Following yesterday’s entry, I received feedback from several readers. So, before diving into today’s discussion, I will address several of their concerns. By all means, the Fair Tax should NOT be implemented unless and until the 16th Amendment has been repealed. In addition, the IRS must be abolished. If the Fair Tax were to be utilized, then the respective states would be the “tax collectors” for the federal government. Currently 44 of our 50 states have a state sales tax which means that they are equipped for including the Fair Tax on the cash registers within their domains. One advantage of moving our tax system to a consumption basis rather than a labor/capital base as it is now is that the states will be collecting the tax and will have the means to enforce 10th Amendment/nullification issues by withholding the portion of federal taxes that are used for unconstitutional activities. It’s called the power of the purse.
As an ardent supporter of Constitutional principles, I fully understand that the federal leviathan was originally intended to rely on Fees, Duties, Imposts and Excise taxes to fund its operations. Clearly the size, reach and cost of the federal monstrosity have far exceeded its constitutional mandate. My personal view is that we could return to constitutional government and tax policy overnight. We would undoubtedly suffer some upheaval and dislocation, but freedom is a marvelous thing. Observe an animal that has been released from its cage or its tether. In the beginning the poor creature is tentative and fearful, but in most cases begins to explore the broader environment with gusto. Again, I believe that the cold turkey approach could be effective, but ……… it’s not politically feasible.
My reasons for preferring a modified version of the Fair Tax are rooted in political reality. To attempt to massively reduce government, radically alter the tax structure and diminish the power of politicians and bureaucrats would generate a flurry of opposition from those who govern us and from many of those who are governed. My primary purpose for choosing the Fair Tax as a transitional mechanism is that I believe that a “little taste of freedom” may trigger the urge for more of it. Secondly, the income tax and its progressive incarnation are absolutely evil. You own your body, your labor and your property. The taxation of labor is a form of piecemeal slavery, and it is compounded by the withholding of tax liabilities before the worker or citizen receives the fruits of labor (pay). The government gets its portion of your labor before your receive the remainder. That is wrong. God Almighty asked the Hebrews to give Him the first 10% of their earnings. Today, the government insists on the first dollar and more. Personally, I do not believe that the government has a greater interest in my labor than does God. This example is illustrative of the insistence by government to be the preeminent factor in every facet of our lives. We are much better served with government stays in the background while protecting our borders and guarding our God-given rights. When the state becomes the dominant principal in our lives, then our liberty has been dangerously usurped. Just as a toddler requires constant supervision and instruction, the ward of the Nanny State must have every aspect of life controlled.
My vision of a Fair Tax Amendment (following or concurrent with repeal of the 16th) would include a proviso that sets the upper limit for the tax at 23%, and would include strict unambiguous language that limits the tax to new products sold at retail (final consumer destination). Also, I would include two more elements, or place them in a separate accompanying amendment, that would require a balanced budget with no new tax avenues available, and constitutionally establish a drop down feature of the tax. For example the tax rate could be reduced one per cent (1%) every two years, thus resulting in an effective rate of 13% after 20 years. While this number may not force the federal government to live within constitutional parameters, it would demand very serious prioritizing. The 13% figure is not nearly as stringent as it may appear because the tax structure and the overall lower level of taxation will boost economic activity, and thus, generate significant revenues.
We’ll pick up the balance of this discussion tomorrow.
Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com or cearlwriting@hotmail.com
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Monday, November 29, 2010
Whatever's Fair
The FairTax is innovative, reasonable and frequently misrepresented. Indeed, it is a consumption tax that is collected at the point of final sale on new products…used items are exempt because the underlying premise is that something should not be taxed more than once. As it has been proposed, the FairTax replaces nearly all existing federal taxes (income, AMT, corporate, Social Security, Medicare, gift, estate) on a revenue-neutral basis. As designed the FairTax would NOT replace certain excise taxes such as the gasoline tax, the communication (telephone, internet) tax and selective limited resource extraction taxes. The greatest weakness of the FairTax proposal, in my view, is that it does not address massive government spending, although I understand the reasoning for this posture---to minimize opposition and simplify the argument. My preference is that we eliminate the excise (hidden) taxes as well, and offset their revenues with spending cuts. If this scenario can be achieved, then no one pays ANY federal tax until they consummate a purchasing transaction for a product or service.
