to Prepare for Disasters

2005-09-14T08:34:00.001-06:00

Based on the recent responses (or lack thereof) of government at all levels to natural disasters, and the aftermath of natural disasters, it is wise to take a little time and do some preparation in case YOU find yourself in such a situation. Assume that no government agency will be there to help.

1. Have a “GO-bag” with you at all times. A “GO” bag consists of those items which you need for the next 12-18 hours in case you are cut off from your normal house, office, vehicle, or work location. It might include keys, phone, phone card, a bottle of water, medication, paper and pen/pencil, spare ammo, and other items, and should be small enough to fit into your briefcase, a shoulder bag, or a small day-pack.

2. Make sure that you and your family have an evacuation plan of your own, and places (plural) to assemble in case you are caught when the family is scattered when a crisis erupts, and the priority in which they are to be used. Where those locations are is very much dependent on the type of threats that you may face.

3. Have a larger “GO-pack” in your vehicle at all times. This includes items similar to your “GO-bag” – those things you would need for 24-72 hours cut off from your home, your workplace, and sources of supply. It might include water, food, first-aid, emergency vehicle items, ammo, weapons, and perhaps even an old cell-phone and charger, FRS radios, and similar items. Although normally kept in your vehicle, it should be something that you can pack at least a short distance on your back: a medium-size pack or small duffel.

4. Make sure that your home and office are prepared in case of a disaster such as a blackout, storm, or other incident that does not directly threaten you or your location. This includes having supplies on hand, such as water, non-electric appliances (such as can-openers and ventilators), medicines, and ways to ventilate or heat the place. You should be able to live in your house or office for up to a week when cut off from normal utilities and access.

5. Make yourself a safe place in your apartment, house, or on your property – a place to allow you and your family to defend and survive for up to 96 hours, with supplies, protection/shelter, and defenses; assuming that all utilities are shut off and that bad guys are running around without control.

6. Ensure that you have at least some supplies and tools available to do emergency repairs on your house, such as blocking off broken windows, providing for security in case of broken locks, shutting off gas, water, or electricity, and have a plan to know how to do these things.

7. Encourage your relatives, neighbors, fellow church-members, business associates, and service providers to do these things as well. Share ideas, but be careful about specifics on what YOU have done, or on finding out what THEY are specifically doing.

8. Organize community emergency response teams (CERT) that are volunteer, relatively informal, teams of people that learn what can be done and decide what they can do in case of a disaster in a community.

9. Make sure that you have a means of escape at all times. For most of us, that means having a working automobile of some kind – in reasonably good working order, with the GO bag there. And make sure that your fuel tank is at least ½ full at all times. (For others, that may require working with someone who DOES have a good vehicle, or other alternatives.)

10. Ensure that you have multiple escape routes to use based on the threat (such as, for example, flash flooding) to get from your normal locations to your assembly point and to a safe place.

11. Arrange in advance for one or more places to take shelter, if need be for an extended time, if it is necessary to evacuate; this might be with family or friends or an affiliated church, or a place where the family goes for vacations.

12. Ensure that you have adequate weapons suited for your location and situation, and that you have been trained on these.

13. Ensure that you have adequate ammunition for your weapons, both for training and for emergency use; assume that resupply may NOT be possible for an extended period (years).

These are just a few of the most critical items that you need in case of emergency. But the most important is your attitude: “I CAN survive, I CAN make a difference, and I DON’T have to depend on welfare or forced help from anyone.” Are you ready?

(c) 2005 Information Incorporated

Darkness Descends in Zimbabwe

2005-07-31T21:29:00.000-06:00

This is being posted here (and elsewhere) in lieu of a news report, since it is a private letter. I do not know the person writing it, but did get this from a reliable friend, and am assuming it is legitimate. It certainly matches what press reports are getting out about the terror descending on Zimbabwe. This expropriation and destruction is very important and timely to watch here in the US, in light of the infamouse June 23rd decision by the Supreme Court allowing "public use" as stated in the constitution to apply to anything with some "public benefit" including increased tax revenue.

A letter from Zim......
Sent in by John Winter:

I reckon that these are the last days of TKM and ZPF.
The darkest hour is always before dawn.

We are all terrified at what they are going to destroy next........I mean
they are actually plowing down brick and mortar houses and one white family
with twin boys of 10 had no chance of salvaging anything when 100 riot
police came in with AK's and bulldozers and demolished their beautiful
house - 5 bedrooms and pine ceilings - because it was "too close to the
airport"..so we are feeling extremely insecure right now. You know - I am
aware that this does not help you sleep at night, but if you do not know -
how can you help?

Even if you put us in your own mental ring of light and send your guardian
angels to be with us - that is a help - but I feel so cut off from you all
knowing I cannot tell you what's going on here simply because you will feel
uncomfortable. There is no ways we can leave so that is not an option. I
just ask that you all pray for us in the way that you know how, and let me
know that you are thinking of us and sending out positive vibes... that's
all.

You can't just be in denial and pretend its not going on. To be frank with
you, its genocide in the making and if you do not believe me, read the
Genocide Report by Amnesty International which says we are IN level seven
(level 8 is after its happened and everyone is in denial). If you don't
want me to tell you these things then it means you have not dealt with your
own fear, but it does not help me to think you are turning your back on our
situation.

We need you to get the news OUT that we are all in a fearfully dangerous
situation here. Too many people turn their backs and say - oh well, that's
what happens in Africa. This government has GONE MAD and you need to
publicize our plight or how can we be rescued?

You can't just say "oh you attract your own reality". The petrol queues are
a reality, the pall of smoke all around our city is a reality, the
thousands of homeless people sleeping outside in 0 Celsius with no food
water, shelter and bedding are a reality.

Today a family approached me, brother of the gardener's wife with two small
children. Their home was trashed and they will have to sleep outside. We
already support 8 people and a child on this property and electricity is
going up next month by 250% as is water. How can I take another family of
4 - and yet how can I turn them away to sleep out in the open?

I am not asking you for money, or a ticket out of here - I am asking you to
FACE the fact that we are in deep and terrible danger and I want you to
pass on our news and pictures and don't just press the delete button for
God's sake. Help in the way that you know how. Face the reality of what is
going on here and SEND OUT THE WORD. The more people that know about it,
the more chance we have of United Nations coming to our aid.

Please stop ignoring and denying what's happening. Would you like to be
protected from the truth and then if we are eliminated how would you feel?
Surely you would say "if only we knew how bad it really was we could have
helped in some way". I know we chose to stay here and so we "deserve"
what's coming to us. For now we ourselves, have food, shelter, a little
fuel and a bit of money for the next meal - but what is going to happen
next? Will they start on our houses? All property is going to belong to the
State now. I want to send out my Title Deeds to one of you because if they
get a hold of those I can't fight for my rights.

We no longer have SW radio which told us everything that was happening
because the government jammed it out of existence - we don't have any
reporters, and no one is allowed to photograph. If we had reporters here
they would have an absolute field day. Even the pro government Herald has
written that people are shocked, stunned, bewildered and blown mindless by
the wanton destruction of everyone's homes which are supposed to be
"illegal but which a huge percentage of them actually do have licenses for.
Please my children - have some compassion and HELP by sending out the
articles and personal reports so that something can be DONE.
---

Baker's Dozen (tm): Celebrate a Safe 4th

2005-07-02T12:31:00.000-06:00

A Baker’s Dozen ™ Citizen’s Guide to Celebrating the Fourth of July (2005)

As we celebrate our Nation’s 229^th Birthday, please have a safe and sane holiday. Some tips for observing this holiday:

1. Celebrate our nation’s birthday in a safe manner. Observe the official fireworks put on by your local authorities and do not allow your children or others to use fireworks, which are unsafe, prone to injure them and others, likely to cause wildfires, and often a nuisance to your neighbors. (Please report illegal fireworks at once to your local law enforcement agency or call 1-888-ATF-BOMB to report to the BATFE.)

2. Drive to your celebration safely. Make sure you wear your seatbelts, have all the children in government-approved child safety seats, have all your forms and travel papers (drivers license, car registration, auto insurance, health insurance) in order, don’t drink and drive, don’t smoke and drive, and don’t talk on your cell phone and drive. And please be polite to the police officers at all the checkpoints: they are doing this for your safety and protection.

3. Don’t drink too much; especially not if you are driving, boating, walking, watching a parade, riding a horse, or anything else for which (for your own safety and that of others) you may have to be detained by police.

4. Don’t frown or stare at people, no matter what they are doing or wearing (or not wearing). Remember, staring at unclothed or partially clothed people is sexual harassment, and frowning may be seen as anti-social and racist or bigoted in some way.

5. Don’t talk politics at Fourth of July events – this may get people angry, especially if you talk about independence, liberty, freedom, and other words banned by Microsoft in China.

6. Don’t pray or talk religion at Fourth of July events – especially on public property, including streets and road rights-of-way, fairgrounds, parks, and national forest and park lands. This is probably violating regulations and court decisions, and may get people angry and embarrassed.

7. Do not use firearms in any way to celebrate the Fourth. Not only is this dangerous and illegal in most (well, all sane) places, but can scare and scar children and sensitive people for life, both mentally and emotionally.

8. Do nothing which will damage the natural environment: do not use charcoal or wood fires which create excessive smoke, do not use ATVs or 4WD vehicles, do not use perfumed sunscreen or bug spray. These all create damage to the soil, vegetation, wildlife, and people sensitive to odors, smoke, and other environmental pollutants.

9. Always only attend publicly-sponsored and government-approved events, where safety, security, and law enforcement are strictly controlled. There is safety in numbers, as long as there is enough security around. Even when not having fun, pretend to, so that you will not harm people’s self-image because they think you don’t like being around them.

10. Remember to protect yourself from common threats and injuries. Use sunscreen and bug-spray (as approved by government agencies) to protect yourself from sunburn, West Nile virus, bird flu, heat stroke, etc. Purchase food, drink, and souvenirs only from properly licensed and government-approved vendors: otherwise you may fail to pay the proper amount of taxes, you may get food poisoning, sickness from undercooked meat, or drink contaminated water, and you may buy items which are not properly child-safe.

11. Do not attempt to physically restrain children (including teenagers and all persons below legal drinking age) from doing anything, even if their actions may be seen as anti-social or threatening: you will be violating child-protection laws, may be performing an act of sexual predation, or breaking other local, state, and federal laws. Instead, call for police officers to properly detain and remove the out-of-control child.

12. Avoid any kind of entertainments which may be illegal in your jurisdiction. Remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse: you must be aware of all restrictions. Common ones to avoid: animal fights (including cock fights), open containers and excessive drinking, smoking in “no-smoking” zones, loud music from boom-boxes or automobiles, low-riding, sun-bathing in restricted zones, playing in water sprinklers on a no-watering day, use of paintball guns, spray string, skateboards, in-line skates, and other restricted items.

13. Remember how grateful you should be to those who won and keep this nation in existence and protect us from dangers and evil: be sure and tell law enforcement officers and other government employees how much you appreciate their selfless dedication and efforts to protect and serve the public.

Although Baker’s Dozen Tips are usually serious, I hope that by now, all readers will see that this is satire and NOT to be taken seriously. If you are upset by this, please, immediately contact a local liberty-lovers group and join their efforts to properly honor our nation’s efforts for both freedom and liberty for our ancestors, ourselves, and our posterity.

The End of Private Property - What Now?

