Thursday, December 30, 2010

Sanitation Workers Give NYC A Snow Job

Instead of plowing the streets, this 
driver was caught snoozing Monday
morning from 9:30 to at least 11 on 
14th Avenue near 149th Street.
When I was growing up in Boston, there was the joke that went along the lines of "whadaya call 4 guys in a city truck drinking coffee? Union workers."

Well the joke is on NYC after last weekend's crippling blizzard when, according to the NY Post, sanitation workers sandbagged the city and risked public safety in a spat with Mayor Bloomberg over job and wage cuts. And oh yeah, they were able to pad their overtime to boot. But these poor guys only can increase their starting base salary 115% in 5 1/2 years up to $67,141* not counting shift differentials and OT of course.

NY Post
"[Department of Sanitation] sent a message to the rest of the city that these particular labor issues are more important," said City Councilman Dan Halloran (R-Queens), who was visited yesterday by a group of guilt-ridden sanitation workers who confessed the shameless plot.

Halloran said he met with three plow workers from the Sanitation Department -- and two Department of Transportation supervisors who were on loan -- at his office after he was flooded with irate calls from constituents.

The snitches "didn't want to be identified because they were afraid of retaliation," Halloran said. "They were told [by supervisors] to take off routes [and] not do the plowing of some of the major arteries in a timely manner. They were told to make the mayor pay for the layoffs, the reductions in rank for the supervisors, shrinking the rolls of the rank-and-file."

New York's Strongest used a variety of tactics to drag out the plowing process -- and pad overtime checks -- which included keeping plows slightly higher than the roadways and skipping over streets along their routes, the sources said.

The snow-removal snitches said they were told to keep their plows off most streets and to wait for orders before attacking the accumulating piles of snow.

[M]ultiple Sanitation Department sources told The Post yesterday that angry plow drivers have only been clearing streets assigned to them even if that means they have to drive through snowed-in roads with their plows raised.

And they are keeping their plow blades unusually high, making it necessary for them to have to run extra passes, adding time and extra pay.

One mechanic said some drivers are purposely smashing plows and salt spreaders to further stall the cleanup effort.
The takeaway in all this is our fearless Unionizer in Chief and the loyal left's efforts to get as many people on the government and union doles as possible. Why let private industry do a job when the government or union can do the same job for twice as much with half the efficiency, especially when the taxpayers are footing the bill.

Somewhere, Andy Stern is smiling.

Via Memeorandum

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Did The SCOTUS Get US v Wong Kim Ark Wrong?

I hate it when I'm wrong but in the argument against birthright citizenship, I offer this mea culpa.

I have for some time tried to make the argument that birthright citizenship was not guaranteed under the 14th Amendment and that the SCOTUS affirmed this in US v Wong Kim Ark because the court found that Kim Ark's parents were legally domiciled, resident aliens and that this would not apply to the offspring of illegal immigrants.

However after rereading the majority opinion in the case, I submit that I was wrong in my interpretation. The court did indeed grant citizenship to anyone born in the US based on the principal of jus soli and English Common Law. But, with that said, it is unimaginable just how the court reached it's decision since it completely disregarded what Congress meant in defining in the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the debates over the amendment, opinions of the US Attorney General along with an established SCOTUS precedent.

Just how did we get to where we are when Justice Horace Gray even goes as far as to contradict himself when, after he quotes passages from the debates to support his position, he writes that "[T]he debates in Congress are not admissible as evidence to control the meaning of those words. But the statements above quoted are valuable as contemporaneous opinions of jurists and statesmen upon the legal meaning of the words themselves".

So let us first take a look at what other members of Congress said in regards to what "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" meant.

