Littlestuff Weekender: 11/20/2010
There is so much crap going on, so many assaults on our liberty and rights that I feel like the target of a circular firing squad. Security groping, take-over of food production, Chinese buying 18% of GM while our government retains a significant share, Dream Act amnesty bill, Cap and Trade via EPA regulation, Card check is still on the near horizon, Fed buying our own debt (QE2)…get the idea?
Sometimes I wonder if I’m overreacting. Maybe these little actions aren’t so bad. Well, consider the snail that scoots and slides through life, unaware of the world around him, until one day he goes through a radical transformation. He becomes escargot.
The courts have become a component of the big government liberty-suppression scam. Check out Roscoe Filburn from nearly 60 years ago. The cavalier denial of his rights to his own property greased the skids towards tyranny.
Jurists have no more courage than elected officials. Beneath those flowing black robes is …..nothing. They cite stare decisis when it involves an issue that they do not want to face, but will reach into forgotten Mongolian tribal law to support a position that is contrary to U.S. tradition. They (the judiciary) are part of a corrupt system.
How much coal-fired energy is needed to charge the battery on a Chevy Volt? Can you get more than 45 miles per charge if you have a REALLY LONG extension cord? How many would sell for $41,000 without the $7,500 government rebate/subsidy?
How long will it be before some enterprising entrepreneur sells “package enhancers” and “breast enhancers” to people who elect to have the full-body scan at airport screenings? Will the Federal Trade Commission charge those passengers with “misleading advertising?”
So, if the Food Safety Modernization Act becomes law, how many new inspectors will we require to monitor all the little gardens and food plots around the country? Now I understand where all the new jobs are being created. How will this legislation affect Detroit’s efforts to replace urban decay with re-claimed agricultural land?
As our economy weakens and inflation ravages our stability, will the Food Police monitor pets…who could become a food source when times become dire? What about weeds?...or bark?
Last call: The Chinese loaned us the money to bail out General Motors. When the GM IPO is floated, the Chinese bought 18% of the stock. The cash from the Chinese purchase goes back to the US Government. Does the US then pay the Chinese back for the loan?
I have a headache. Have a great weekend.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Friday, November 19, 2010
Enabling Rights
OK, the brassy bastards just won’t stop. We’ve advanced from an incremental erosion of our personal liberties to an all-out power grab. The historical march toward tyranny has a multitude of beginnings, but I believe that the most onerous one was the passage of the Federal Reserve Act on December 23rd, 1913. Merry Christmas, Suckers! Aside from the noxious fact that a gaggle of bankers control our monetary policy, the most egregious aspect of the Act was the Congress’ transfer of its Constitutional obligation to another party. This pattern has continued for the last century. The freedom-choking concept is “enabling legislation”--- a device whereby Congress drafts and passes broad policy measures and directs other entities to promulgate rules and regulations to enforce the provisions. Get the picture?
How many departments, agencies, bureaus, services, directorates, etc. are there circling in the federal universe? All of these pockets of power are engaged in rule-making that impacts our lives every day. Often they use bad science, incomplete data and falsely perceived threats as justification to implement their intervention into every facet of our lives. There are so many of these “alphabet” entities that we feel as if we’re being assaulted on hundreds, perhaps thousands, of fronts. The massive regulatory apparatus puts all Americans on the defensive, and thus, significantly weakens our chances for slaying the monster.
If you have a burning desire to suffer from glazy-eye syndrome, I urge you to read the Federal Register’s daily update for a full month. If you have the internal strength to NOT suck on an exhaust pipe after doing so, you will have one of two predictable responses. You will either sigh in resignation, or become so darn angry that it’ll be impossible for anyone to be with you. But wait, O’ gullible citizen, it gets worse. Perhaps you’ve wonder how these brain-dead career politicians with the sparkling smiles and the 12-month tans can generate so many abhorrent bills that enable the loss of our liberty.
The answer is staff. This semi-permanent group of lifetime bureaucrats works for the elected officials and for the various committees and sub-committees. They live inside the beltway. They have been radically infected with “Potomac Fever” with little prospect for a cure. They are the true enablers. They do the work and allow the legislator to appear competent. They author the enabling legislation that ultimately becomes law….and they do not have to go back to Minnesota or Texas and live under those toxic regulations. Besides, Congress typically exempts itself from much of the freedom-crushing legislation.