2005-06-24T18:04:00.000-06:00

What now? (Part I – Consequences)

“And just when will the revolution actually start now?” That was the first question my wife had when I told her of the insane 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court announced yesterday, concerning the power of government to seize private property.[1] And it is a valid question. This morning, a raft of stories about some of the 10,000 “eminent domain” actions in progress across the former republican union popped up on various web news-sites and newspaper sites.

As many people have pointed out, the United States Constitution, and virtually all institutions of free nations, are built on a solid bedrock of establishing the principle of ownership of property. My recent article on nation-building[2] listed this as the number 2 priority, right after removing government’s power to harm its members or neighbors:

“Establish ownership of property (institutionalize property). Establish and enforce ownership by individuals of all possible resources, including land, structures, water, air, airspace, broadcasting bands (frequencies), ideas, and rights to provide specified services to specific persons or in specific locations for specific purposes. English common law developed to provide this institutionalization of property, and evolved by hard knocks to ensure that resources (assets) held informally or put to use were recognized as property. The institution of property, free from the whims of rulers, invaders, and envious neighbors is essential to create a free society.”

Obviously, this Supreme Court decision, for those in states without very solid protections in their own constitutions against eminent domain, has just destroyed that bulwark of freedom. When coupled with the affirmation (and expansion) of the 1942 case which expands the “commerce clause” to anything Congress wishes to consider “interstate commerce” in the medical cannabis case ruling[3] several weeks ago and Monday’s ruling on a California property rights case[4], it creates a situation in which that “line in the sand” that indicates the final destruction of the Republic has been crossed. Hence my wife’s question.

Indeed, we are only beginning to be able to examine the consequences of this ruling, although one of the four dissenting justices (O’Connor) wrote:

“Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded — i.e., given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public — in the process. To reason, as the court does, that the incidental public benefits resulting from the subsequent ordinary use of private property render economic development takings “for public use” is to wash out any distinction between private and public use of property—and thereby effectively to delete the words ‘for public use’ from the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”

The very evil of this ruling can be seen by looking at the very case on which it was made, and hundreds of other cases now pending across the nation, and sure to be prosecuted with vigor based on this ruling (just as Federal agents in California are even now rounding up “criminals” after the medical cannabis ruling and most recent failure by Congress to rectify the situation).

But we have a very real, very horrific example in today’s news of exactly what this decision will ultimately lead to, titled by one writer as “Holocaust in Zimbabwe.”[5] In that poor nation, its ruler, the power-mad Robert Mugabe, has ordered the demolition of the shacks and gardens of somewhere between 300,000 and one million of its poorest citizens, sending them homeless to live in the streets, or in some cases, burying them or their children in the rubble of their homes; and intends to do the same thing to the houses of people violating zoning ordinances by having offices or workshops in their homes.

“Oh, that can’t happen here!” How often have we heard those words? Yet, it may happen here sooner than later, and in the very town whose tyrannical rulers brought this to the Court in the first place. A number of people in the Fort Trumball area of New London, Connecticut, have said that they will continue to resist the theft of their homes. And so, one day soon, armed police, probably with SWAT teams, handcuffs, battering rams and all the other paraphernalia of dictatorship, will show up on the few remaining doorsteps of the neighborhood (all of the homes which once surrounded those few people who fought in the courts have been demolished and the area apparently looks like Potsdammer Platz in 1946) to assault and drag away, among others, an 81-year-old woman from the only home she has ever had. And no doubt, the blue-clad thugs of the City of New London will be backed up by the armed might of the Connecticut State Police and probably even a variety of federal agency goons.

They probably won’t make her and the other surviving remnants of the community actually live in the streets; they’ll get nice warm jail cells for a while, at least, and when (months or years later) the checks get cut, they’ll theoretically be able to buy new homes – or at least new places to live. But such an eventual outcome does not excuse the criminal (or at least immoral) act of stealing in the first place, nor the mistreatment of the people victims of this theft.

As the editorial in the New Hampshire Union Leader stated on Friday[6]: “In essence, all land in the United States is now state-owned.” No different than Communist China, Communist Cuba, the Third Reich, the Soviet Union, or ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia: the thugs have won.

Some of the immediate impacts have already been discussed on radio, in discussion groups, on blogs, etc.:

1. Churches are in great risk. Religious organizations do not pay property taxes, but now, under the premise that “economic development” = “government revenue enhancement,” this will encourage local governments to exercise eminent domain (i.e., steal) on church properties (and other tax-exempt properties) in order to sell them to new owners for commercial purposes and therefore be able to add them to the tax rolls.

2. Especially in California, with Proposition 13, and other locations where property tax valuations are frozen as long as the residence is not sold, it will be possible (and eminently logical) to condemn the properties, pay the current market value to the owners, then allow them to buy back their property at the same price they just sold it for – a price that now forms the baseline for property tax appraisals and levies: in some cases in California, this apparently would instantly increase property tax generated from the property by five times or more. Or the city/county could simply sell their new property to whomever they would, leaving the old owner out in the cold (albeit with a nice check).

3. The use of eminent domain by unscrupulous “big-box store” chains and opportunistic and tyrannical “economic development” bureaucrats and their schills in city and county councils is well-known, especially in places like the Front Range Metroplex of Colorado, and will see rapid expansion, now that the American Planning Society, Municipal League, and other government lobbying groups have this victory. And to that we can add plans to demolish entire neighborhoods for the sake of constructing vast sports temples in New York, DC, and other places: mixing “bread and circuses” with welfare to the rich (sports owners and players) and vast profits in the form of taxes for cities and counties.

4. Various cities and counties and states can be expected to become a lot more aggressive, and the courts much more biased, in various cases where there is some question as to whether the intended use is indeed “public,” as in dozens of cases regarding easements for pipelines, power facilities (such as power windmills and solar systems), and streets, parking, etc. Abuse will grow significantly.

I don’t have the imagination to come up with some other results of this catastrophic decision, but I can be sure that “innovative” tyrants and their sycophants will use their imaginations. But I am reminded of what newly-confirmed Federal Circuit Court Judge, then-California Supreme Court Justice, Janice Rogers Brown wrote in dissent to the California case I mentioned earlier: "Theft is theft even when the government approves of the thievery," she wrote. "Turning a democracy into a kleptocracy does not enhance the stature of the thieves, it only diminishes the legitimacy of the government." Today, just months later, her words ring true.

As with the medical cannabis decision, there are those who will immediately expect the legislature or the executive to come to their rescue. Such hopes will be no more realized than the expectation that such intervention would save Terry Schiavo’s life several months ago. For example, Brown’s opinion was used by some senators in opposing her recent elevation to a federal appeals court: she is “too radical.”

So what now? What do we do?

I have already received e-mail urging me to participate in a form of recall petitions against this Gang of Five (John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer), and actually, I would include the sixth, Scalia, who filed a concurring opinion in the medical cannabis case, as well. The usual call, to “Support President Bush” and get in more conservative justices when (whenever) one or two retire, has inevitably been made. Other ideas as well will be bandied about in the next days. In my second part of this article, I’ll look at some alternative actions.

FYI: The three court cases are:

San Remo Hotel v. City and County of San Francisco, 04-340

Kelo v. New London, 04-108

Ashcroft, et al. v. Raich, et al. 03-1454

[1] NEW news story reference

[2] Baker’s Dozen ™ Tips on Rebuilding Disfunctional Societys, http://libertys-outpost.blogspot.com/, 9 Jun 2005

[3] http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/06/scotus.medical.marijuana.ap/

[4] http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050620/D8ARHDE00.html: The Supreme Court said Monday that people who lose state lawsuits claiming the government improperly took their property cannot count on federal courts for help. In Monday's decision, the justices ruled against a historic San Francisco hotel that wanted to convert rooms - previously designated for permanent residents - to accommodate tourists. The city had restrictions on hotel changes, as part of an ordinance intended to preserve housing for the poor, disabled and elderly. When the San Remo Hotel was ordered to pay $567,000, it sued in state court and narrowly lost at the California Supreme Court in 2002. There were no harsh words in Monday's 9-0 Supreme Court ruling that found the 62-room hotel could not pursue a federal case because state courts had already addressed all the issues. "This is a big victory for local governments," said Nicole Garnett, a Notre Dame law professor.

[5] http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44963

[6] http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=56728

Interesting Things about Bills of Rights

2005-06-18T20:21:00.000-06:00

I'm always having folks point me to new things on-line, and this above site is courtesy of Sunni (http://www.endervidualism.com/salon/web/w0605.htm) and is of considerable interest, because it shows a willingness to keep minor differences in philosophy from interfering with useful cooperative efforts. One thing of interest I noticed was the list of "Documents Which Encompass Human Rights" and their disclaimer: "Inclusion of a document on this list does not imply agreement with the entire document. These are just examples of documents that recognize individual rights." They list six.

I of course have a certain fondness for the United States' Bill of Rights (US-BOR) (which tops the list) - due to ancestry, raising, my own free acceptance of an obligation to defend and protect it, and my day-to-day life under its protections, but I am readily willing to admit that it has its flaws. My state's (South Dakota's) Bill of Right [sic] is better: more specific, more forthright and in keeping with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence itself, although it shares some flaws with the US version. These include no enforcement mechanism except the courts (what a laughable concept THAT is, in view of 220+ years of history), the right to keep and bear arms, and (in SD's case, only) the statement of the inherent right of the people to reform or abolish the government. It also resides within the context of the entire Constitution, and as recent court decisions have again reminded us, that venerable document contains loopholes large enough (sadly) to drive an entire PanzerArmee through. The other documents I look on with decreasing pleasure: starting with the next oldest, the French "Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen" (DRMC), which you can find at (http://www.hrcr.org/docs/frenchdec.html) This little piece of statist disinformation, with its meandering about "law" and "nation" and "society" is far worse than (and three times as long as) the US-BOR (especially its morbid fascination with "law"). While no more followed by successive French governments that the BOR is by the present American government branches, is far more able to be subverted (as those same French governments have demonstrated time and again). Its Gallic influence is seen in the current European Union's failed constitution.

It is not all bad, of course, and has some definite flairs in places, as in Article 4:"Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law. "

However, this is immediately offset by the very next article: "5. Law can only prohibit such actions as are hurtful to society. Nothing may be prevented which is not forbidden by law, and no one may be forced to do anything not provided for by law."Which is the measure? Persons or society? If it said, "Law can only prohibit such actions as are hurtful to others" it would be consistent with itself, at least. The last phrase of the second sentence - at first I thought it had no redeeming features at all, but maybe if it said, "No one may be forced to do anything." it might make sense.

Oh, and no right to keep and bear arms or to replace the government.

The next is the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." (UDHR) Again, it is easy to see the influence of the French document in it, as well as to see its influence on the EU. And again, it sounds very pretty, but has no enforcement except a very oblique reference in the preamble: "Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law," - but we know how much good THAT has done. But as you read through its THIRTY articles (as compared to 17 in the DRHC and 10 in the US-BOR), you find that what the UN, even in 1948, considered "rights" sound like excuses for the existence of the state and its power: "social security" is a right; "food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services" are rights, "employment" is a right. (It is very interesting, though, in light of the worldwide clamor over same-sex marriage, to note that this document clearly defines marriage as between a man and a woman: "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family." (Article 16) There might be in there a right to plural marriages, but not to homosexual ones.) And some of the so-called "rights" are anything BUT rights: the most prominent one is in Article 26: "Elementary education shall be compulsory." And as you might imagine, no right to keep and bear arms. All in all, a worthless piece of paper, as germane to world history in the past 57 years as the location of Alexander's tomb.