Senator Jacob Howard was pretty clear
This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.
-Congressional Globe, Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session Page 2890
As was Senator Lyman Trumbull
The provision is, that "all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens." That means "subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof."... What do we mean by "complete jurisdiction thereof?" Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.
-Congressional Globe, Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session Page 2893
Senator Howard later agreed with Senator Trumbull's definition of the word.
I concur entirely with the honorable Senator from Illinois, in holding that the word "jurisdiction," as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now.
-Congressional Globe, Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session Page 2895
To further support the contention that Justice Gray got it wrong, Congress, on April 9, 1866, passed a law which established "That all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States;" (39th Congress, Session 1, Chapter 31) which later became Section 1992 of the US Revised Statutes in 1873. Now you argue that by choosing different language for the 14th Amendment, Congress changed it's mind but remember, this law was passed only a month after the amendment was proposed and Representative John Bingham, who co-wrote the citizenship clause said this regarding chapter 31 in the debate.
I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.
-Congressional Globe, House of Representatives, 39th Congress, 1st Session Page 1291
So we have here the Congressional record that clarifies "subject to the jurisdiction thereof", now can we find any other reference by the government as to what it means? Well in 1873 the US Attorney General George Henry Williams issued this opinion concerning the 14th Amendment which according to the current DOJ website, "Under the Judiciary Act of 1789, the Attorney General was authorized to render opinions on questions of law when requested by the President and the heads of Executive Branch departments."
"The word 'jurisdiction' must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment. Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent. Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to them."
-14 U.S. Attorney General Opinions 300
Interestingly enough Justice Gray uses the previous opinions of Attorney Generals to support his opinion while omitting one that came just a year before Elk v. Wilkins where he himself also wrote similar words in the majority opinion,
The persons declared to be citizens are "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired.
With the history lesson being over on what the intent of just what was meant by "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" you have to ask yourself, how did Justice Gray arrive at this opinion in US v Wong Kim Ark just 14 years later, and especially after citing Elk?
The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes. The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory... It can hardly be denied that an alien is completely subject to the political jurisdiction of the country in which he resides.
What is presented as the opinion in Kim Ark is a pretty ironclad case for birthright citizenship regardless of the legal status of the parents. This is further cemented by a little nugget from Justice William Brennan in Plyler v Doe and makes it impossible to get around without an amendment or a SCOTUS ruling that settles the question once and for all.
"[B]y principles of sovereignty and allegiance, no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment "jurisdiction" can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful."

Saturday, December 25, 2010

The Christmas That Changed Our Nation

As we wind down from this Christmas, let's take time to remember that fateful event that took place on Christmas night in 1776, for without it, our nation might well be a different place from the one we all know today.

On that night, General George Washington assembled his troops to cross the Delaware River for an assault on a Hessian garrison in Trenton, NJ. During this bitter winter, morale and supplies were low, enlistments were expiring and the Continental Army had been suffering defeat after defeat. The success of the Revolution was teetering on the brink of failure and Washington, sensing that bold action needed to be undertaken, devised a plan of attack.

History tells us that Washington's mission was indeed a success as he was able to win the Battle of Trenton the next day and then caused the British to abandon most of NJ after defeating them again at the Battle Princeton on January 2, 1777. The fate of the republic changed due to Washington's bold gambit and the tide of the war shifted in favor of the Colonies.

Friday, December 24, 2010

Merry Christmas To Our Friends


Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night
from Chris, Christine and the kitty army

And a big thank you to all of you who have visited MTOF over the course of the year.

The Ghost Of bin Laden Past

Keeping Osama bin Laden alive is important to the warfare state because without a boogieman to fixate on, the house of cards that our current occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are built on, along with the denigration of our civil liberties from the War on Terror, would crumble. Yet, we are still led to believe that the sickly looking man of late 2001 is still alive and kicking even though there is a host of speculation of his death.

It is in the best interest of all parties involved, be it the US government, the military industrial complex, the puppet governments we are propping up and even al-Qaeda for bin Laden to be alive. Alive, they all can use him as propaganda in support their agendas whereas a dead bin Laden does all of them no good.

Emmanuel Goldstein gave Big Brother a face to whip the inhabitants of Oceania into a frenzy, much like Osama bin Laden is used to this day. Unlike Goldstein, bin Laden is becoming less relevant but will still be a convenient enough excuse for an invasion of Pakistan, Yemen or even Iran.

The Washington Times 12/23
Is bin Laden dead or alive? Nobody seems to know for sure, or, if anybody does, he isn't saying. The White House's Afghanistan-Pakistan review this month didn't even mention him despite an ongoing, decade-long manhunt.

In 2008, former CIA case officer Robert Baer asserted, "Of course he's dead." In 2002 and 2009, Pakistani Presidents Pervez Musharraf and Asif Ali Zardari separately stated that bin Laden was dead. In 2002, FBI counterterrorism chief Dale Watson stated that bin Laden "probably" was dead.