The Congress has legislated a multitude of unconstitutional acts that deny our unalienable rights. They have forfeited their Constitutional mandates by allowing other, unelected entities to implement, promulgate, regulate and enforce those unconstitutional provisions. Unalienable rights are natural rights. If you are a believer, unalienable rights are from God and cannot be taken or given away. If you’re a regular reader of my columns, you are aware that I’m a 10th Amendment nullifier. I believe the states have the duty to refuse to implement or allow any unconstitutional law to be enforced within their borders. I fear, however, that there are not very many legislators who have the cajones to stand up to Big Brother. Our unalienable rights are individual rights, therefore………
Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
How many departments, agencies, bureaus, services, directorates, etc. are there circling in the federal universe? All of these pockets of power are engaged in rule-making that impacts our lives every day. Often they use bad science, incomplete data and falsely perceived threats as justification to implement their intervention into every facet of our lives. There are so many of these “alphabet” entities that we feel as if we’re being assaulted on hundreds, perhaps thousands, of fronts. The massive regulatory apparatus puts all Americans on the defensive, and thus, significantly weakens our chances for slaying the monster.
If you have a burning desire to suffer from glazy-eye syndrome, I urge you to read the Federal Register’s daily update for a full month. If you have the internal strength to NOT suck on an exhaust pipe after doing so, you will have one of two predictable responses. You will either sigh in resignation, or become so darn angry that it’ll be impossible for anyone to be with you. But wait, O’ gullible citizen, it gets worse. Perhaps you’ve wonder how these brain-dead career politicians with the sparkling smiles and the 12-month tans can generate so many abhorrent bills that enable the loss of our liberty.
The answer is staff. This semi-permanent group of lifetime bureaucrats works for the elected officials and for the various committees and sub-committees. They live inside the beltway. They have been radically infected with “Potomac Fever” with little prospect for a cure. They are the true enablers. They do the work and allow the legislator to appear competent. They author the enabling legislation that ultimately becomes law….and they do not have to go back to Minnesota or Texas and live under those toxic regulations. Besides, Congress typically exempts itself from much of the freedom-crushing legislation.
The Congress has legislated a multitude of unconstitutional acts that deny our unalienable rights. They have forfeited their Constitutional mandates by allowing other, unelected entities to implement, promulgate, regulate and enforce those unconstitutional provisions. Unalienable rights are natural rights. If you are a believer, unalienable rights are from God and cannot be taken or given away. If you’re a regular reader of my columns, you are aware that I’m a 10th Amendment nullifier. I believe the states have the duty to refuse to implement or allow any unconstitutional law to be enforced within their borders. I fear, however, that there are not very many legislators who have the cajones to stand up to Big Brother. Our unalienable rights are individual rights, therefore………
Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Playing Peek-a-Boo
The recent and current furor about the overzealous activities of Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) an arm of the Homeland Security Agency has given me pause (not paws). So, we have these ultra super, high-falutin’ scanners that cannot see if you have something hidden in an orifice, but do register the dimensions and consistency of certain body parts. Hmmm. In addition, the former Director of Homeland Security (Michael Chertoff) now represents the company that provides these amazing scanners. Hmmm. The scanner operators are supposedly ensconced at a remote location so that they cannot see or be seen by the passengers. The primary purpose for this placement of the scanner controller was to “protect the privacy of the passengers.” Now we discover that nearly a hundred of the scans have been seen on the internet. Hmmm. I feel much safer now, don’t you?
If you should decide to opt out of the full-body, totally revealing scan procedure, then you may be subjected to a body “pat.” Maybe you’ll qualify for the enhanced body pat. This is a process whereby the designated TSA agent using hands and fingers explores parts of your body that neither your mother nor your spouse has ever touched. Hmmm. The official government fondling is done for your own protection. The possibility that the examining officer may rarely change his or her rubber gloves should not impact your protection or your safety for at least two weeks. Hmmm. Everyone is a potential target for the official government fondling or voyeurism, though some have more potential than others. High probability targets include good looking people, old people, nuns and especially cute children. The low probability universe includes, but is not limited to, Muslims, ugly people, armed provocateurs, Mid-Eastern explosives experts and Black Panthers carrying nightsticks while dressed in camouflage.