The analysts have concluded that as originally constructed, a FairTax of 23% on every new product or service would offset the monies generated by the non-excise sector of the federal tax code. Their examination has yielded that each domestic commercial transaction carries with it an “embedded” tax of roughly 22%. That means that throughout the cycle of the product or service from raw material to finished product/delivered service, the various federal taxes that are levied at each stage of the process comprise approximately 22% of the final cost to the consumer (taxpayer). At first glance one might assume that the FairTax would be more costly for the taxpayer (23% vs. 22% embedded). Okay, it’s math time.
For the sake of clarity and as a fiscally responsible commentator, I will assume for this model that the actual impact of the “embeds” is a mere 18%. If the price of an item is $ 1.00 (one dollar), then the REAL cost without taxes would be eighty-two cents ($.82)(1.00-.18=.82). When we add the FairTax to the cost of the product or service, we note that amount to be $1.0086 or $1.01. So, if the embedded amount is only 18% versus the 22%, then the final transaction COULD be a penny higher than it is under the present structure…….BUT remember, you are not paying withholding taxes for income, FICA or Medicare. Let’s assume that you have 19 exemptions and pay NO income tax. Your FICA rate of 7.65% means that even IF the cost of goods and services were to rise by one per cent, you will continue to net 6.65% of your gross income for saving, additional purchases…whatever you desire. I truly believe that this is a very conservative estimate. In my view, your net yield will be much larger which in turn would generate more economic activity.
The previous discussion has overlooked an important “embedded” benefit. Just as the individual wage earner/taxpayer will not be required to pay the FICA tax, neither will the employer. This outcome could lead to lower prices, more capital investment or higher profits and wages. Any of these results would provide a benefit for the economy.
So, the easy question is how does this FairTax concept really help the taxpayer? And the easy answer is …more freedom. Your overall tax liability will, in a large measure, be determined by you. Need a car? Well, purchase a Kia and pay a relatively low tax, buy a Lexus and pay a higher sum,…..or buy a late-model used Cadillac and pay NO tax. The choice is yours. You choose. Acquire your clothes from high-end thrift shops and pay no tax. Have a garage/lawn sale and be legal, for once, by collecting no tax.
Tomorrow we’ll examine how to offset the lower incomes of the poor, and examine the mechanism for implementing the FairTax as a REPLACEMENT not an ADDITION to the current tax nightmare. Please check out www.fairtax.org .
Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com or cearlwriting@hotmail.com
The analysts have concluded that as originally constructed, a FairTax of 23% on every new product or service would offset the monies generated by the non-excise sector of the federal tax code. Their examination has yielded that each domestic commercial transaction carries with it an “embedded” tax of roughly 22%. That means that throughout the cycle of the product or service from raw material to finished product/delivered service, the various federal taxes that are levied at each stage of the process comprise approximately 22% of the final cost to the consumer (taxpayer). At first glance one might assume that the FairTax would be more costly for the taxpayer (23% vs. 22% embedded). Okay, it’s math time.
For the sake of clarity and as a fiscally responsible commentator, I will assume for this model that the actual impact of the “embeds” is a mere 18%. If the price of an item is $ 1.00 (one dollar), then the REAL cost without taxes would be eighty-two cents ($.82)(1.00-.18=.82). When we add the FairTax to the cost of the product or service, we note that amount to be $1.0086 or $1.01. So, if the embedded amount is only 18% versus the 22%, then the final transaction COULD be a penny higher than it is under the present structure…….BUT remember, you are not paying withholding taxes for income, FICA or Medicare. Let’s assume that you have 19 exemptions and pay NO income tax. Your FICA rate of 7.65% means that even IF the cost of goods and services were to rise by one per cent, you will continue to net 6.65% of your gross income for saving, additional purchases…whatever you desire. I truly believe that this is a very conservative estimate. In my view, your net yield will be much larger which in turn would generate more economic activity.
The previous discussion has overlooked an important “embedded” benefit. Just as the individual wage earner/taxpayer will not be required to pay the FICA tax, neither will the employer. This outcome could lead to lower prices, more capital investment or higher profits and wages. Any of these results would provide a benefit for the economy.
So, the easy question is how does this FairTax concept really help the taxpayer? And the easy answer is …more freedom. Your overall tax liability will, in a large measure, be determined by you. Need a car? Well, purchase a Kia and pay a relatively low tax, buy a Lexus and pay a higher sum,…..or buy a late-model used Cadillac and pay NO tax. The choice is yours. You choose. Acquire your clothes from high-end thrift shops and pay no tax. Have a garage/lawn sale and be legal, for once, by collecting no tax.