Since 2004, we have seen no new bin Laden videos; we've only heard audios. One video released in 2007 could be a compilation of older videos. So why does the intelligence community continue to support the impression that he's alive?

Al Qaeda wants America and the world to believe bin Laden is still alive. His image is a specter of the horrors of Sept. 11, helping build public support for everything from troop surges a globe away to warrantless wiretaps at home.
Another interesting read on bin Laden's demise is a March 2009 article in the American Spectator by Angelo M. Codevilla.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Sunday Read at Pajamas Media: Missing the California of My Youth

Inspiration begets inspiration as blogging friend Tim Daniel at Left Coast Rebel writes a truly inspired piece for Pajamas Media after reading Victor Davis Hanson’s National Review article, Two Californias.

I highly recommend reading Tim's article, Missing the California of My Youth, at Pajamas Media as it is a very though provoking piece that shows just where we are headed as a republic based on the model of progressivism that California has provided.

If this doesn't serve as a wake up call for America, nothing will. Tim closes his article with this.
With my own eyes in California I have witnessed the perils of socialism and top-down collectivist government, the havoc wreaked by a blind eye turned to the rule of law, and what creeping and crippling regulations and taxes do to a once-thriving middle class. Neo-Bolshevik state lawmakers beholden to radical special interests joined hands with a neutered opposition party to fleece the world’s 8th largest economy, and my state reminds us of the moral destruction that the entitlement mentality and unfettered entitlements create.

In what seems like a lifetime ago, Barack Obama promised to fundamentally transform the nation. California is what a truly progressive government transformation looks like. Thus, in a sensible America, the decline of California would be the canary call in a coal mine for the nation. How can we let the progressive nightmare continue to happen to the nation when a state of almost 40 million (nearly a nation unto itself) has already experienced the disaster first?

Atlas has shrugged and California has changed – government has ruined this place and I will never forget it.

Do You Hate The State? by Murray N. Rothbard

Originally published in The Libertarian Forum, Vol. 10, No. 7, July 1977.
I have been ruminating recently on what are the crucial questions that divide libertarians. Some that have received a lot of attention in the last few years are: anarcho-capitalism vs. limited government, abolitionism vs. gradualism, natural rights vs. utilitarianism, and war vs. peace. But I have concluded that as important as these questions are, they don’t really cut to the nub of the issue, of the crucial dividing line between us.

Let us take, for example, two of the leading anarcho-capitalist works of the last few years: my own For a New Liberty and David Friedman’s Machinery of Freedom. Superficially, the major differences between them are my own stand for natural rights and for a rational libertarian law code, in contrast to Friedman’s amoralist utilitarianism and call for logrolling and trade-offs between non-libertarian private police agencies. But the difference really cuts far deeper. There runs through For a New Liberty (and most of the rest of my work as well) a deep and pervasive hatred of the State and all of its works, based on the conviction that the State is the enemy of mankind. In contrast, it is evident that David does not hate the State at all; that he has merely arrived at the conviction that anarchism and competing private police forces are a better social and economic system than any other alternative. Or, more fully, that anarchism would be better than laissez-faire which in turn is better than the current system. Amidst the entire spectrum of political alternatives, David Friedman has decided that anarcho-capitalism is superior. But superior to an existing political structure which is pretty good too. In short, there is no sign that David Friedman in any sense hates the existing American State or the State per se, hates it deep in his belly as a predatory gang of robbers, enslavers, and murderers. No, there is simply the cool conviction that anarchism would be the best of all possible worlds, but that our current set-up is pretty far up with it in desirability. For there is no sense in Friedman that the State – any State – is a predatory gang of criminals.
Read the rest at LRC

VIDEO - Gary Johnson On Libertarianism In America

Gary Johnson discusses whether libertarians are on the rise in America on FBN's America's Nightly Scoreboard.



If you like what Gov Johnson has to say and want to learn more please visit his OUR America website.

Its Easy To Blame GOP For DREAM Act Failure

Seeing the headline and reading the AP article on the failure of the DREAM Act, Republicans block youth immigration bill, you get the impression that the bill failed because the evil, racist, xenophobic Republicans in the Senate put the kibosh on it with the 55-41 vote against cloture. In reality it was the five Democrats, Max Baucus and Jon Tester of Montana, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mark Pryor of Arkansas who along with Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who skipped the vote but was on the record that he would have voted against it, who doomed the bill's passage, but that is just an afterthought in the last paragraph of the story.