Some people have expressed outrage at this blatant violation of our 4th Amendment rights, and they have called for a more aggressive profiling program to identify potential miscreants before they get to the security area. They argue that if the government wasn’t so “P.C,” then the profiling procedure would render much of the present system unnecessary. Hmmm. The critics are ignoring one critical factor in the entire airport security fiasco. They do profile. Yes, indeed, they do profile. You see, if you were to opt out of the scanning and chose to undergo the enhanced body pat, and you actually smiled doing the procedure. You would be profiled as a “perv.” Two huge TSA musclemen would throw you to the floor and clamp detention bracelets on your ankles. See, the system works just like most government programs work.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
If you should decide to opt out of the full-body, totally revealing scan procedure, then you may be subjected to a body “pat.” Maybe you’ll qualify for the enhanced body pat. This is a process whereby the designated TSA agent using hands and fingers explores parts of your body that neither your mother nor your spouse has ever touched. Hmmm. The official government fondling is done for your own protection. The possibility that the examining officer may rarely change his or her rubber gloves should not impact your protection or your safety for at least two weeks. Hmmm. Everyone is a potential target for the official government fondling or voyeurism, though some have more potential than others. High probability targets include good looking people, old people, nuns and especially cute children. The low probability universe includes, but is not limited to, Muslims, ugly people, armed provocateurs, Mid-Eastern explosives experts and Black Panthers carrying nightsticks while dressed in camouflage.
Some people have expressed outrage at this blatant violation of our 4th Amendment rights, and they have called for a more aggressive profiling program to identify potential miscreants before they get to the security area. They argue that if the government wasn’t so “P.C,” then the profiling procedure would render much of the present system unnecessary. Hmmm. The critics are ignoring one critical factor in the entire airport security fiasco. They do profile. Yes, indeed, they do profile. You see, if you were to opt out of the scanning and chose to undergo the enhanced body pat, and you actually smiled doing the procedure. You would be profiled as a “perv.” Two huge TSA musclemen would throw you to the floor and clamp detention bracelets on your ankles. See, the system works just like most government programs work.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
One of the Gang
If we citizens are truly serious about reforming government at all levels, then we must implement “reverse affirmative action” for all elected officials. Historically, elected public servants have been treated with a high level of respect and decorum. People treat them with respect and deference. When politicians attend a function, they get the best seats and are escorted to the head of the line. Citizens often clamor for the opportunity to have their pictures snapped with elected officials. They cherish the little hand-signed notes that they receive from the purveyors of power.
We often rail at how imperial our career politicians have become, but do we not treat them as our betters? We act as if someone who has a lust for the exercise of power, who has the ego to stand before a constituency and laud his/her own talents, and who has the unmitigated gall to continually ask others for money is a better person than any of us. If you carefully examine the attributes necessary for a successful politician in today’s environment, you will see someone with whom you typically wouldn’t associate. Do you enjoy the company of people who are always asking for money? Do you relish the opportunity to bask in the glow of someone who thirsts for power over you?
If the people are ever to regain the power to govern ourselves, then we must stop investing our politicians with exalted positions over us in our every day encounters. We must remove the curtain and expose the wizard as just another human being who has been chosen to serve. Our attitudes can be instrumental as we elect new people going forward. Today’s officeholders may be too far gone…too far under the spells of deference and privilege. To end the sense of entitlement that elected officials seem to embrace, we must cease our treating them as if they were special.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
We often rail at how imperial our career politicians have become, but do we not treat them as our betters? We act as if someone who has a lust for the exercise of power, who has the ego to stand before a constituency and laud his/her own talents, and who has the unmitigated gall to continually ask others for money is a better person than any of us. If you carefully examine the attributes necessary for a successful politician in today’s environment, you will see someone with whom you typically wouldn’t associate. Do you enjoy the company of people who are always asking for money? Do you relish the opportunity to bask in the glow of someone who thirsts for power over you?