Tomorrow we’ll examine how to offset the lower incomes of the poor, and examine the mechanism for implementing the FairTax as a REPLACEMENT not an ADDITION to the current tax nightmare. Please check out www.fairtax.org .
Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com or cearlwriting@hotmail.com
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Maybe you...?
If seems as if we are treading on thin ice. No, this is not an examination of climate change, but rather a look at how close we are skating to the edge of tyranny. Attempting to confront the overreaching arms of big government is similar to trying to slay the Hydra with a butter knife. The monster is so large and has become so unwieldy that it’s difficult to identify where to begin when deciding to dismantle the beast. Of course disassembly of the huge government apparatus isn’t necessary…if you don’t care about losing your freedom to decide matters for your own self interest.
Maybe, just maybe you are content with Big Nanny’s telling you what to plant in your garden. Perhaps you are more than happy to forgo the incandescent bulb to favor one that takes a long time to achieve top luminance and is difficult to discard because of environmental concerns. It is easy to imagine that you prefer an automobile that lugs around an extraordinarily heavy battery, uses coal-fired electricity to get charged, cannot haul the entire family, and is a structural death-trap. No doubt, you would not object when the Healthcare panel determines that your chronic condition would be too costly to alleviate, and the fact that your utility for the society has been limited means that medical services for you would be a waste of the State’s resources.
It’s conceivable that you approve of the government’s interference in the marketplace. After all, bureaucrats are extremely knowledgeable and forward thinking. It is always a good thing, isn’t it, when the government chooses some businesses to succeed (with subsidies) and others to fail (regulations, penalties, etc.). What could go wrong? You may even applaud when government bails out businesses that are “too big to fail,” (by the way, how big is too big?), then assumes ownership of stock and takes an active role in management and policy.
You might even feel confident that Homeland Security and other agencies and departments are monitoring your phone calls, texting and emails. You may be downright ecstatic with their post-facto security procedures. Each time the terrorists attempt a new method for creating mayhem, the security geniuses implement highly restrictive countermeasures, thus forcing the bad guys to develop more innovative methods for harming us. It’s possible that the specter of an increasingly growing police state helps you to feel more secure. Bureaucrats never err, and you have nothing to fear if they should wrongly determine that you could be a threat. Right?
At the rate that we are moving right now, you may have your perfectly safe world in a short time. I hope that you will be satisfied to live in your tiny little box and never have the anxiety that comes from having to make your own decisions. Remember, though, if you dare to peek out of the box, you will pay the consequences. Big Brother expects you to stay in the box because you have everything you need.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Maybe, just maybe you are content with Big Nanny’s telling you what to plant in your garden. Perhaps you are more than happy to forgo the incandescent bulb to favor one that takes a long time to achieve top luminance and is difficult to discard because of environmental concerns. It is easy to imagine that you prefer an automobile that lugs around an extraordinarily heavy battery, uses coal-fired electricity to get charged, cannot haul the entire family, and is a structural death-trap. No doubt, you would not object when the Healthcare panel determines that your chronic condition would be too costly to alleviate, and the fact that your utility for the society has been limited means that medical services for you would be a waste of the State’s resources.
It’s conceivable that you approve of the government’s interference in the marketplace. After all, bureaucrats are extremely knowledgeable and forward thinking. It is always a good thing, isn’t it, when the government chooses some businesses to succeed (with subsidies) and others to fail (regulations, penalties, etc.). What could go wrong? You may even applaud when government bails out businesses that are “too big to fail,” (by the way, how big is too big?), then assumes ownership of stock and takes an active role in management and policy.
You might even feel confident that Homeland Security and other agencies and departments are monitoring your phone calls, texting and emails. You may be downright ecstatic with their post-facto security procedures. Each time the terrorists attempt a new method for creating mayhem, the security geniuses implement highly restrictive countermeasures, thus forcing the bad guys to develop more innovative methods for harming us. It’s possible that the specter of an increasingly growing police state helps you to feel more secure. Bureaucrats never err, and you have nothing to fear if they should wrongly determine that you could be a threat. Right?
At the rate that we are moving right now, you may have your perfectly safe world in a short time. I hope that you will be satisfied to live in your tiny little box and never have the anxiety that comes from having to make your own decisions. Remember, though, if you dare to peek out of the box, you will pay the consequences. Big Brother expects you to stay in the box because you have everything you need.
Comments: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Monday, November 22, 2010
If Only.
If only all career politicians were people of honor, integrity and intelligence, then our liberty and our nation would not be in such jeopardy.