This is dishonest journalism to say the least and is another example of a supposedly non-biased news organization promoting the agenda of an administration that it clearly supports.

AP
Senate Republicans on Saturday doomed an effort that would have given hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants a path to legal status if they enrolled in college or joined the military.

Sponsors of the Dream Act fell five votes short of the 60 they needed to break through largely GOP opposition and win its enactment before Republicans take over the House and narrow Democrats' majority in the Senate next month.

President Barack Obama called the vote "incredibly disappointing."

"A minority of senators prevented the Senate from doing what most Americans understand is best for the country," Obama said. "There was simply no reason not to pass this important legislation."
Via Memeorandum

Saturday, December 18, 2010

DHS To Begin Battling Climate Change As Homeland Security Issue

Oy vey, Big Sis is on the case, what could possibly go wrong?

CNSNews
At an all-day White House conference on "environmental justice," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that her department is creating a new task force to battle the effects of climate change on domestic security operations.

Speaking at the first White House Forum on Environmental Justice on Thursday, Napolitano discussed the initial findings of the department’s recently created "Climate Change and Adaptation Task Force."

Napolitano explained that the task force was charged with “identifying and assessing the impact that climate change could have on the missions and operations of the Department of Homeland Security.”
Via Memeorandum

DREAM Act Fails In Senate

Good for America, bad for the pro-amnesty and Reconquista movements, the Senate blocked a lame-duck attempt to vote on the DREAM Act by a margin of 55-41. While I fully support comprehensive immigration reform and could see the merits behind the idea of granting a path to citizenship for fully assimilated, high school graduates who fulfill a military service requirement, the idea of doing so in piece-meal legislation during a lame-duck session is DOA.

If Congress wants to undertake immigration reform, they must do so in a stand-alone bill that does not grant amnesty to a vast majority of illegal entrants, regardless of their reason for being in this country or where they came from, and include aspects such as full assimilation to our culture along with a process for documenting and doing background checks on those who will be allowed to stay or want to come in.

Stricter border security must also be included along with a simpler process for granting temporary work visas so those who are here can pay their fair share of taxes into a system where they are currently reaping benefits from, while paying little for. The financial incentive for coming to America illegally has to end now.

Congress must also address and enforce the original intent of the 14th Amendment and stop allowing for automatic citizenship of children born in this country to illegal immigrants and those who come here on tourist visas solely to achieve US citizenship for their child.

The DREAM Act was really a nightmare for America and deserved to go down in flames.

Via Memeorandum

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Congress Brings Home The Bacon To The Tune Of $8B In Earmarks

Congress never learns.

Just a little over a month ago, the American public roared in the mid-term election to send them the message that its big spending ways will no longer be tolerated. Well Leviathan is still not listening because tucked away in the 1,924 page, $1.1T omnibus spending bill released today, are 6,600 earmarks totaling $8B worth of pork, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. Now this may be the final cash grab by members on their way our, as the GOP claims, but many of that party's swine are feeding at the trough too.

Don't believe me, if you have a few days or a bad case of insomnia, you can read the bill and earmark requests at the Senate Committee on Appropriations website.

We'd all be better off if Congress just went on vacation, permanently.

Via Memeorandum

Monday, December 13, 2010

Want To Work For The DHS - There's An App For That

As if the government's surveillance on our every day life is not bad enough, a Florida company called Citizen Concepts has created the PatriotApp "that empowers citizens to assist government agencies in creating safer, cleaner, and more efficient communities via social networking and mobile technology... on the belief that citizens can provide the most sophisticated and broad network of eyes and ears necessary to prevent terrorism, crime, environmental negligence, or other malicious behavior." In other words, to create an Orwellian state where neighbors can spy on each other to create a climate where we are ever suspicious of one another.

And surprise, surprise that 2 members of the Citizens Concepts team, Dr Roy R Swiger and Ms Penny L Conner, have background experience with DHS and DOD. I wonder if Michael Chertoff has a stake in this company too.

I feel safer already.

From the website

Citizen Concepts announces the launch of PatriotAppTM, the world's first iPhone application that empowers citizens to assist government agencies in creating safer, cleaner, and more efficient communities via social networking and mobile technology.  This app was founded on the belief that citizens can provide the most sophisticated and broad network of eyes and ears necessary to prevent terrorism, crime, environmental negligence, or other malicious behavior. 