If the people are ever to regain the power to govern ourselves, then we must stop investing our politicians with exalted positions over us in our every day encounters. We must remove the curtain and expose the wizard as just another human being who has been chosen to serve. Our attitudes can be instrumental as we elect new people going forward. Today’s officeholders may be too far gone…too far under the spells of deference and privilege. To end the sense of entitlement that elected officials seem to embrace, we must cease our treating them as if they were special.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Re-Peeling the Onion
This entry is my contribution to the new Congress. If they are serious about downsizing an unconstitutional, overgrown federal government, then this plan may provide them with the means to pare back the government in an orderly fashion. I first advanced this idea on my Earl for Ohio Facebook page, but it was a more cryptic version. The GOP has their “Pledge to America.” It’s not very sweeping in nature, and certainly lacks specificity. In addition, many Republicans are poised to implement their “no earmark” policy….an insignificant but highly symbolic gesture. They should have a workable plan that is substantive and effective.
Every committee and sub-committee chair should inventory every department, agency, bureau and directorate for which they have oversight. Then, each committee should identify 100 restrictive, excessive or unconstitutional rules or regulations for every department etc. under their purview. Following the cataloging of the most offensive regulatory burdens, the committee should have roll call votes to repeal each of the offending rules or regulations, and forward those selected for removal to the House or Senate floor for a roll call vote. If some rule or reg is Constitutional and necessary, but has been misinterpreted or unlawfully expanded, the repeal process should go forward, and replacement enabling legislation that is more tightly and clearly written should be introduced.
With all the committees and subcommittees on the Hill, this process would “deep six” literally thousands of onerous bureaucratic freedom-killers. Of course, the Congress must have the courage to follow through and not allow the K-Street interests to sidetrack the reforms. This endeavor would be a real test of their willingness to reduce government, but would allow it to be done in an incremental and systematic manner. All of this activity should be targeted for completion by the end of 2011.
The second year of the Congress (2012) should build on the first. The agency/bureau overview should continue with the repeal and elimination of all duplicative and contradictory regulations, rules, directives and laws. In addition, the various governmental entities should be eliminated if unconstitutional or consolidated if they serve some worthy purpose within the parameters of the Constitution. This task will be an especially daunting one because the politicians will be faced with an election year as they are confronted with a multitude of difficult choices. We will know who is serious about reducing the size and scope of government,…and who is not. Again, each repeal or removal should have a roll call vote in committee and on the floor.
Finally, for those who survive the election process, the Congress can in 2013 set the tone of reduction by eliminating a large number of sub-committees and committees. As long as so many Congresspersons hold the gavels of authority, their natural tendency will be to retain their power, enlarge their mandates and support the bureaucracy. Eliminating earmarks is nice, but severely paring down the number of committees and sub-committees is critical for a true shrinking of government. We will not accept the little token cosmetic diversions any more.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
.
Every committee and sub-committee chair should inventory every department, agency, bureau and directorate for which they have oversight. Then, each committee should identify 100 restrictive, excessive or unconstitutional rules or regulations for every department etc. under their purview. Following the cataloging of the most offensive regulatory burdens, the committee should have roll call votes to repeal each of the offending rules or regulations, and forward those selected for removal to the House or Senate floor for a roll call vote. If some rule or reg is Constitutional and necessary, but has been misinterpreted or unlawfully expanded, the repeal process should go forward, and replacement enabling legislation that is more tightly and clearly written should be introduced.
With all the committees and subcommittees on the Hill, this process would “deep six” literally thousands of onerous bureaucratic freedom-killers. Of course, the Congress must have the courage to follow through and not allow the K-Street interests to sidetrack the reforms. This endeavor would be a real test of their willingness to reduce government, but would allow it to be done in an incremental and systematic manner. All of this activity should be targeted for completion by the end of 2011.