If only the people we choose to lead us, whether politically, in business or in our volunteer groups, were not overcome by their own megalomania, then maybe we could accomplish something of lasting value.
If only the people who choose the leaders were more self-reliant and less concerned about what government can “give” them, then perhaps they would be more discerning when selecting those who lead them.
If only we were more diligent about handling our own affairs, then maybe we wouldn’t be so eager to restrict the actions of others.
If only our children who are born with their unalienable rights intact could retain some sense of urgency for freedom, then I would not be so fearful for their futures.
If only more parents would teach about liberty and responsibility, then our distortion of our rights would not be so great or so wrong.
If only preachers would recognize that salvation and unalienable rights are mutually inclusive, then the church would become the citadel for freedom that would honor God and advance the cause of liberty.
If only our career politicians would read and follow the Constitution, then freedom –economic, political and personal—would flourish.
If only taking an oath had the gravity that it once had, then perhaps our leaders and jurists would be more diligent in their following the Constitution.
If only we allowed God Almighty back into our daily discourse, then oath-keeping would be a more solemn activity.
If only personal shame were to return as an element of social interaction, we wouldn’t have so many restrictive laws, rules and regulations.
If only we hadn’t had such an expansion of “rights,” and inflation of self-esteem and a misguided definition of accountability, then perhaps I would have more confidence in our nation’s prospects for righting our ship of state.
If only there were not so many aspects of our nation’s faltering, those of us who care could join together to correct our course.
If only those of us who care were not faced with a multitude of issues requiring correction, then we could be more effective by uniting and focusing on a few critical items.
If only our Framers and Founders had not been so wise, then I would not have enjoyed the opportunity to freely express my alarms.
If only ………
Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
If only the people we choose to lead us, whether politically, in business or in our volunteer groups, were not overcome by their own megalomania, then maybe we could accomplish something of lasting value.
If only the people who choose the leaders were more self-reliant and less concerned about what government can “give” them, then perhaps they would be more discerning when selecting those who lead them.
If only we were more diligent about handling our own affairs, then maybe we wouldn’t be so eager to restrict the actions of others.
If only our children who are born with their unalienable rights intact could retain some sense of urgency for freedom, then I would not be so fearful for their futures.
If only more parents would teach about liberty and responsibility, then our distortion of our rights would not be so great or so wrong.
If only preachers would recognize that salvation and unalienable rights are mutually inclusive, then the church would become the citadel for freedom that would honor God and advance the cause of liberty.
If only our career politicians would read and follow the Constitution, then freedom –economic, political and personal—would flourish.
If only taking an oath had the gravity that it once had, then perhaps our leaders and jurists would be more diligent in their following the Constitution.
If only we allowed God Almighty back into our daily discourse, then oath-keeping would be a more solemn activity.
If only personal shame were to return as an element of social interaction, we wouldn’t have so many restrictive laws, rules and regulations.
If only we hadn’t had such an expansion of “rights,” and inflation of self-esteem and a misguided definition of accountability, then perhaps I would have more confidence in our nation’s prospects for righting our ship of state.
If only there were not so many aspects of our nation’s faltering, those of us who care could join together to correct our course.
If only those of us who care were not faced with a multitude of issues requiring correction, then we could be more effective by uniting and focusing on a few critical items.
If only our Framers and Founders had not been so wise, then I would not have enjoyed the opportunity to freely express my alarms.
If only ………
Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Littlestuff Weekender-11-20-2010
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
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
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
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Littlestuff Weekender-11-13-2010
Sometimes I believe that I’m becoming schizophrenic. On one hand I see the massive growth of our increasingly oppressive government. I see it’s heartless, mindless and soulless appetite that smothers the will and the initiative of our people. I see its unencumbered march toward total control extinguishing the sparks of liberty that God has placed within each of us, and I want to hunker down, to be alone, to tend my garden and pretend that it’s not happening. On the other hand, my anger, passion and my sense of justice are energized. I want to scream from the rooftops and mountaintops that Liberty is worth fighting for. I want to challenge and impede the monster’s movement every step along the way. I want to fight and resist with every fiber of my being. I do not want to submit, and I shall not.
Many people are drawing benefits and receiving subsidies from Big Government. Their allegiance or their indifference has been purchased. I have reason to believe that the government is going to give me a Rolex for Christmas….excuse me, the Winter Holidays. Isn’t that what it means to be on a watch list?
I’ve figured this out: I’m too late smart, and too soon old.