The next is the 1982 "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" found at (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter). It starts out with two sick jokes to anyone who knows governments and Canada in the last 25 years. "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law..." - It may have been founded upon God, but the effort in the last quarter century has been to disassociate itself from God as much as possible - especially the God of the Anglican and Roman Catholic traditions of its founders. The next joke is worse, though (and the EU closely followed this in their botched attempt at a bill of rights): "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." In other words, folks, don't bother with the rest of it: "reasonable limits" and "demonstrations justification" are defined by either a one-vote majority in Commons or a one-vote majority of appointees to the High Bench. There ARE no freedoms and rights except as the powers-that-be are willing to let people have. And of course, there are no provisions for enforcement. And we are up to 34 Articles, although admittedly several of the articles deal with the unique English-French "multicultural" of Canada. At least (although they are meaningless, as I said) there are a few familiar rights that we south of the border recognize, such as banning self-incriminating and double-jeopardy. But no right to keep and bear arms, as Canadians are learning right now.

The last two documents listed are "The Australian Privacy Charter" and the "World Passport" - both of which are dream documents and about as applicable to real life as the EU's dead constitution, so I won't go into any detail. The Australian thing has at least one good article though: "People should have the option of not identifying themselves when entering transactions." Of course it is weasely "should" is not the same as saying: "No person shall be forced, under penalty of law, to identify themselves when entering transactions." If you are curious, go to: http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/PrivacyCharter.html. Please note, Australia HAS NO "Bill of Rights" except for tenuous claims to the old British one from 1688, because they are in allegiance to H.M. Queen Elizabeth, second of that name.

The "World Passport" (http://www.worldgovernment.org/docpass.html) is my opinion is a piece of garbage and does not belong in the links at all. It purports to support the right of free travel around the world, but that is a crock, to put it mildly. Whether your "papers" (as in "May I see your papers, please, comrade.") are issued by a wanna-be world government or a national government or a local dog-catcher/tyrant - they are still an affront to human liberty and dignity and deserve to be treated like any other attempt at slavery. Freedom to travel has to apply to anyone with or without papers or it is meaningless, in the long term (and often in the very short term, as well - try catching a plane in the USA today.) It is also, apparently, something of a scam, like International Drivers Licenses (not International Driving Permits) and claims that citing the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) will make the IRS back off.

The point is, there is not YET (and probably won't ever be) a "perfect" Bill of Rights, and attempts to define more and more rights specifically lead to all kinds of garbage. Bills of rights exist to limit the powers of government, NOT to establish or "give" rights to people, so maybe the entire concept of bills of rights is flawed. Maybe it would have been better if the Founding Fathers had entitled this "PROHIBITIONS ON ANY GOVERNMENT" and (of course) provided a mechanism for enforcement. But I fear that any human government beyond that of a small, voluntary membership (like that of a church congregation) is doomed to eventually try to take away every right - and this kind of thing just facilitiates that.

New Baker's Dozen: Rebuilding Nations

2005-06-09T18:02:00.001-06:00

This was first published at www.thepriceofliberty.org

Baker’s Dozen ™ Tips for Rebuilding Disfunctional Societies
With thanks to Quintin Langley for the original idea.

Massive invasions to “liberate” nations, even when coupled with massive foreign aid programs, voting schemes, and generous pensions for redundant politicians and military dictators, have been proven to be inadequate for creating truly human societies. (For example, it has been sixty years now since most of Europe was liberated from Nazi tyranny, and they STILL can’t get it right.) Therefore, these tips to create a functional and human society are provided for your use. WARNING: Avoid so-called “professional” individuals and groups, especially those who claim vast experience in nation-building (or re-building) and those with short acronyms or abbreviations like “UN”, “USA”, or “CPSU.”
While these tasks are listed in general order in which they should be accomplished, it is not always necessary to complete one task before proceeding to the next.

Remove or limit the ability of organizations (including “states” or “governments”) to harm their members (clients/citizens/etc.) and their neighbors. “De jure” limits seldom work unless “de facto” limits are already in place. In some cases, this may require five to ninety years to accomplish. Although “disarmament” is claimed by many to be the only way of removing or limiting this, history has shown that disarmament works, at best, for a very limited time; the time-proven method of limiting the ability to cause harm is to ensure that neighbors and citizens are adequately armed and capable of using those arms effectively.

Establish ownership of property (institutionalize property). Establish and enforce ownership by individuals of all possible resources, including land, structures, water, air, airspace, broadcasting bands (frequencies), ideas, and rights to provide specified services to specific persons or in specific locations for specific purposes. English common law developed to provide this institutionalization of property, and evolved by hard knocks to ensure that resources (assets) held informally or put to use were recognized as property. The institution of property, free from the whims of rulers, invaders, and envious neighbors is essential to create a free society.

Establish methods of resolving disputes which do not involve immediate use of weaponry or a ruling by a “wise man” from a throne. Solomon was a rarity: one in several hundred billion. Have several methods, at least somewhat independent. If it turns out that violence is sometimes necessary to resolve an otherwise insoluble dispute, make sure that obvious physical and mental differences are balanced.

Diversify education. Schools, formal or informal, are the basis of the flow of information required for a society to function. Turning schools into instruments of government, at ANY level (local, regional, national) ultimately destroys free speech AND the economy, as the aims of government are inexorably opposed to the goals of proper education: learning to communicate and share information. Education must be free and separate from the state, just as religion must be, and for most of the same reasons. Priority must be given to primary schools: higher education will follow naturally. No person, organization, or institution should have a monopoly on education anywhere, anytime.

Eliminate corruption at all levels, in both the “public” and “private” sectors. Under the table payments are damaging to society and the economy. Living on tips, whether you are a waiter, a soldier, or a politician, is corrosive and reduces or eliminates the feedback necessary for a market economy AND a free society. If the full price of the goods or services provided is not clear and up-front, inefficiency is far above tolerable levels.

Establish commonly accepted standards. This is a broad area, because it includes everything from commonly accepted standards for weight, length, and other physical measurements to commonly acceptable standards for proper behavior of children, teens, military personnel (on- and off-duty), business-owners, employers, employees, and media, among others.

Provide (as much as possible) all goods and services by private, voluntary actions. Do not attempt to allocate any goods or services by elections, appointed officials, or redistribution of stolen goods.

Eliminate (as much as possible) forced payments and forced services. This amounts, in fact, to an elimination of taxes. Make voluntary contributions the normal way of providing for needs which affect a large segment of society or for services which cannot be done by a free market. Once this is done, it doesn’t matter what you call the political leaders.

Devolve power. While a “strong man” or “man on a horse” may temporarily solve some problems, in anything but the very short term they create more problems than they ever solve. Whatever political power exists, whatever power to enforce laws, defend against aggression, or implement new laws or enforcement, must be divided as much as possible, both geographically and culturally (that is, by segments of society such as classes, ethnic groups, religious affiliations, or other divisions). In particular, internal defense against aggression (internal “police” powers) and external defense against aggression (“military” powers) must be kept separate, if at all possible with completely different geographic jurisdictions.

Encourage learning and education outside the state or country or society being “built.” Learning that there is a way of doing things outside your clan, town, county, people or nation, even if you don’t LIKE the other ways of doing things, matures you amazingly. Apply this principle even to those people who just can’t seem to understand that they are not supposed to attack people, control them, or be rude: whether this education is done by banishment or putting them in Coventry is really a moot point, as long as the rest of the population is safe from them.

Separate civic (ceremonial) and administrative (working) roles for government at all levels. No one needs any power whatsoever to welcome soldiers home, visitors to town, dedicate buildings, cry with the survivors, raise money to help the injured, or kiss babies.

Encourage preachers. Not “religious leaders” (whatever they may be called) but preachers – those teaching whatever doctrine they wish to proclaim, calling people in the public eye to account for their actions, urging people to live moral (or even immoral) lives, and reminding people there is something beyond society and the state.

Do it in writing. Living constitutions stink worse than the “dead” written word.

Version 1.1. This initial list may be amended in the future; your comments are appreciated and will be incorporated in future editions.
© 2005, Information Incorporated

Shadow Governments?

2005-06-09T18:01:00.000-06:00

Shadow government? An idea for the United States

For decades, if not centuries, Britain's parliamentary government has featured an unusual idea - that the opposition party in government should form a "shadow government" featuring "shadow ministers" and even shadow ministerial staffs. This allows the opposition to do several things, including assign responsibility for dealing with issues, prepare for an eventual accession to power, and provide a ready source of commentary to the press and elsewhere on specific issues and fields of concern. The closest thing the US has had to this concept has been the minority leaders and their subordinates (whips, etc.) in the various legislative houses. But since ministries (in the UK) are executive branch departments in the US, there had seldom been anything similar. The closest is the Democrat or GOP spokesman chosen to rebut the now traditional Saturday broadcast by the sitting president.

Of course, since there is much to argue for the fact that, philosophical differences apart, there is little if anything in actual RESULTS to distinguish between the two predominant, and old, parties, in the US, such a shadow administration is, at best, a token.

However, for the Libertarian Party, well outside the informal cartel of government power in DC and all fifty state capitols, the idea of a shadow government offers some potential, indeed.

Modern American government is huge. Even if a single Libertarian party member were able to respond as would be desirable to every pronouncement by a state cabinet member or department head, there is not enough time in the day (especially for volunteers). The same thing can be said of key legislative committee chairs, again at both the state and federal level. However, the appointment (or even, within the party, election) of shadow "secretaries" and shadow "chairs" of key departments and committees would allow for specialization AND time to respond in a given area of interest, as well as a certain legitimacy: "Today, Libertarian shadow Secretary of Defense John Smith condemned Secretary Rumsfeld's call for 50,000 more troops in Iraq" has a better ring than "Libertarian activist and spokesman John Smith condemned..." This will also encourage specialization and additional thought about specific political and governmental problems, which apply both to political/election efforts and to non-political libertarian efforts. For example, a series of web or telephone conferences between the fifty state shadow Attorneys General about how to respond to new mandates on Drivers Licenses would produce some very valuable ideas and information, as well as contacts and possibly, media attention. It would encourage cooperation in various efforts, including ballot initiatives, voter registration drives, and nonpolitical activities such as monetary alternatives and personal defense initiatives.

In addition, by appointing such shadow cabinet/chair positions several years in advance of elections, the opportunities for public speaking and attention in the media would increase. If shadow appointments to all legislative seats were done two years in advance, it would be a way of determining candidates for the elected office well in advance, AND give some more credence to their campaign. Jana Jones, appointed in 2006 as the Libertarian Party shadow County Commission Chair, who has been writing letters to the editor, commentaries, and making press releases for almost a year and a half prior to formally announcing she will run AGAINST the current Democratic Chair, has some visibility (and knowledge) that would otherwise not be there.

As liberty continues to be eroded away at the same rate as soil washing away from a freshly plowed field in Iowa during a cloud-burst, the existence of shadow government officials at all levels may be a valuable survival tool which will keep the present precarious state of affairs from being replaced by some kind of outright dictatorship (military or otherwise). This is really NOT a new idea: the pre-Revolutionary Committees of Correspondence in the Thirteen Colonies were very much shadow governments, and the Continental Congress, itself much a product of those committees, was an illegal or at least extra-governmental organization in the eyes of the Crown and the Crown's governments in the Colonies.