The second year of the Congress (2012) should build on the first. The agency/bureau overview should continue with the repeal and elimination of all duplicative and contradictory regulations, rules, directives and laws. In addition, the various governmental entities should be eliminated if unconstitutional or consolidated if they serve some worthy purpose within the parameters of the Constitution. This task will be an especially daunting one because the politicians will be faced with an election year as they are confronted with a multitude of difficult choices. We will know who is serious about reducing the size and scope of government,…and who is not. Again, each repeal or removal should have a roll call vote in committee and on the floor.
Finally, for those who survive the election process, the Congress can in 2013 set the tone of reduction by eliminating a large number of sub-committees and committees. As long as so many Congresspersons hold the gavels of authority, their natural tendency will be to retain their power, enlarge their mandates and support the bureaucracy. Eliminating earmarks is nice, but severely paring down the number of committees and sub-committees is critical for a true shrinking of government. We will not accept the little token cosmetic diversions any more.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Reading the Tea Leaves
A quickie analysis of the Libertarian Party and Tea Party (C4L, Tea Party, 912, Liberty, Patriot and other like-minded groups) impact in the mid-term election of two weeks ago yields some interesting points. The massive GOP blowout that swept the party of Lincoln into power in the nation’s capitol has been credited to a great degree to “Tea Party” activity. With a few notable Senate exceptions (Angle (NV), Buck CO), perhaps Miller (AK) and O’Donnell (DE), most Tea Party endorsed or supported candidates were electorally successful and led the way to a 60-plus seat pickup in the House and at least a 6 seat gain in the Senate for Republicans.
A cursory glance at results in Ohio would suggest a similar outcome in the Buckeye state. There are some numbers that suggest, however, that the co-opted “Tea Party” activists lost some impact when they strayed beyond traditional GOP RINO candidates. A look back at the May 4th Primary Election reminds us that Sandy O’Brien (Secretary of State) and Seth Morgan (Auditor) were both favorites of the Ohio Tea Party groups. Each of them garnered around 30% of the Republican vote and failed to secure their respective nominations
Throughout the newly formed activist groups, righteous anger and disgust with how the state party apparatus had been used to advance the prospects of Dave Yost for Auditor and John Husted for Secretary of State was notable. An additional galling aspect was that Yost had changed from an Attorney General candidate to Auditor in order to provide an open field for former Senator, Mike DeWine, after some funny business with petitions for Tea Party AG favorite, Steve Christopher. Christopher failed to qualify for the ballot, and DeWine did, indeed, enjoy an open field.
Over the past ten months I’ve had the opportunity to speak to several dozen Tea Party-type groups. Almost without exception they pronounced their loathing of DeWine and his questionable conservative values. They also expressed heated discontent with Yost and Husted along with State Chair, Kevin DeWine. I sensed that grassroots were angry and would not blindly work for a victorious RINO slate. At their various meetings they often stated that it was time to teach the GOP a lesson---that the Republican Party could not take their allegiance for granted.
Robert Owens was the Constitution Party Chairman and its candidate for Ohio Attorney General. A former prosecutor he was an instrumental drafter of the Health Care Freedom Amendment, a statewide measure to repeal the noxious national legislation (Obamacare). So, Owens had credentials, youth and energy, and he offered a viable alternative to DeWine. The Ohio Liberty Council is a statewide alliance of liberty-oriented groups, and their endorsement arm, The Ohio Tea Party PAC, endorsed Owens’ candidacy. He was the ONLY statewide candidate to receive at least 7/8 approval from their 58 affiliates (at least 51 local organizations). Owens was a tireless campaigner, traveling all over the state to many venues and winning adherents.
In 2010 for the first time in 76 years, a minor party had a full slate of statewide candidates. The Libertarian Party of Ohio had candidates for every major office including Marc Allyn Feldman, their Attorney General hopeful. Clearly, Feldman’s candidacy would have some impact on Owens’ Constitution Party candidacy, but the key Ohio Tea Party PAC endorsement and the general Tea Party organizations’ disillusionment with DeWine’s nomination could, nevertheless, yield a significant vote total for Owens. Apparently, Tea Party endorsements did not translate into votes.