Fortunately, I have discovered that Grace is not a cashier at Kroger’s.
The Book of Proverbs (22:7, NIV) warns us “the borrower is servant to the lender.” Benjamin Franklin and other Founding Framers warned us against profligate spending and debt. Yet, for the past century we have childishly ignored their cumulative wisdom. We are now at the stage where we borrow to meet our debt payments, and still, the clowns in charge talk about reducing expenditures to 2008 levels. Why not 1908 dollars adjusted for inflation? They provide all kinds of reasons, alibis and excuses for not engaging in a serious and effective fiscal blueprint. Well, my fellow citizens, I have some advice for you in light of government’s irresponsible behavior. Sign up for Rosetta Stone and learn Mandarin Chinese.
It seems likely that many of you share my frustration with the apathetic attitudes of many of our family, friends and neighbors. Now we know how the Old Testament prophets felt. Jerusalem was conquered, and the people were dispersed….one thousand, nine hundred forty years ago. It’s true, if we do not learn from history, we are condemned to repeat it.
I love Christmas. I cherish the message of hope. I love spending time with my family. I enjoy the kitchen smells, the fragrance of pine and the non-stop Christmas music.
For the past year, I have traveled Ohio. I have made some wonderful new friends and re-connected with some old friends. I have been blessed. Thank you, one and all.
My family has provided a phenomenal support system for me. Pat, my wife of 41.67 years (so who’s counting), daughter Kelly, hubby, Kevin and youngin’s Shaun and Erin plus son P.J., spouse, Heather, and little one, Sully have all been so supportive and encouraging. I love them all, and I’m so proud that I get to share their lives.
Dear career politician,
Stop spending MY money. Stop spending Pat’s money. Stop spending my children’s money. Stop spending my grandchildren’s money. Stop spending money. Stop spending. Stop!!!!!
Comments welcome: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Many people are drawing benefits and receiving subsidies from Big Government. Their allegiance or their indifference has been purchased. I have reason to believe that the government is going to give me a Rolex for Christmas….excuse me, the Winter Holidays. Isn’t that what it means to be on a watch list?
I’ve figured this out: I’m too late smart, and too soon old.
Fortunately, I have discovered that Grace is not a cashier at Kroger’s.
The Book of Proverbs (22:7, NIV) warns us “the borrower is servant to the lender.” Benjamin Franklin and other Founding Framers warned us against profligate spending and debt. Yet, for the past century we have childishly ignored their cumulative wisdom. We are now at the stage where we borrow to meet our debt payments, and still, the clowns in charge talk about reducing expenditures to 2008 levels. Why not 1908 dollars adjusted for inflation? They provide all kinds of reasons, alibis and excuses for not engaging in a serious and effective fiscal blueprint. Well, my fellow citizens, I have some advice for you in light of government’s irresponsible behavior. Sign up for Rosetta Stone and learn Mandarin Chinese.
It seems likely that many of you share my frustration with the apathetic attitudes of many of our family, friends and neighbors. Now we know how the Old Testament prophets felt. Jerusalem was conquered, and the people were dispersed….one thousand, nine hundred forty years ago. It’s true, if we do not learn from history, we are condemned to repeat it.
I love Christmas. I cherish the message of hope. I love spending time with my family. I enjoy the kitchen smells, the fragrance of pine and the non-stop Christmas music.
For the past year, I have traveled Ohio. I have made some wonderful new friends and re-connected with some old friends. I have been blessed. Thank you, one and all.
My family has provided a phenomenal support system for me. Pat, my wife of 41.67 years (so who’s counting), daughter Kelly, hubby, Kevin and youngin’s Shaun and Erin plus son P.J., spouse, Heather, and little one, Sully have all been so supportive and encouraging. I love them all, and I’m so proud that I get to share their lives.
Dear career politician,
Stop spending MY money. Stop spending Pat’s money. Stop spending my children’s money. Stop spending my grandchildren’s money. Stop spending money. Stop spending. Stop!!!!!
Comments welcome: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Friday, November 12, 2010
Guns and Moses
This is not a retrospective on the life of Axel Rose although he may be nearly as old as Moses. This entry is an exploration of the necessity for an armed citizenry. In the perfect world there would be no need for citizens to bear weapons. Today’s world is not perfect, however, and members of our society should be armed for a number of reasons. Obviously, one of the primary reasons is for personal protection. The United States has become an increasingly dangerous place, and even our smaller communities have not escaped the turmoil. Although crime prevention is a component of police work, most often the law enforcement officers do not become involved until after a crime has been committed. Their efforts are primarily directed toward investigation and apprehension. It seems, therefore, a prudent move for a citizen to have the means for self-defense and self-preservation.