This is not offered as a panacea or as anything but yet another tool to use in the cause of liberty; one which will serve both political and non-political efforts.

If you are interested in this concept and wish to explore it, please (1) share this with other libertarians, (2) respond to this web-site with your ideas, comments, and encouragement, and (3) begin forming your own LOCAL shadow government. Start with your town, housing association, school board, or county.

Traveling Securely - A new "Bakers Dozen"

2005-03-16T22:57:00.001-07:00

A Baker’s Dozen Tips ™ To Traveling Securely by Nathan Barton and John Farnham © 2004

With the increased difficulty in using public transportation (planes and trains), more Americans are driving greater distances than ever. However, both in cities and other areas, there are threats to you and your property while traveling. There are a few simple items to reduce the risk and to be able to respond if a threat arises:
1. Ensure that you have basic equipment for responding to emergencies in your vehicle. Some of the equipment you should ALWAYS have: first-aid kit (trauma type), warning triangles and/or flashers, purified water (for drinking, cleaning, and emergency fluids replacement), paper and pencil, food (including candy or other items with sugar), and vehicle maintenance equipment (such as tire gauge, tire-changing equipment, spare, and owner’s manual).
2. Ensure that you vary your emergency equipment in your vehicle based on changing seasons and the area in which you are traveling. Seasonal equipment may include additional water, blankets or sleeping bags, snow shovel, suntan lotion, hats, coats, and raingear.
3. When parking your vehicle, make sure that you put away or cover items that might be a temptation to people to break in and steal. Also cover or put away items that may be damaged by the sun or heat. And of course, be sure you lock your car at all times when you are not in the vehicle.
4. Don’t leave children, animals, or other items in your vehicle, which may be damaged by extremes of heat or cold.
5. When traveling in heavy stop-and-go traffic, especially in central urban areas, keep doors locked and windows rolled up (as much as possible) to prevent someone from entering your vehicle without permission, or from throwing something into (or snatching something from) your vehicle.
6. Always inspect the exterior of your vehicle before getting in and driving, to check for damage (especially in a parking lot), broken lights, low or flat tires, and other problems.
7. When receiving your car back from a maintenance provider, in addition to checking to make sure that repairs were done as invoiced, and that key items are present and have been correctly replaced, also check that an excessive amount of mileage has not been used on the odometer.
Make sure that your registration, insurance information, and tags/stickers are all current, and have not been tampered with. When receiving replacements, check to make sure all information is correct. Whenever possible, do NOT put a street address on your various papers: instead use a post office box.
8. If you carry a pistol in your vehicle (a strong recommendation), make sure that it is convenient to reach if needed, that it is not visible from outside the vehicle, and that it is stored securely where it will not be dislodged in case of a sudden stop or accident. Ensure that you know what laws apply in states through which you travel.
9. If stopped by a patrolman or police officer, verify that the person really is a police officer before letting them take your documents or get into their vehicle. If possible, arrange thorough an auto club or other service to have a “bond” for minor traffic offenses, to avoid having to post large cash bails or pay large fines.
10. When you see an accident or what appears like an accident, if possible report the accident to an emergency dispatcher before stopping to assist, in case problems develop. When approaching the accident scene, keep a good distance to avoid problems with debris from the accident, attempts to seize your vehicle, and to allow emergency response vehicles adequate access, as well as pulling off the driving lane far enough for your own safety.
11. Especially before beginning a long trip or traveling to remote areas, check for adequate fuel, oil, radiator fluid, other fluids, spare tire, tire-changing equipment, and working lights, including turn signals.
12. If stopped and asked by law enforcement to voluntarily submit to a search, refuse to do so without a search warrant. If searching is done, politely express that you are allowing such under threat of force, and observe the searching as closely as possible. Request a written copy of anything that they claim to have found.
13. Your automobile should be as much your castle as your home, but the law does not always recognize that fact. Plan for that situation, and be prepared for whatever might happen.

© 2004 Information, Incorporated. Free for distribution without change and with all copyright notices intact. For corrections and ideas, please contact: WASTELINE6@aol.com This does NOT constitute legal advice or professional advice/consulting of any type, and the author is not responsible for any misuse of this information or errors contained herein.

A Baker's Dozen Tips (TM): Dealing with ID Theft

2005-03-01T20:54:00.000-07:00

© 2004 Wasteline, Inc. Used by Permission.

A major growth sector in US crime is identity theft. Millions are victimized every year by emptied bank accounts, charged-out credit accounts, ruined credit records, and even criminal records pointing towards the victim's identity. The Federal Trade Commission says that identity theft is the number-one form of fraud, with over 9 million people affected in 2003. Many people don’t find out for months that they were hit.

1. Fundamentals: Know what is needed to steal an identity – forewarned is forearmed. It doesn’t take much. A name, address (past or present), phone, birth date, Social Security number (SSAN), mother's maiden name, and just one of the following: bank account number (from a check), credit card number (from a sales slip or a bill), driver's license (from a motel receipt, perhaps), plate number and/or VIN (vehicle ID number), even a utility bill. A thief can make a few phone calls, do an online search and become you.
2. A Little Defense: There are lots of ways for the crook to get the data he (or she) needs: Pick pocketing, “shoulder surfing” and dumpster diving are covert ways of obtaining info, but registry clerks, medical filers, property management filers, bankers, utility company employees or any venue where you are required to give out your SSAN for services are the weakest links in your ability to conceal your ID. Dishonest employees sell lists of SSAN for cash. So the number one thing you can do is LIMIT HOW OFTEN YOU GIVE OUT THIS NUMBER! Don’t write your signature on your debit and credit cards – instead, print “SEE PHOTO ID” in that space, and use your drivers license, military ID, or school ID to show the signature. Make sure that clerks don’t write down the ID number or SSAN (if it appears on the ID) on a check or sales slip. Leave street addresses and SSAN OFF your checks – many people advise putting only initials, not full names.
3. The Postman Cometh: Postal address forms can be filled out and your mail redirected to a criminal’s address. Incoming and outgoing mail have everything they need. Credit card offers and loan applications have proprietary information, and can often be completed and approved with just a bogus signature. Stolen mail might never be missed, giving the thief a head start. If possible, use a locked USPS box, a private mailbox (PMB) (from the UPS Store or some other private business), or a mail slot, rather than a traditional outdoor mailbox.
4. For Whom the Phone Rings: Criminals don’t observe “no-call” lists. Some predators call congratulating you on winning a prize or trip. Someone will claim you hit their auto in a parking lot (or they hit yours!), or that they found something of yours with identity on it and ask you to confirm your SSAN, drivers license, or other number to prove you are who you claim to be.
5. Phishing and Other Computer Fun: The computer/internet version of phone fraud: e-mails asking for personal information and imitating a service provider or other business are common types of spam. Often the e-mail will direct you to a web-site that mimics a well-known and recognized web-site (such as Visa or Wells Fargo) but is really sitting on a server in Russia or Bermuda. Data-mining spyware is another threat, where you enter the very information they are looking for, for a legitimate site and use, and the number is collected by the spyware. Change passwords frequently and use “non-common” passwords.
6. Behind the Curve: On average, the FTC says it takes a person 12 to 16 months to realize they have been victimized by a well-run operation. Some thieves will pay off debt for up to a year to get larger increases on loans and credit cards, then cash in when the big loans and limits come in. Other times, less knowledgeable but lucky crooks can strip your accounts in mere days: a credit card with a 10,000-dollar limit can provide a spree of less than a week.
7. Prevention: Many small things can be done to prevent this from happening. Some ideas: get to know the people at the post office – especially in small towns. In larger towns, get to know your carrier, as well as UPS, FedEx and other delivery service drivers. If they see something that doesn't make sense they may be the first to notify you. Don’t just get a locking mailbox, but never put outgoing mail in an unsecured mailbox. Get a shredder and shred everything with a name, account number and address. Reduce exposure by paying as many bills online and getting online billing statements (only) for accounts. Limit the number of cards you have and use.
8. Watch out: It is critical to pay attention to your finances. Look at bills for items you never purchased, calls from credit card companies increasing your credit lines, calls from bill collectors looking for payments, and mail for people other than yourself (especially in the form of credit card statements or loans). Review your bank statements: electronic banking means they don’t need to steal your checks to steal your money. Look for an unusual amount of direct mail from a particular brand or product line; this represents a large purchase on behalf of the thief putting you on a direct mail list regarding their purchase.
9. Zip your lip: It is not necessary to give out your SSAN as much as you think. Only give it out if it is absolutely necessary, ask for alternatives. Deal only with established vendors with solid backgrounds. Never give out your mother’s maiden name unless absolutely necessary, and after verifying it is essential (look for other key questions to use).
10. Credit, Cash, Paper, or Plastic: Be careful: excessive inquiries into your credit lower your scores making you less able to get loans for cars or homes, but you should check your credit record at least annually, and perhaps quarterly (especially if you can’t lower your vulnerability). These checks make you aware of activity regarding your SSAN and accounts, especially new ones. Look over bills carefully, and keep sales slips.
11. Banker-Man: Establish a personal relationship with your banker – if you are using a large chain bank, pick a small branch to work with, not the main or major local office, and get to know them. At the same time, make sure that the bank uses their systems to verify “unusual” or “unexpected” changes in pattern. Protect your PIN (personal ID number) carefully: when new ones are assigned, immediately change to one that you DO NOT WRITE DOWN, at least not in a recognizable form.
12. If It Happens: First, contact the fraud departments of all three major credit bureaus – have them flag your SSAN. Contact all your banks, and change passwords (or put them into place if you don’t have them). Notify all credit card companies, and cancel all credit cards affected by theft. Notify local authorities – the location of your residence is usually who has jurisdiction, but this may vary by state. Check with your drivers license agency to make sure that new duplicates of licenses haven’t been issued, and to see if there are tickets you “didn’t get.” If the theft appears to be local, notify the people you normally do business with, including gasoline stations, convenience stores, supermarkets, discount stores, the post office, and similar places.
13. Business’ Responsibility: Identity theft is not your boss’s problem, but an employee struggling to get their life in order after being hit can hurt the business. The victim will be distracted, spend company time, use phones, go to court, come in late and leave early, as they work desperately to get the mess straightened out. An average victim is estimated to spend 175+ hours in the effort, which can cost up to $20,000. Employee training can help your employees, and the business.
© 2004 Information, Incorporated. Free for distribution without change and with all copyright notices intact. For corrections and ideas, please contact: WASTELINE6@aol.com This does NOT constitute legal advice or professional advice/consulting of any type, and the author is not responsible for any misuse of this information or errors contained herein.

Views of History

2005-02-24T09:54:00.000-07:00

There are a good many views or interpretations of history, both of the world and of the United States. The common textbooks, both for secondary schools and tertiary schools (colleges) seldom present any of these views except for the one which the author has chosen. Yes, the events are the same (although which are covered and which are skipped are different), but the way we look at those events is really the important thing: history exists for us to learn from, to benefit from: otherwise, it is a waste of time. Interesting perhaps, but a waste of time.

Our interpretation of history is of course based on our viewpoint. A communist looks at history very much differently from a libertarian. Libertarian views of history, in fact, are very rare - most published views are those of statists, after all. It is important, though, to recognize the viewpoint of something we are reading or studying, even if we don't agree with the point of view; it is equally important to read history with a viewpoint other than our own (provided we realize that it is), to better understand history from our viewpoint.