 Simply download, report (including pictures) and submit information to relevant government agencies, employers, or publish incident data to social network tools.

Key Features:

  • Integrated into Federal Agencies points of contacts
    • FBI
    • EPA
    • GAO
    • CDC
  • Custom integration with user employers
  • Fully integrated with Social Media (Facebook, Twitter)
  • Multiple menus and data fields
  • View FBI Most Wanted
  • Simple graphical user interface
Uses:
  • Enable citizens to record and communicate:
  • National Security, Suspicious activities, Crime
  • Government Waste
  • Environmental Crime or possible violations
  • White collar crime
  • Workplace harassment, discrimination, or other violations
  • Public Health concerns
PatriotApp encourages active citizen participation in the War on Terror and in protecting their families and surrounding communities.

NYT - Ron Paul, GOP Loner, Comes In From Cold

H/T Daily Paul

The NYT ran a nice article on the new Chairman of the House Subcommittee for Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, Rep Ron Paul and overall it was a quite positive piece, even with the unflattering picture. The big takeaway, other than it's going to be a long couple of years for "Helicopter" Ben, is that Dr Paul is 50/50 on a 2012 run for President.
WASHINGTON — As virtually all of Washington was declaring WikiLeaks’s disclosures of secret diplomatic cables an act of treason, Representative Ron Paul was applauding the organization for exposing the United States’ “delusional foreign policy.”

For this, the conservative blog RedState dubbed him “Al Qaeda’s favorite member of Congress.”

It was hardly the first time that Mr. Paul had marched to his own beat. During his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, he was best remembered for declaring in a debate that the 9/11 attacks were the Muslim world’s response to American military intervention around the globe. A fellow candidate, former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York, interrupted and demanded that he take back the words — a request that Mr. Paul refused.

During his 20 years in Congress, Mr. Paul has staked out the lonely end of 434-to-1 votes against legislation that he considers unconstitutional, even on issues as ceremonial as granting Mother Teresa a Congressional Gold Medal. His colleagues have dubbed him “Dr. No,” but his wife will insist that they have the spelling wrong: he is really Dr. Know.

Now it appears others are beginning to credit him with some wisdom — or at least acknowledging his passionate following.

After years of blocking him from a leadership position, Mr. Paul’s fellow Republicans have named him chairman of the House subcommittee on domestic monetary policy, which oversees the Federal Reserve as well as the currency and the valuation of the dollar.
Read the rest here

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Video - Interview with Julian Assange

H/T LRC

I happen to fall on the side that what WikiLeaks has done with the release of classified documents is not a crime or treason based on the SCOTUS ruling in New York Times Co. v. United States. I will even go one step further and say that anything that exposes the lies and corruption of our statist government, or any government for that matter, is a good thing for liberty. I fully agree with Ron Paul when he commented "[s]tate secrecy is anathema to a free society. Why exactly should Americans be prevented from knowing what their government is doing in their name? In a free society we are supposed to know the truth. In a society where truth becomes treason, however, we are in big trouble." We have a right to know what our government is doing in our name and that we have every right to hold the government accountable when it breaks the trust that we have in it.

Our founders, particularly Jefferson, understood this which is why he was against forming "entangling alliances" with other countries and knew that the government should fear the people and not the other way around. The Neo-cons will say otherwise but that is because they have a vested interest from keeping us in the dark.

Julian Assange interviewed by Hans Lysglimt from Johannes Aarmo on Vimeo.

On April 26. 2010 Julian Assange was invited to speak at the Oslo Freedom Forum (http://www.oslofreedomforum.com), an annual human rights conference in Oslo arranged by human rights activist Thor Halvorssen. Yours truly, (publisher of Farmann Magazine www.farmann.no) – Hans Lysglimt caught up with Assange for coffee leading into an engaging discussion about Wikileaks, its future and its threats along with insight into what motivates the person Julian Assange. We wanted to share this conversation and therefore set up this spontaneous interview with a handheld video camera right there at the coffee table.

HL: The ideology behind WikiLeaks is to enable transparency, or is there more of a thought behind it than that?

JA: There is. Our goal is justice. Our goal is to have a just civilization. That is sort of a personal motivating goal. And the message is transparency.