A second justification for a citizen’s possession of firearms is for sporting purposes and varmint control. Target shooting and hunting are noble, healthy pursuits. They are the types of activities that an entire family can enjoy. The varmint control element may not be a huge issue in many neighborhoods—one doesn’t find too many Norwegian rats in Scarsdale, but in my small patch of the country, we do encounter the occasional pest. Woodchucks (we call them groundhogs around here), raccoons (nasty critters when threatened), and the increasingly annoying coyote are all threats to livestock, pets, crops or gardens. These feral critters are often too wily for effective trapping, so a well-placed shotgun blast or rifle shot is usually an effective determent.
Resisting tyrannical government is a serious endeavor. One does not cavalierly initiate armed activity against the power structure of the nation. The Founders and Framers of our country anticipated that at some time in the future, the citizens would feel compelled to rise and resist an overreaching governmental apparatus. As Thomas Jefferson wrote:
Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.
The implication is that if the government becomes too big, too oppressive or too unresponsive, then the people must aggressively wrest the reins of power and self-determination from the entrenched power structure. The huge government entity will resist any attempt to contain it. Laws and regulations will be advanced that limit the ability of the people to assert their control over the leviathan. In June of 1788, George Mason prophetically identified a key element of government’s restrictive control.
“To disarm the people…. was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
Mason’s sentiment was further advanced by Patrick Henry:
O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone… Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation… inflicted by those who had no power at all?
The Founders and Framers, when considering additions to the Constitution that would protect individual God-given rights and secure ratification votes from some reluctant colonies, enshrined the individual right of the citizen to bear arms in the Second Amendment. Fortunately, the United States Supreme Court in the 2008 D.C vs. Heller decision upheld the historical understanding that the right to own and possess firearms is an individual one. That’s the good news. The alarming news is that the Court affirmed more than 220 years of common practice by a mere 5 to 4 vote! Our individual Second Amendment right is hanging by a thread even as our government becomes more oppressive and invasive.
So, why is the reference to Moses in the title of this piece? Our Judeo-Christian heritage informs us that if God is with you, then the size of your army or the power of your arsenal is incidental. David needed but a few smooth stones and a slingshot to vanquish the mightiest warrior of the Philistine nation whereupon their army surrendered. Samson slew a thousand of those pesky Philistines using the jawbone of an ass. I suspect that our country may have forfeited God’s blessing if we’ve ever had it. We cannot rely on His divine intervention to help us secure our liberty.
If the time should come that freedom-loving citizens are compelled to battle for their God-given liberties, then the right to bear arms is critical. Slinging stones and swinging jawbones will not achieve the objective. We must protect and defend our individual right to bear arms. Every branch of the federal government has, to some degree, undermined the Constitutional certainty that was understood at the founding. In many speeches I’ve advanced the notion of the “triad of liberty.” When we perceive that Government is exceeding its limits, we use the 1st Amendment to reason, to protest and to persuade. Our next remedy for relief is the 10th Amendment wherein our states resist the encroachment of the federal government that has run amok. Finally, we resist force with force by exercising our 2nd Amendment protections.
Asses’ jawbones do not contain enough firepower. They are readily available, though. You can find a career politician lurking around every corner.
Comments are welcome: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
A second justification for a citizen’s possession of firearms is for sporting purposes and varmint control. Target shooting and hunting are noble, healthy pursuits. They are the types of activities that an entire family can enjoy. The varmint control element may not be a huge issue in many neighborhoods—one doesn’t find too many Norwegian rats in Scarsdale, but in my small patch of the country, we do encounter the occasional pest. Woodchucks (we call them groundhogs around here), raccoons (nasty critters when threatened), and the increasingly annoying coyote are all threats to livestock, pets, crops or gardens. These feral critters are often too wily for effective trapping, so a well-placed shotgun blast or rifle shot is usually an effective determent.
Resisting tyrannical government is a serious endeavor. One does not cavalierly initiate armed activity against the power structure of the nation. The Founders and Framers of our country anticipated that at some time in the future, the citizens would feel compelled to rise and resist an overreaching governmental apparatus. As Thomas Jefferson wrote:
Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.