In some cases, we change our point of view in general, and yet, it may take some time before we realize that has changed our point of view of history: yet if one happens, the other is necessary. Anyone who started their political life as a conservative or liberal (or any other kind of statist) who has become libertarian, is aware of this.

There are several good examples of libertarian points of view that are worth discussing, briefly:

"Hologram of Liberty" by Boston T. Party, a popular and yet private libertarian writer, presents a very different point of view of the United States Constitution and the growth and development of the Republic, one which might make even 100-100 (Nolan chart) libertarians want to throw the book across the room. His premise is simple, and he argues very well for it: that the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, was intentionally written as a flawed document which ALLOWS the explosion of government size and power that has taken place over the last 210+ years, and that those who wrote it knew exactly what their intentional flaws would lead to, because that was their goal.

A second view of history is illustrated by that other illustrious libertarian, Murray Rothbard. In a column he wrote 10 years ago, but recently republished at Lew Rockwell (see below), entitled "Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty" he pointed out the significant difference between conservatives (including neo-conservatives) and liberals (both classical and modern) in American history in the last century, and what that has done to freedom, not just in the United States, but for the entire world. In particular, he points out that the so-called "Populist" and "left-wing" introduction of various laws in the early 20th Century, regulating the trusts, labor, and introducing the income tax, were in reality supported by, and highly beneficial to the monopolistic "capitalists" of the era and since. He also traces the oddly contradictory classic liberal/libertarian roots of some of Russian (Leninist) communism, and the distinctions between National Socialism (Nazi) and International Communist Socialism (USSR).

Yet a third view of history (and one which many libertarians may find shocking, but which is a strong addition to the entire concept of liberty, as far as I am concerned) may be seen in the writings of Charles Kimball, found at the "Xenohistorian" site (again, see below). Mr. Kimball presents a view of history from a Christian and Biblical point of view, which views human government as a rebellion against God, and the traditional definitions of "civilization" (as contrasted to barbarianism or primitive cultures) as being intentionally biased in favor of this rebellious human government. He goes on to point out how an ugly but successful alliance of human government and false religion has dominated the world's history, but how there have been constant efforts and a gradual rollback of that alliance has taken place (and is continuing today).

(www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard-arch.html)
(www.javelinpress.com)
(http://xenohistorian.faithweb.com/worldhis/)

Red Star, White Star, No Star

2005-02-05T19:35:00.000-07:00

The following news story was published on Friday the 4th of February. It frankly disgusts me:

EU group wants hammer & sickle banned
Fox News
"A group of conservative European Union lawmakers from eastern Europe called Thursday for a ban on communist symbols, including the red star and the hammer and sickle, to match a proposed EU ban on the Nazi swastika. The group from Estonia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic said the communist symbols should be included in any ban because of the suffering caused by Soviet-backed regimes in eastern Europe. 'We would like to have an equal treatment of the other evil totalitarian regime of the communist system,' said Jozsef Szajer, an Hungarian member of the European Parliament. EU Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner Franco Frattini has proposed a Europe-wide ban on display of the swastikas and other Nazi symbols as part of a campaign to combat anti-Semitism and intolerance." (02/03/05) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,146288,00.html

Talk about symbol over substance! At a time when socialism is taking over more and more of Europe, they want to hide the symbols. Pretend it will go away then. Right.

Let’s see, how many more symbols could we add? How about the various Imperial Eagles (Russian, German, French, Austrian) – after all, millions suffered and died because of these imperialist regimes over centuries. The German (Imperial) Iron Cross must also go, together with the swastika. Oh, and we can’t forget the Roman/Mussolini fasces (the ax with a bundle of rods wrapped around it) – how many acts of genocide did the Romans commit? Let’s see, what about the Turkish/Islamic crescent moon – Turks and other Islamists killed millions of Europeans and enslaved even more over more than a thousand years. We must also add Napoleon’s honey-bees and other trappings, and that French Tri-color, waved by hordes of fanatics who butchered their way from Gibraltar to the gates of Moscow in the “cause” of “Liberty, Fraternity, and Equality.” Of course, that was in response to the tyranny of the Bourbon kings, so we must also ban the fleur-de-lis, even in its modern guise as the symbol of international Scouting (or perhaps BECAUSE of its use by that religious-intolerant-fascist-paramilitary organization).

Anything else? Well, the blood-soaked history of Europe offers so many things that are symbolic of suffering, tyranny, genocide, killing, and such that we have to continue to add to the “Omnibus European Hate Symbols Ban Act of 2005.”

How about the very worst of examples of evil known to modern Europeans: the American Bald Eagle, the Stars and Stripes (those Americans even have the gall to print a military newspaper by that name and with it on the masthead IN EUROPE!), and the White Star. I’m sure that there are some other American symbols of evil to be added – perhaps even the use of the initials USA (like the initials NSDAP or the contraction “Na-zi” (for National Socialist)) should be outlawed. Oh yes, and don’t forget that symbol, the Statue of Liberty. I know it came from France, but that was about five or six “republics” ago, and now they know better: liberty is evil, and American liberty is even more evil.

But this is not enough – there are the symbols of that evil that is even greater than America, greater than the Soviets, greater than the Nazis – an evil that has been around now for nearly 2,000 years. That evil, of course, is Christianity – that bloody, simpering, proselytizing, do-gooder, right-wing, holier-than-thou movement that has swept the world and used as an excuse for mass murder, genocide, destruction of cultures, tyranny, liberty, and virtually every other evil known to modern man. Obviously, if the hammer and sickle and swastika are to be banned, than so must that most evil of symbols (from which both other symbols may have been taken, by the way) – that evil thing called the “cross.” Of course, ALL forms of the cross must be eliminated, whether it be a crucifix (obviously a particularly distasteful use – hanging up a carving of a DEAD guy on your wall- how tacky), Nordic or St. Andrews or St. George or Lorraine or any of the other hundreds of versions. And we must also ban all other symbols of that hated and hateful religion – the rooster used by the German Evangelical (Protestants), the shepherd’s crook/staff, the bishop’s mitre, the various symbols of the mythical “Trinity,” and of course, that hideous book, the Bible – worse than Mein Kampf, Das Capital, and Mao’s Little Red Book combined. Only then can Europe truly be free from fear and bad feelings and a sense of past history.

So go for it, all you politicians and bureaucrats and new-agers and liberated men and womyn and “its” there between the Atlantic and the Urals. Make your future safe by denying your past, and obliterating your present. Nothing is too good for the new order, is it? You make me sick.

Punish the Generous

2005-02-05T19:20:00.000-07:00

This event happened very close to (one of) my homes, and so is more meaningful.

A good many judges are reported to fear for their lives, scuttling like frightened rabbits from their secure courtrooms to the “safety” of their alarmed cars to rush home anonymously to houses in gated communities with elaborate security systems. This judge should be taking all those precautions, together with this woman, who will very likely need protection from the justified anger of their neighbors and community. If the two girls (one a minor at the time) had spray-painted hate messages on her house, they would have been punished less than they were for leaving cookies one evening. A court system that allows this kind of travesty of justice deserves nothing but contempt.

As a long-time fan of Archie comics (www.archiecomics.com), these two remind me of a not-untypical Betty and Veronica story, but no B&V story ever ended so depressingly as this one has (at least so far).
At least one libertarian, Ari Armstrong, the Publisher/editor of Colorado Freedom Report (www.FreeColorado.com) has donated money to the two girls to pay part of their fine and legal costs. I hope more of us will follow suit. I'm including his letter at the end of this post.

Original story: Gift of Cookies Crumbles; Girls Told to Pay $900
A Colorado judge ordered two teen-age girls to pay about $900 for the distress a neighbor said they caused by giving her home-made cookies adorned with paper hearts. The pair were ordered to pay $871.70 plus $39 in court costs after neighbor Wanita Renea Young, 49, filed a lawsuit complaining that the unsolicited cookies, left at her house after the girls knocked on her door, had triggered an anxiety attack that sent her to the hospital the next day.
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050204160509990010

Ari's letter:
February 4, 2005

Dear Mrs. Ostergaard,

I was saddened, dismayed, and outraged to learn from the Denver Post that your daughter, Taylor, and her friend Lindsey Jo Zellitti, were successfully sued for being nice.

Quite obviously, a knock on the door in the evening is not sufficient to send somebody to the hospital. Ms. Young obviously suffered from unrelated problems, for which she scape-goated your daughter and her friend. Unfortunately, the court system assisted Ms. Young in perpetrating a grave injustice.

Please, please, girls, do not let one cynical woman and a callous court system dampen your benevolent spirit. Many of us appreciate your kindness and condemn the overly-litigious judicial system that too often punishes people for their virtues.

Please accept a modest contribution from my wife and me to offset your legal expenses. (Please split the funds between the two families.) I will also ask readers of my web page, FreeColorado.com, and other friends of mine, to join in helping to defray those costs. If you receive funds in excess of the legal bills, I ask that you split the money evenly between the girls to be used for college expenses.

Though Ms. Young and the idiot judge who awarded her damages seem to think of the girls as cookie monsters, the girls are properly regarded as kind and creative thinkers. If the judge had had a lick of common sense, he would have given the girls a medal, not a fine.

Rather than follow the crowd, the girls exercised independent thinking and came up with a constructive, original project. I wish them well as they pursue their goals and values. Please tell them that they did the right thing, and their benevolent fellow Coloradans applaud them for it.

Sincerely,
Ari Armstrong
Editor, Colorado Freedom Report

The addresses for the girl's parents (from the telephone directory) are:
Ostergaard, Richard and Jill, 415 Co Rd 307, Durango CO 81303
Zellitti, Gary and Rhonda 781 Co Rd 302, Durango CO 81303
(Ms. Young's phone number and address is apparently unlisted. No surprise.)

Chemical Spill Costs Upset Public School Parents

2004-12-31T07:48:00.000-07:00

This story (first in the Dallas Morning News, was brought to my attention by Tim Gablehouse of Golden (CO). Unfortunately, the DMN is one of those jerkline outfits that wants enough information to steal your identity to let you read an article on their website (even if you spent the 75 cents they charge for their fishwrapper), so I'm putting the article here for TPoL and other readers.

Parents upset by ambulance bills

By The Associated Press(12/30/04 - DALLAS, TX) — The parents of some Dallas students who were taken to the hospital this fall after cleaning up a chemical spill in class are upset that they have been billed for the ambulance ride.
Nine seventh-graders at Pearl C. Anderson Middle Learning Center were following a science teacher's order in October by cleaning up the chemical that had spilled onto the classroom floor. As they were cleaning, their hands began to burn.
The school called for an ambulance, and the students were taken to a local hospital where they recovered a couple of hours later. The science teacher -- whose name was not disclosed by district officials -- was reprimanded but is still teaching.
Each family was billed $350 for the ambulance ride and the Dallas Independent School District is refusing to pay.
"If ... (school officials) would have called me, I would have taken her to the hospital and avoided this," said Deborah Whaley, who has received her second notice to pay the ambulance bill. "It could have all been avoided if they had told the kids not to touch it. They should have just called the janitor in."
Dallas schools spokesman Donald Claxton said state law protects school districts from liability in such incidents. He said the district would set a precedent by paying the ambulance bills.
"If we start paying for one, we're going to start paying for everything like that," he said. "It's a very unfortunate situation. We feel sick about it."
Dallas school district policy says that in an "extreme emergency," an ambulance service shall be called to take a student to an emergency room. The student's family will be billed for the ambulance service, the policy states.
Trustee Ron Price, whose area includes Pearl C. Anderson, wants the school board to take a look at the policy when it's back in session next month.
"We don't want to penalize parents for our mistake," Price said.