Three of the Libertarian candidates for statewide office garnered more than 177 thousand votes each suggesting that a base of around 175 thousand for statewide LPO challengers. In the Attorney General race, however, Feldman’s 104,554 tally lagged considerably behind his party mates. Owens’ presence in the race coupled with Feldman’s inability to wage an aggressive campaign were the two most instrumental factors in Feldman’s final number. So, did the Tea Party activists propel Owens into contention? Did they overcome the 100 thousand plus votes that Feldman siphoned from Owens’ potential? Did the Tea Party faithful soundly reject the re-cycled Mike DeWine? No, no, no.
They did not deliver. They crawled back upon their favored RINO and rode him once again. Same old, same old. Fervor and endorsements did not deliver votes. Owens’ final total was slightly more than 127 thousand votes while DeWine had nearly one million seven hundred eighty-three thousand (1,782,821).
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
A cursory glance at results in Ohio would suggest a similar outcome in the Buckeye state. There are some numbers that suggest, however, that the co-opted “Tea Party” activists lost some impact when they strayed beyond traditional GOP RINO candidates. A look back at the May 4th Primary Election reminds us that Sandy O’Brien (Secretary of State) and Seth Morgan (Auditor) were both favorites of the Ohio Tea Party groups. Each of them garnered around 30% of the Republican vote and failed to secure their respective nominations
Throughout the newly formed activist groups, righteous anger and disgust with how the state party apparatus had been used to advance the prospects of Dave Yost for Auditor and John Husted for Secretary of State was notable. An additional galling aspect was that Yost had changed from an Attorney General candidate to Auditor in order to provide an open field for former Senator, Mike DeWine, after some funny business with petitions for Tea Party AG favorite, Steve Christopher. Christopher failed to qualify for the ballot, and DeWine did, indeed, enjoy an open field.
Over the past ten months I’ve had the opportunity to speak to several dozen Tea Party-type groups. Almost without exception they pronounced their loathing of DeWine and his questionable conservative values. They also expressed heated discontent with Yost and Husted along with State Chair, Kevin DeWine. I sensed that grassroots were angry and would not blindly work for a victorious RINO slate. At their various meetings they often stated that it was time to teach the GOP a lesson---that the Republican Party could not take their allegiance for granted.
Robert Owens was the Constitution Party Chairman and its candidate for Ohio Attorney General. A former prosecutor he was an instrumental drafter of the Health Care Freedom Amendment, a statewide measure to repeal the noxious national legislation (Obamacare). So, Owens had credentials, youth and energy, and he offered a viable alternative to DeWine. The Ohio Liberty Council is a statewide alliance of liberty-oriented groups, and their endorsement arm, The Ohio Tea Party PAC, endorsed Owens’ candidacy. He was the ONLY statewide candidate to receive at least 7/8 approval from their 58 affiliates (at least 51 local organizations). Owens was a tireless campaigner, traveling all over the state to many venues and winning adherents.
In 2010 for the first time in 76 years, a minor party had a full slate of statewide candidates. The Libertarian Party of Ohio had candidates for every major office including Marc Allyn Feldman, their Attorney General hopeful. Clearly, Feldman’s candidacy would have some impact on Owens’ Constitution Party candidacy, but the key Ohio Tea Party PAC endorsement and the general Tea Party organizations’ disillusionment with DeWine’s nomination could, nevertheless, yield a significant vote total for Owens. Apparently, Tea Party endorsements did not translate into votes.
Three of the Libertarian candidates for statewide office garnered more than 177 thousand votes each suggesting that a base of around 175 thousand for statewide LPO challengers. In the Attorney General race, however, Feldman’s 104,554 tally lagged considerably behind his party mates. Owens’ presence in the race coupled with Feldman’s inability to wage an aggressive campaign were the two most instrumental factors in Feldman’s final number. So, did the Tea Party activists propel Owens into contention? Did they overcome the 100 thousand plus votes that Feldman siphoned from Owens’ potential? Did the Tea Party faithful soundly reject the re-cycled Mike DeWine? No, no, no.
They did not deliver. They crawled back upon their favored RINO and rode him once again. Same old, same old. Fervor and endorsements did not deliver votes. Owens’ final total was slightly more than 127 thousand votes while DeWine had nearly one million seven hundred eighty-three thousand (1,782,821).
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