The implication is that if the government becomes too big, too oppressive or too unresponsive, then the people must aggressively wrest the reins of power and self-determination from the entrenched power structure. The huge government entity will resist any attempt to contain it. Laws and regulations will be advanced that limit the ability of the people to assert their control over the leviathan. In June of 1788, George Mason prophetically identified a key element of government’s restrictive control.
“To disarm the people…. was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
Mason’s sentiment was further advanced by Patrick Henry:
O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone… Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation… inflicted by those who had no power at all?
The Founders and Framers, when considering additions to the Constitution that would protect individual God-given rights and secure ratification votes from some reluctant colonies, enshrined the individual right of the citizen to bear arms in the Second Amendment. Fortunately, the United States Supreme Court in the 2008 D.C vs. Heller decision upheld the historical understanding that the right to own and possess firearms is an individual one. That’s the good news. The alarming news is that the Court affirmed more than 220 years of common practice by a mere 5 to 4 vote! Our individual Second Amendment right is hanging by a thread even as our government becomes more oppressive and invasive.
So, why is the reference to Moses in the title of this piece? Our Judeo-Christian heritage informs us that if God is with you, then the size of your army or the power of your arsenal is incidental. David needed but a few smooth stones and a slingshot to vanquish the mightiest warrior of the Philistine nation whereupon their army surrendered. Samson slew a thousand of those pesky Philistines using the jawbone of an ass. I suspect that our country may have forfeited God’s blessing if we’ve ever had it. We cannot rely on His divine intervention to help us secure our liberty.
If the time should come that freedom-loving citizens are compelled to battle for their God-given liberties, then the right to bear arms is critical. Slinging stones and swinging jawbones will not achieve the objective. We must protect and defend our individual right to bear arms. Every branch of the federal government has, to some degree, undermined the Constitutional certainty that was understood at the founding. In many speeches I’ve advanced the notion of the “triad of liberty.” When we perceive that Government is exceeding its limits, we use the 1st Amendment to reason, to protest and to persuade. Our next remedy for relief is the 10th Amendment wherein our states resist the encroachment of the federal government that has run amok. Finally, we resist force with force by exercising our 2nd Amendment protections.
Asses’ jawbones do not contain enough firepower. They are readily available, though. You can find a career politician lurking around every corner.
Comments are welcome: earl4sos@gmail.com or cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
High Speed Fail
Ohio Governor-elect, John Kasich, derailed (for now) the Three C High-speed rail project. Maybe he has determined that an average speed of 41mph doesn’t necessarily meet the criterion for the “high-speed” designation. Perhaps he was swayed by the realization that massive amounts of funds would be necessary to construct the infrastructure for the rail system while Ohio’s ground transportation network is crumbling. It’s possible that he was concerned about the dislocation and eminent domain issues that would precede the building of the rail, though I doubt it. Individual rights and property are generally trampled for “the greater good.”
Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood (RINO-Illinois) notified Mr. Kasich that the $400 million in stimulus funds that were set aside to begin the rail project would be forfeited if not used for the high-speed boondoggle. In case you may have forgotten, that $400 million is: 1) our money; 2) our borrowed money and future debt; and 3) not President Obama’s nor Ray Lahood’s private stash for their pet social engineering projects. Kasich had asked for permission to divert the funds for other uses. Aside from the blatantly irresponsible action of seeking additional borrowed funds for any purpose, Kasich’s stand contains the nucleus of principle. States have the Constitutional right to determine what is best for their citizens. Big Nanny be damned.
Back to the fast train fiasco. The average subsidy for EVERY Amtrak passenger is $32…yes, every time someone purchases a ticket and ascends the steps to the passenger car, the taxpayers’ cash register rings up another thirty-two bucks. So, who in her or his right mind believes that the Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati FORTY-MPH EXPRESS would be more efficient? Even if it were as cost-effective as Amtrak, why should the taxpayers of Ohio be saddled with the bill for a relatively few riders? Why should Youngstown and Toledo residents underwrite ease and convenience for people in other jurisdictions? Why should the good people of St. Henry, Tiffin, Caldwell and Gallipolis bear the burden of propping up a certain loser? Besides, 41 mph does not suggest a “bullet train.” It is more reminiscent of a “stop action” bullet in a “Matrix” film. Hell, there are Kenyan distance runners who could outpace that thing.
OK, in the interest of proving for the public good and welfare, I shall prose some remedies for enhancing the feasibility of High-Speed Rail in Ohio. Because our fearless and clueless leaders are trying to establish the Buckeye as a leader in the alternative energy field, I submit that we should merge the two fiascos to arrive at a singular solution for all of our economic woes in Ohio. Let’s examine ways to propel the train using renewable energy resources.