DHS: States, Cities need spy networks

2004-12-15T22:49:00.000-07:00

From a friend in state government comes this article, which I provide in full:

STATES AND CITIES MUST HUNT TERROR PLOTS, MASS GOVERNOR SAYS
By PAM BELLUCK

Published: December 15, 2004

BOSTON, Dec. 14 - To protect America against terrorists, state and local agencies, as well as private businesses, need to gather intelligence themselves and not just rely on intelligence gathered by the federal government, Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, the leader of a national working group on safeguarding the nation, told homeland security officials on Tuesday.

"The eyes and ears which gather intelligence need to be as developed in our country as they were in foreign countries during the cold war," Mr. Romney told the group. "Meter readers, E.M.S. drivers, law enforcement, private sector personnel need to be on the lookout for information which may be as useful."

In a presentation by telephone to Tom Ridge, the secretary of homeland security, and members of the Homeland Security Advisory Council, who were meeting in San Diego, Mr. Romney said that local law enforcement agencies should stop believing that they could protect all possible targets of terrorism.

"We could increase our law enforcement personnel tenfold, but we can't protect every target," Mr. Romney said. "There are just too many schools, churches, stadiums, bridges, tunnels, roads, subways. We have to be able to find the bad guys before they carry out their acts, and that can only be done through intelligence. The financial resources of our nation and our states should be increasingly devoted to this effort."

The proposal by Mr. Romney's working group represents a new and more assertive role for many local law enforcement agencies and other public and private entities in fighting terrorism, some experts on domestic security said.

Some cities and states, including Massachusetts, Colorado and Los Angeles, have set up or are planning "fusion centers," which collect information from local sources and seek to analyze it and draw conclusions. New York City goes beyond that, sending detectives to places like Israel and Singapore, as well as to other states to investigate businesses that sell explosives.

But under Mr. Romney's proposal, every state would be urged to marshal local agencies and businesses, with the goal of collecting details and observations that might, when stitched together, point to a potential terrorist attack.

"If you have a transit system that circles a major city and you get reports of people photographing trains at various locations, well, the report from one police station may be meaningless, but several of them may be a pattern," said John D. Cohen, senior homeland security policy adviser to Massachusetts.

The proposal "makes a great deal of sense to me," said Dave McIntyre, who teaches about domestic security at Texas A&M University. "I don't see how you're going to protect every high school football stadium, every school bus, every theater. I do think that we might find that a better investment of resources is to look at intelligence and investigative development."

Mr. Romney, who dealt with post-9/11 security issues as president of the organizing committee for the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, said in an interview on Monday that his involvement with the domestic security working group was an outgrowth of the concern he felt as governor about the way the federal government was transmitting information and the lack of direction that the federal government was giving the states.

"I was initially quite frustrated that the homeland security money came without any sense of what states should do," Mr. Romney said, saying that when he raised those concerns, he was asked to assemble and lead a working group on the subject.

Mr. Romney, who is often mentioned as a Republican with potential or ambition to occupy a national office, insisted in the interview that he had no desire to be the next director of homeland security, or to take any other position in the Bush administration. He said that after the November elections, he told Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff, "in case my name gets bandied about for any position, I'm filling my entire term" as governor, which expires in two years.

Dr. McIntyre said a potential pitfall of the working group's proposal was the issue of making sure that local agencies and businesses did not violate civil liberties. "How do we properly ensure that we're investigating some Americans without investigating all Americans?" he asked.

Mr. Cohen, the security adviser, said: "When we're talking about engaging frontline personnel, we're not asking them to go out and spy on people. In the course of them doing their jobs day to day, they collect information. And we're talking about teaching people to be more sensitive when information that is collected in the course of their day-to-day business may actually have a nexus with terrorism."

At Tuesday's meeting in San Diego, with Mr. Romney presenting his report from Boston, Mr. Ridge asked about the cost of the working group's plan. Mr. Romney, whose group included state and local officials and business executives from around the country, said some of the money for training local officials and setting up fusion centers could come from federal homeland security grants to states.

But, he added: "Whether I'm going to get funding from the federal government or not, this is a priority and I'm going to go after this. I went to the Legislature this year to get funding for our fusion center."

Mr. Romney said the intelligence that states received from the federal government was "oftentimes confusing" and sometimes contradictory. His report recommended that information be disseminated through a single federal agency.

Mr. Romney's report also said that too much information from the federal agencies was classified as secret or top secret, barring state officials from giving details to most local officials, who do not have adequate security clearance.

"You're put in a position of not passing it on or passing it on to someone without the right clearance and violating the law," Mr. Cohen said.

Baker’s Dozen ™ Protect yourself from a suspicious parcel

2004-12-13T14:13:00.000-07:00

Draft for your review and comment
Although the usual targets of letter-bombers and anthrax-mailers are government agencies or big corporations, the technique can be used by many enemies of liberty against many people, including those who are liberty activists. So handling mail these days can be dangerous, sometimes deadly. It is important to recognize the difference between safe and suspicious mail, and plan appropriately in advance.
1. Whenever possible, use a locking mail box or a post office box, and not a mail slot or unlocked mailbox, for both business and private use. If using a mail box, if at all possible, do not attach to your building or house, but have at some distance away, but in view of your house.
2. Always look for a return address and make sure that you're receiving the mail from someone you know or from a credible source. Be wary of packages that have your address as the return address, which aren’t familiar, and are mailed to unknown or improper addresses.
3. Recognize unusual shapes, especially in a business or personal-size envelope, that may indicate an explosive device or internal package or bag of some substance. Be on the lookout for soft bulges, as when powder has been poured in, in an envelope.
4. Look for staining through the envelope, especially if oily or greasy.
5. Refrain from eating or drinking in a designated mail handling area.
6. Place suspicious envelopes or packages in a plastic bag or some other type of container to prevent leakage of contents. Never squeeze, sniff or smell suspect mail. Unless you are concerned about a gas, do NOT seal the container – it can turn a small explosive into a major threat.
7. If you do not have a container, then cover the envelope or package with anything available (clothing, paper or trash can) and do not remove the cover. Put a warning note or sign on the cover or container to alert people of the danger.
8. Leave the room and close the door, or section off the area to prevent others from entering.
9. Wash your hands with soap and water to prevent spreading any powder or other residue to your face.
10. If you are at work, report the incident to your building security official or an available supervisor, who should notify the police and other authorities without delay.
11. List all people who were in the room or area when this suspicious letter or package was recognized. Give a copy of this list to both the local public health authorities and law enforcement officials for follow-up investigations and advice. They may have been exposed.
12. If you are at home, report the incident to the local sheriff/police and postal authorities. Alert your neighbors.
13. Be aware that simply reporting, although a smart idea, can lead to a lot more problems. Be careful under what conditions you notify the authorities, and do not be surprised if they panic in response.
Remember that not all packages are dangerous or deadly, but use common sense, just as you would with e-mail spam or finding something on the street!

A new "Baker's Dozen" on Travel Security

2004-12-08T21:40:00.000-07:00

I'm again posting an article and asking for comments and suggestions before sending it out for publication on The Price of Liberty or elsewhere.

A Baker’s Dozen ™ Checklist for Improving Travel Security
With the increased difficulty in using public transportation (planes and trains), more Americans are driving greater distances than ever. However, both in cities and other areas, there are threats to you and your property while traveling. There are a few simple items to reduce the risk and to be able to respond if a threat arises:
1. Ensure that you have basic equipment for responding to emergencies in your vehicle. Some of the equipment you should ALWAYS have: first-aid kit (trauma type), warning triangles and/or flashers, purified water (for drinking, cleaning, and emergency fluids replacement), paper and pencil, food (including candy or other items with sugar), and vehicle maintenance equipment (such as tire gauge, tire-changing equipment, spare, and owner’s manual).
2. Ensure that you vary your emergency equipment in your vehicle based on changing seasons and the area in which you are traveling. Seasonal equipment may include additional water, blankets or sleeping bags, snow shovel, suntan lotion, hats, coats, and raingear.
3. When parking your vehicle, make sure that you put away or cover items that might be a temptation to people to break in and steal. Also cover or put away items that may be damaged by the sun or heat. And of course, be sure you lock your car at all times when you are not in the vehicle.
4. Don’t leave children, animals, or other items in your vehicle, which may be damaged by extremes of heat or cold.
5. When traveling in heavy stop-and-go traffic, especially in central urban areas, keep doors locked and windows rolled up (as much as possible) to prevent someone from entering your vehicle without permission, or from throwing something into (or snatching something from) your vehicle.
6. Always inspect the exterior of your vehicle before getting in and driving, to check for damage (especially in a parking lot), broken lights, low or flat tires, and other problems.
7. When receiving your car back from a maintenance provider, in addition to checking to make sure that repairs were done as invoiced, and that key items are present and have been correctly replaced, also check that an excessive amount of mileage has not been used on the odometer.
8. Make sure that your registration, insurance information, and tags/stickers are all current, and have not been tampered with. When receiving replacements, check to make sure all information is correct. Whenever possible, do NOT put a street address on your various papers: instead use a post office box.
9. If you carry a pistol in your vehicle (a strong recommendation), make sure that it is convenient to reach if needed, that it is not visible from outside the vehicle, and that it is stored securely where it will not be dislodged in case of a sudden stop or accident. Ensure that you know what laws apply in states through which you travel.
10. If stopped by a patrolman or police officer, verify that the person really is a police officer before letting them take your documents or get into their vehicle. If possible, arrange thorough an auto club or other service to have a “bond” for minor traffic offenses, to avoid having to post large cash bails or pay large fines.
11. When you see an accident or what appears like an accident, if possible report the accident to an emergency dispatcher before stopping to assist, in case problems develop. When approaching the accident scene, keep a good distance to avoid problems with debris from the accident, attempts to seize your vehicle, and to allow emergency response vehicles adequate access, as well as pulling off the driving lane far enough for your own safety.
12. Especially before beginning a long trip or traveling to remote areas, check for adequate fuel, oil, radiator fluid, other fluids, spare tire, tire-changing equipment, and working lights, including turn signals.
13. If stopped and asked by law enforcement to voluntarily submit to a search, refuse to do so without a search warrant. If searching is done, politely express that you are allowing such under threat of force, and observe the searching as closely as possible. Request a written copy of anything that they claim to have found.

Your automobile should be as much your castle as your home, but the law does not always recognize that fact. Schools should be a safe place for teaching children, but they can NOT be completely isolated from all threats and dangers – in fact, too much isolation can in itself be a danger. But children should be able to expect parents, teachers, and other staff to be prepared and keep them as secure as possible.

Medical Matters and Jello

2004-12-08T21:24:00.000-07:00

With thanks to Chuck Muth for posting these two items on his "news and views" e-newsletter!

I have to comment on these two items, even though I don't have an URL for them:

STUPIDITY VIRUS STRIKES LOUISIANA
“In Jefferson Parish, La., 8-year-old Kelli Billingsley ‘brought homemade Jell-O cups to school at Boudreaux Elementary,’ reports WGNO-TV in New Orleans. ‘The girl's mom says her daughter was just trying to make a treat for her friends,’ but ‘the school suspended the girl for having a look alike drug,’ despite having tested the Jell-O and finding no trace of alcohol or any other forbidden substance. Things sure have changed since we were young. At our elementary school they had a drinking fountain that dispensed a liquid that looked just like vodka!”- James Taranto’s Best of the Web, 12/7/04

Apparently, it is now popular in some places (teacher's unions, perhaps) to create alcoholic gelatin treats for parties - thus this bizarre little ritual. Despite assurances that they were just plain old Jello (just like Bill Cosby sells!), and despite testing, the second-grader was suspended for nine days - a cruel and unusual punishment indeed when there was no crime to begin with.

JUST SAY NO TO (LEGAL) DRUGS?
“Let the Un-Drugging of America begin. The pharmaceutical industry, despite a golden age of biology that has unraveled mysteries of the genetic code and yielded miracle drugs that save thousands of lives, may be on the brink of a backlash. Millions of us are popping prescription pills for innocuous ills, when simple lifestyle changes - harped on by physicians for decades - are more effective and a lot cheaper…“Epidemiological studies have found that bad living - smoking, drinking too much alcohol, feasting on cheeseburgers - is responsible for 80% of one’s risk of heart disease and almost all the risk of diabetes. Cleaning up your act would do more to reduce that risk than popping a plethora of new pills.”- Forbes, 11/29/04
Indeed, this is something that I can speak of from experience - having various physicians attempt to diagnose me with various things and prescribe very expensive prescription-only medicines for conditions that can be changed with VERY limited diet changes and changes in schedules for me. What today is all too often seen by myopic doctors (drugs for everything) as a "serious condition" is often just the body telling you that you aren't treating it right - and it is often a fairly simple matter to find out why it is doing that. Even if it is NOT a simple matter, after you've spent $1000 on getting a diagnosis, why trap yourself into spending $50 - $100 a month for the rest of your life for some drug (with often-nasty side-effects) when a simple "no-thanks" to certain foods, or "it is too late in the day to be eating or drinking that" is so simple? (And easier to do when your body slams you in the gut once or twice.)

The problem is, in both of these articles, that we as people have SURRENDERED our decision-making abilities, and our responsibilities (for our lives or those of our children) to someone who really is not deserving of the trust we give them, to say nothing of what we pay them. If we take back control over our own lives - even just to the extent of saying "NO" to more nannies for adults, and more prisons for children - we will find that we don't NEED to trust these people to do anything but mess up their lives and the lives of those we surrender to their tender mercies.

Campaigns for Liberty

2004-11-30T09:27:00.000-07:00

We all would like to see our liberty restored and protected from further encroachment, and many libertarians work hard to elect like-minded candidates, support ballot measures, and other work. Of course, there is much more to be done, and this is one idea from an unusual source: the United Kingdom.

Two newspapers, of all things, are promoting pro-liberty campaigns in the United Kingdom, as mentioned in recent news stories (www.thepriceofliberty.org). The Daily Telegraph is pushing a very strong campaign to change laws and make it clear that homeowners can defend themselves against robbers, burglars, and other invaders of their homes. http://www.advertising.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/28/ncrime28.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/11/28/ixhome.html
The Daily Sun (famed for its "Page 3 Girls") is also running a lengthy campaign called "Stop the Fines Robbery" (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2004552877,00.html ) in which they are publishing examples of abuse by traffic wardens (police officers in charge of traffic - like meter maids and meter men in US cities) and then going to the various courts and cities to help the people fight to overturn the charges (many parking fines in the UK are US$160 or more). Now, neither of these campaigns is going to restore the "liberties of Englishmen" anytime soon, but they DO make an impact on the people and on the government - small, but noticeable and effective.
Similar campaigns on a local level, right here in the Fifty States, can do the same thing, and help build support for liberty on their own, as well as make it easier for electioneering and ballot issues. A small campaign to stop traffic ticket abuse can help a few people directly, gather press coverage, build alliances with other people (especially conservatives and liberals), make people better known, and reduce intrusions of personal liberty in any area. If coordinated with local groups (such as radio station personalities or newspaper columnists, or charity groups), they can broaden the appeal, be more effective, and essentially pay for themselves. They don't have to be statewide efforts - they can be as small as a county or a city.

Here are some ideas:
- many groups are fighting the condemnation authority of local governments for "economic development" where (for example) the city condemns dozens of homes in order to put together a block of land to be sold to a "big-box" retailer or industrial company.
- many cities DO have problems with parking ticket abuse - I know of one city where high-school students with as few as a single unpaid parking ticket more than a month old have been arrested in front of their classmates, in the classroom.
- many communities (one in Illinois has been in the news as of late) have their own local laws forbidding the ownership of handguns, or prohibiting either open carry or concealed carry in their boundaries.
- many towns have a problem with the arrogant attitude or continual foul-ups by a single government agency - federal, state, or local. For example, a DOT (Dept of Transportation) shop which constantly tracks mud onto the streets, or sends vast plumes of diesel smoke across the neighborhood on winter days; or a Dept of Fish and Game warden who constantly trespasses on private property, or harasses local people for game violations; or a local town that has speed traps for unwary travelers.
Each of these is an opportunity to right a wrong, protect or restore a freedom, and turn into a springboard for other good work. Look around and try and do this, yourself!

Thanksgiving Thoughts

2004-11-25T11:04:00.000-07:00

Well, it is a day to be thankful, even if we have turned it into a day of outlandish pigging out, of pre-Christmas marketing hype, and laziness (except for those cooking all those meals) - the beginning of the two months of extravagant bread-and-circuses of the "holidays" starting with T-Day, going on through Christmas (where still legal), New Year's Eve parties and New Year's Day circuses (sports), followed by the Superbowl and even, extending to the excesses of Karnival (Marti Gras or Shrove Tuesday).

But we should think about being thankful, and here is a list of a few:
1. Thankful that we live in the nation we do - with so much of the world being worse off.
2. Thankful that we (my family and I) live in the West, and not in places where neither the freedom nor the scenery are as good.
3. Thankful that we have enough (and usually, too much) to eat and drink, and that we have enough laid by to provide for at least minor emergencies.
4. Thankful for the freedom we still have to travel, despite $2.00 gasoline, and the wide-open spaces in which to travel.
5. Thankful for friends of liberty, especially those who are friends of ours as well, and for all they do to encourage us, and keep us thinking straight, and so much more.
6. Thankful for friends who are brothers and sisters in Christ - "church friends" who also do all they can do to encourage us, and keep us thinking straight, and so much more.
7. Thankful for a loving, hardworking, and cheerful spouse, able to do so much and keep things in order.
8. Thankful for two sons growing up to be faithful christians and lovers of liberty, and smart and hard-working friends as well as children.
9. Thankful for the technology on which I write this, and which I use to travel and communicate and live by, and for the freedom and faith that has made this possible.
10. Thankful for the hundred and one things that I take for granted every day.

Dealing with ID Theft

2004-11-17T11:55:00.000-07:00

This is the second in a series of "Baker's Dozen" tips on personal security. Comments are appreciated before I submit to Mama Liberty to TPoL for publishing.

A Baker’s Dozen Tips ™ To Dealing with ID Theft by Nathan Barton © 2004

A major growth sector in US crime is identity theft. Millions are victimized every year by emptied bank accounts, charged-out credit accounts, ruined credit records, and even criminal records pointing towards the victim's identity. The Federal Trade Commission says that identity theft is the number-one form of fraud, with over 9 million people affected in 2003. Many people don’t find out for months that they were hit.

Fundamentals: Know what is needed to steal an identity. It doesn’t take much. A name, address (past or present), phone, birth date, Social Security number (SSAN), mother's maiden name, and just one of the following: bank account number (from a check), credit card number (from a sales slip or a bill), driver's license (from a motel receipt, perhaps), plate number and/or VIN (vehicle ID number), even a utility bill. A thief can make a few phone calls, do an online search and become you.
A Little Defense: There are lots of ways for the crook to get the data he (or she) needs: Pick pocketing, “shoulder surfing” and dumpster diving are covert ways of obtaining info, but registry clerks, medical filers, property management filers, bankers, utility company employees or any venue where you are required to give out your SSAN for services are the weakest links in your ability to conceal your ID. Dishonest employees sell lists of SSAN for cash. So the number one thing you can do is LIMIT HOW OFTEN YOU GIVE OUT THIS NUMBER! Don’t write your signature on your debit and credit cards – instead, print “SEE PHOTO ID” in that space, and use your drivers license, military ID, or school ID to show the signature. Make sure that clerks don’t write down the ID number or SSAN (if it appears on the ID) on a check or sales slip. Leave street addresses and SSAN OFF your checks – many people advise putting only initials, not full names.
The Postman Cometh: Postal address forms can be filled out and your mail redirected to a criminal’s address. Incoming and outgoing mail have everything they need. Credit card offers and loan applications have proprietary information, and can often be completed and approved with just a bogus signature. Stolen mail might never be missed, giving the thief a head start. If possible, use a locked USPS box, a private mailbox (PMB) (from the UPS Store or some other private business), or a mail slot, rather than a traditional outdoor mailbox.
For Whom the Phone Rings: Criminals don’t observe “no-call” lists. Some predators call congratulating you on winning a prize or trip. Someone will claim you hit their auto in a parking lot (or they hit yours!), or that they found something of yours with identity on it and ask you to confirm your SSAN, drivers license, or other number to prove you are who you claim to be.
Phishing and Other Computer Fun: The computer/internet version of phone fraud: e-mails asking for personal information and imitating a service provider or other business are common types of spam. Often the e-mail will direct you to a web-site that mimics a well-known and recognized web-site (such as Visa or Wells Fargo) but is really sitting on a server in Russia or Bermuda. Data-mining spyware is another threat, where you enter the very information they are looking for, for a legitimate site and use, and the number is collected by the spyware. Change passwords frequently and use “non-common” passwords.
Behind the Curve: On average, the FTC says it takes a person 12 to 16 months to realize they have been victimized by a well-run operation. Some thieves will pay off debt for up to a year to get larger increases on loans and credit cards, then cash in when the big loans and limits come in. Other times, less knowledgeable but lucky crooks can strip your accounts in mere days: a credit card with a 10,000-dollar limit can provide a spree of less than a week.
Prevention: Many small things can be done to prevent this from happening. Some ideas: get to know the people at the post office – especially in small towns. In larger towns, get to know your carrier, as well as UPS, FedEx and other delivery service drivers. If they see something that doesn't make sense they may be the first to notify you. Don’t just get a locking mailbox, but never put outgoing mail in an unsecured mailbox. Get a shredder and shred everything with a name, account number and address. Reduce exposure by paying as many bills online and getting online billing statements (only) for accounts. Limit the number of cards you have and use.
Watch out: It is critical to pay attention to your finances. Look at bills for items you never purchased, calls from credit card companies increasing your credit lines, calls from bill collectors looking for payments, and mail for people other than yourself (especially in the form of credit card statements or loans). Review your bank statements: electronic banking means they don’t need to steal your checks to steal your money. Look for an unusual amount of direct mail from a particular brand or product line; this represents a large purchase on behalf of the thief putting you on a direct mail list regarding their purchase.
Zip your lip: It is not necessary to give out your SSAN as much as you think. Only give it out if it is absolutely necessary, ask for alternatives. Deal only with established vendors with solid backgrounds. Never give out your mother’s maiden name unless absolutely necessary, and after verifying it is essential (look for other key questions to use).
Credit, Cash, Paper, or Plastic: Be careful: excessive inquiries into your credit lower your scores making you less able to get loans for cars or homes, but you should check your credit record at least annually, and perhaps quarterly (especially if you can’t lower your vulnerability). This checks make you aware of activity regarding your SSAN and accounts, especially new ones. Look over bills carefully, and keep sales slips.
Banker-Man: Establish a personal relationship with your banker – if you are using a large chain bank, pick a small branch to work with, not the main or major local office, and get to know them. At the same time, make sure that the bank uses their systems to verify “unusual” or “unexpected” changes in pattern. Protect your PIN (personal ID number) carefully: when new ones are assigned, immediately change to one that you DO NOT WRITE DOWN, at least not in a recognizable form.
If It Happens: First, contact the fraud departments of all three major credit bureaus – have them flag your SSAN. Contact all your banks, and change passwords (or put them into place if you don’t have them). Notify all credit card companies, and cancel all credit cards affected by theft. Notify local authorities – the location of your residence is usually who has jurisdiction, but this may vary by state. Check with your drivers license agency to make sure that new duplicates of licenses haven’t been issued, and to see if there are tickets you “didn’t get.” If the theft appears to be local, notify the people you normally do business with, including gasoline stations, convenience stores, supermarkets, discount stores, the post office, and similar places.
Business’ Responsibility: Identity theft is not your boss’s problem, but an employee struggling to get their life in order after being hit can hurt the business. The victim will be distracted, spend company time, use phones, go to court, come in late and leave early, as they work desperately to get the mess straightened out. An average victim is estimated to spend 175+ hours in the effort, which can cost up to $20,000. Employee training can help your employees, and the business.