Each engine on the train could have a windmill attached to its top (sorta like a beanie propeller). The faster the train would travel the more energy that would be generated. If we could reach “warp” speed, we might generate enough power to export to other states that are burdened with huge gas and oil reserves that the EPA will not allow them to tap. Our greatest concern would be that the train could conceivably become airborne if it exceeded the recommended ground speed. A flying train with a couple of dozen subsidized passengers could result in a tragedy of immense proportions.
Perhaps solar panels would provide an efficient energy system for running the train. Nighttime runs might have to be severely curtailed, and air conditioning requirements on the train may have to be ramped up, but the solar option could be very feasible on those 5 or 6 totally sunny days that we enjoy here in the Great Lakes region. In addition, every hail storm would create new jobs as we replace the damaged panels.
My favorite option involves the use of methane. Each train could be equipped with a methane converter. Farmers along the High-Speed corridor could pile their animal waste along the tracks. As the train speeds by, a waste collector would scoop up the excrement, capture the methane and convert it to energy. My greatest concern is that if the farmers were to stack too much material along the tracks, then our High-Speed Wonder train could arrive at its destination … full of crap. So, for now, we’ve avoided the Boo-Hoo Choo-Choo .
Comments welcome: earl4sos@gmail.com cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood (RINO-Illinois) notified Mr. Kasich that the $400 million in stimulus funds that were set aside to begin the rail project would be forfeited if not used for the high-speed boondoggle. In case you may have forgotten, that $400 million is: 1) our money; 2) our borrowed money and future debt; and 3) not President Obama’s nor Ray Lahood’s private stash for their pet social engineering projects. Kasich had asked for permission to divert the funds for other uses. Aside from the blatantly irresponsible action of seeking additional borrowed funds for any purpose, Kasich’s stand contains the nucleus of principle. States have the Constitutional right to determine what is best for their citizens. Big Nanny be damned.
Back to the fast train fiasco. The average subsidy for EVERY Amtrak passenger is $32…yes, every time someone purchases a ticket and ascends the steps to the passenger car, the taxpayers’ cash register rings up another thirty-two bucks. So, who in her or his right mind believes that the Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati FORTY-MPH EXPRESS would be more efficient? Even if it were as cost-effective as Amtrak, why should the taxpayers of Ohio be saddled with the bill for a relatively few riders? Why should Youngstown and Toledo residents underwrite ease and convenience for people in other jurisdictions? Why should the good people of St. Henry, Tiffin, Caldwell and Gallipolis bear the burden of propping up a certain loser? Besides, 41 mph does not suggest a “bullet train.” It is more reminiscent of a “stop action” bullet in a “Matrix” film. Hell, there are Kenyan distance runners who could outpace that thing.
OK, in the interest of proving for the public good and welfare, I shall prose some remedies for enhancing the feasibility of High-Speed Rail in Ohio. Because our fearless and clueless leaders are trying to establish the Buckeye as a leader in the alternative energy field, I submit that we should merge the two fiascos to arrive at a singular solution for all of our economic woes in Ohio. Let’s examine ways to propel the train using renewable energy resources.
Each engine on the train could have a windmill attached to its top (sorta like a beanie propeller). The faster the train would travel the more energy that would be generated. If we could reach “warp” speed, we might generate enough power to export to other states that are burdened with huge gas and oil reserves that the EPA will not allow them to tap. Our greatest concern would be that the train could conceivably become airborne if it exceeded the recommended ground speed. A flying train with a couple of dozen subsidized passengers could result in a tragedy of immense proportions.
Perhaps solar panels would provide an efficient energy system for running the train. Nighttime runs might have to be severely curtailed, and air conditioning requirements on the train may have to be ramped up, but the solar option could be very feasible on those 5 or 6 totally sunny days that we enjoy here in the Great Lakes region. In addition, every hail storm would create new jobs as we replace the damaged panels.
My favorite option involves the use of methane. Each train could be equipped with a methane converter. Farmers along the High-Speed corridor could pile their animal waste along the tracks. As the train speeds by, a waste collector would scoop up the excrement, capture the methane and convert it to energy. My greatest concern is that if the farmers were to stack too much material along the tracks, then our High-Speed Wonder train could arrive at its destination … full of crap. So, for now, we’ve avoided the Boo-Hoo Choo-Choo .
Comments welcome: earl4sos@gmail.com cnpearl@woh.rr.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)