Freedom Poetry v 1.0

2004-11-17T11:08:00.000-07:00

There is a dearth of good liberty-oriented poetry and songs out there, and here is the first of several attempts to contribute to that lack. The first (to longtime science fiction readers) is thanks to Gordy Dickson, from whom the metre and most of the opening lines are "sincerely flattered" (and with serial numbers suitably obliterated). Opinions are earnestly sought! And a suitable title.

Freedom Poetry v 1.0

Soldier, ask not, now or ever, Why to war our banners go.
Slav’ry’s legions now surround us, Strike, and do not spare the blow.

When, at last, our freedom is won, Care we not who fired the gun?
But can we let another man pay, and from our duty turn and run?

The price of freedom’s never paid, By taking from another,
Yet there are those who fain to claim, freedom for us, and none other.

Let now our hands show blood-red tone, But throw down a broken chain.
Let us not fear what men may say, But in honor bear that stain.

And if we fail to win the fight, Death can’t our liberty claim,
Can’t deny that Tree our blood’s water, nor can it bring us to shame.

Mayhap we will fail now to win, But know well too, not give up,
Lest slaveowners’ darkness come again, Our precious freedom disrupt.

Sing not of liberty, my friend, Unless you will too make sure,
Your deeds will make this blessed land’s, Liberty more and more pure.

Can you not see just what is right? Not just our own should be free,
For liberty is God’s gift to all, That ev’ry child of God so be.

And we answer God’s just demand, for what gave He to our hands,
When we stand before the great Throne,"We kept freedom in our lands."

Home Invasion Security

2004-11-17T11:01:00.000-07:00

I am preparing this for Lady Susan (Mama Liberty) to publish in The Price of Freedom, but would like to ask folks to take a look at it and suggest changes or ideas!

A baker’s dozen tips to preventing Home-Invasions by Nathan Barton © 2004

Got Arms? : Burglars fear an armed and trained householder more than anything else, as a review of the web can tell you. Get and know how to use a pistol for self-defense, and make sure you keep it where you can find it in emergency. Practice regularly.
Goodies: One simple reason your house is chosen is someone tipped off the home-invader that you have valuables. Your friends or children or baby sitter might have unintentionally bragged. Close your curtains and drapes regularly, and don’t show things off where they are easily visible from the outside or callers at the front door.
Strangers: You tell your children not to talk to strangers, so why do you open the door to a total stranger?
Peephole and Security Cameras: Install peepholes, talk through the door. In many places, there is a need for additional security, and inexpensive, dependable security camera systems, many web-ready, are available for low prices at Wal-Mart and other stores. But don’t depend on either cameras or peepholes – you can’t see everything.
Posers: Home-invaders pose as delivery people, public workers, or people in distress. In some cases, these people moonlight as invaders – even police officers. Listen and learn what is going on in your area, and share with neighbors.
Make a call: If in doubt about someone, under no circumstances do you open the door unless you get phone numbers to call their superiors. Verify the number by using the phonebook or directory assistance – don’t trust the number that the guy at the door gives you. If someone claims to be in distress tell him or her you will call the police for them.
Do not call the police: If you live in a high crime area or where law enforcement takes a while to respond (much of the country), and if someone is trying to break into your house while you are in it, don’t expect the police to respond in time. Be prepared to defend yourself. Sometimes, calling the fire department will get help to the scene quicker. (Do this only if you are desperate. Firefighters are not equipped to handle violence. However squealing sirens can deter a criminal.) Better yet, call 911 and tell them you are being invaded, that you are armed, and will shoot to kill if necessary (whether you will or not) – this often gets police to respond faster.
Get connected – stay connected: Consider a second line or a cell phone in your bedroom. If you use something other than dial-up, consider internet phone service. Burglars often cut phone lines outside or remove a telephone handset from the receiver when they enter a home, to prevent outgoing calls from extensions.
Get alarmed: An alarm system activated while you are sleeping will prevent a burglar from getting to far. Newer alarms have cellular options, a safeguard even if the phone lines are cut.
Got more arms? : In addition to lethal weapons, having a non-lethal weapon (such as a Taser or a Pepper spray) in close proximity to various places in your house, such as the front door, can debilitate your attacker before they gain control and let you get to your primary weapon.
Locks and security: Call a qualified person, such as a locksmith, to take a physical security survey to help you determine the most efficient way to lock up and otherwise secure your home. There are many products on the market that only provide a false sense of security. Who is qualified? A locksmith should be a professional associated with well-known manufacturers. Security services should also have credentials, including training or military (Security Police or Military Police) experience, and should provide references.
Get even more armed. Everyone in the family, from about age 6 or 7 on up, should be familiar with the weapons, security, and procedures in case of an invasion. While the safe age for a child to have their own weapons (including .22 rifles, bb guns, and knives, as well as sidearms) varies from child to child, as soon as you as their parent determine that they are responsible, have them take that responsibility. Even the youngest child should be given basic firearms training to know WHY they are not toys and WHY you do not share them with friends.
Friends and neighbors. Get to know your next-door neighbors, on both sides, in back AND across the street. Keep an eye on their place, let them know if something odd is going on, and they’ll do the same for you. Wave and smile at each other, even if you aren’t the best of friends – a close-knit community can scare off would-be invaders. At the same time, don’t divulge too much information to each other about travel plans or possessions – it is easier to spill the beans about someone else than yourself.

I've gotten tired of the so-called "security experts" who never mention the true facts, and believe that the only time there should be guns in a house is when a cop shows up. So I took a checklist and severely modified it, to produce this (I also fixed a lot of grammar in rewriting it - no surprise with hoplophobes, I guess.)

Please post your comments here or send to me! Thanks.

Secession?

2004-11-11T22:29:00.000-07:00

Well, for the second day in a row, secession was some of the talk on the radio - I'll cheerfully let most of the "Blue" counties go anywhere they want, and gladly accept the loss of their tax money, their "creativeness," and their increasingly-pathetic whining.

I've long been an advocate of secession, anyway, and come by it naturally: after all, some of my ancestors seceeded when they heard about these neat things called "horses" about 600 miles to the south, and decided that the plains of Wyoming and South Dakota were not as nice a place to live as the Staked Plains. Then a hundred or so years later, some other ancestors decided that the United Kingdom could have an empire without them, and seceded together (after seceding in a way initially by emigrating). And only about sixty years later, some more of my ancestors decided that seceding from the EU de Mexico might be wise. Then, just a quarter-century later, after a foolish marriage of convenience, decided to secede from the USA - unfortunately, they should have also seceded from the CSA, and gone it alone.

So if someone wants to leave the USA, more power to them, as long as they take their ideas with them and leave those of us who just want a little peace and quiet, and a lot of freedom, to enjoy what's left. It is easier than the other way, where we have to do the seceding again - I don't know, how about the Alliance of Free Western States, anyone? I mean, I think the South has a copyright on "Confederate" and "Coalition" is being used right now, and "Commonwealth" has two copyrights (and a lot of bad history).

Well, it's an idea.

No more saving Private Ryan?

2004-11-11T11:30:00.000-07:00

TV Stations Cancel 'Saving Private Ryan'
Associated Press
NEW YORK — Many ABC affiliates around the country have announced that they won't take part in the network's Veterans Day airing of "Saving Private Ryan," saying the acclaimed film's violence and language could draw sanctions from the Federal Communications Commission
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/nation/10148601.htm

A strawman, pure and simple. ABC has been leading up to this for at least two years, with the cooperation of CBS and Fox – claiming this is “violating” new FCC rules. If they were so afraid of the big bad FCC, they could ***bleep*** the language - no one has raised any objections to the violence, but both a warning (nobody warned anyone that Janet Jackson would be having her shirt ripped off) or a bit of editing to get the worst of the gore out (the opening scene mostly) might not butcher it too badly- certainly TV stations and networks have done worse butcher jobs to serve their own purposes in the past. [Although a friend tells me ABC’s contract with Spielberg allows no editing – an interesting clause indeed.]

But the truth is, they want to make anyone who objects to ANYTHING they air look like fools, and the entire idea that viewers should have control of content (other than through response to advertising) look bad. Sadly, most viewers who object to network content are (a) too gutless to turn the dial, and (b) so gutless that they expect the government to do what they won’t – discipline the networks by fines and punishments rather than notify the networks directly (and indirectly through advertisers) that they will not patronize a sleazy outfit. ABC and these stations aren't opposed to the FCC - they just want it to be their tool to prevent and control competition, but not TOO powerful, lest their profits be negatively effected by its limits on what they can broadcast.

At the same time, in the words of another commentator – “Ain’t guvmint grand?” The unconstitutional power of the FCC to censor anything is being used as an excuse to ignore a popular sentiment to honor veterans with an acclaimed movie.

Still, there are millions of people who live in daily fear (as these ABC stations claim to be) that something that they will innocently do will bring down on them the wrath of a totally bloated, all-controlling, big government that seeks ANY EXCUSE to expand its power at the expense of you or me. These range from the owner and operator of a small truck firm not sure about whether he can load one more pallet on his truck, a ready-mix “mom-and-pop” plant operator replacing a defective piece of machinery and running afoul of air “quality” regulations, a doctor debating whether to prescribe a new, more powerful painkiller, a husband and wife responding to a loud knock at the door late at night, a homeowner wanting to leave his grass a few inches higher than the bureaucrats downtown allow, and millions of others.

Is ANYTHING government provides worth the fear and pain that government, even at its most “benign” causes? Anything?

Opening Post

2004-11-09T21:59:00.000-07:00

This blog is being started, in large part, to respond to and post comments about others' blogs, and to serve as a place to get some questions asked (and answered) and some ideas bounced back and forth.
So join in!