It is important not to confuse the message with the goal. Nonetheless we believe that it is an excellent message. Gaining justice with transparency. It is a good way of doing that, it is also a good way of not making too many mistakes.

We have a trans-political ideology; it is not right, it is not left, it is about understanding. Before you can give any advice, any program about how to deal with the world, how to put the civil into civilization. How to gain influence on people. Before you can have that program, first you have to understand what is actually going on. How does the world actually work. How do human civilisation and institutions actually work. What are they doing? Because, any remedy must be based on what is actually happening in practice. Because, if it is not based on what is actually happening it is based on some kind of fantasy. And therefore any program or recommendation, any political ideology that comes out of that misunderstanding will itself be a misunderstanding.

So, we say, to some degree all political ideologies are currently bankrupt. Because they do not have the raw ingredient they need to address the world. The raw ingredient to understand what is actually happening.
Read the rest of the transcript here.

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Is DC "Seeing The Light" On States Rights?

States rights are the foundation of our republic but for too long we have let Leviathan steamroll over the states, taking their voice away. With the wave of small government sentiment and the realization that we need to return to our Constitutional roots sweeping the nation, the politicians in DC have taken notice and are attempting to stem the tide by fooling us into thinking they understand our concerns and by taking minimal action to placate us.

Here is a snippet of my article on this subject at the Tenth Amendment Center Blog. I hope you enjoy it.
Well, Leviathan must be sensing that the heat is on because Sen. Roger Wicker R-MS is about to propose the 10th Amendment Regulatory Reform Act in the vein of HR 4946, which was proposed by Rep. Tom Cole R-OK back in March. This, however, is just a smokescreen because both pieces of legislation only go as far as allowing the states to protest proposed regulations by federal agencies. Nowhere does it allow the states a say in unconstitutional laws passed by Congress. That dog just won't hunt.
Read the article at the Tenth Amendment Center Blog and feel free to leave a comment. Thank you.

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Boehner To Block Ron Paul As Subcommittee Chair

H/T LRC

Ron Paul knows more about monetary policy than probably every member of Congress combined and has his sights on the Chair of the House Subcommittee for Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology where he intends to put the Federal Reserve under the microscope. Paul has long been a critic of the Fed and his book End The Fed illustrates why the institution is responsible for the economic woes that we face today.

If Boehner is successful in blocking Rep Paul from this chair, it will show that the GOP is not serious about its pledge of reining in federal spending and does not believe in the principles of smaller government that it has been espousing. This will be a slap in the face to the Tea Party who so greatly supported them in the 2010 midterm elections.

Bloomberg Businessweek
Five GOP leadership aides, speaking anonymously because a decision isn't final, say incoming House Speaker John Boehner has discussed ways to prevent Paul from becoming chairman or to keep him on a tight leash if he does. If Boehner, who will help determine who gets to chair subcommittees as early as Dec. 8, rejects Paul, he may have to contend with thousands of grassroots supporters and dozens of younger lawmakers who see Paul as a hero.

Merry Christmas Boston - Red Sox Acquire Adrian Gonzalez - Or Not

I interrupt this usually political blog for some fantastic news on the baseball front.

Today I awoke to a shiny new bauble under my Red Sox Christmas Tree in the name of SD slugging first baseman Adrian Gonzalez. The team and fans have long coveted the gold glover AGon and it appears that dream is now a reality. Now if the BoSox can sign one of Carl Crawford or Jayson Werth, I will be sporting tremendous wood.

Sources: Adrian Gonzalez to Red Sox

Editor's Note - Boston's been Grinched. According to the Boston Herald and Jon Heyman at SI.com the deal has fallen through due to the Sox and Gonzalez not being able to come to terms on a contract extension. The trade could still happen but would Boston want to give up that much talent for a 1 year rental? I should have learned from the ARod trade talks in 03 that nothing is done until it is announced.

And to throw a further damper on it, Jayson Werth looks like he's going to DC


Editor's Note (Update) - All is well, the deal has gone down and a press conference will be held on Monday. No extension will be announced but it is surmised that they agreed on 8 years $167M. By waiting until after opening day to sign an extension, instead of finalizing it now, it will save the Sox roughly $13M in payroll toward the luxury tax for 2011.

Ah the joys of the Hot Stove season, not that any of you political junkies care.

Friday, December 3, 2010

"Police State" Episode of "Conspiracy Theory" Pulled

I have to say that I thought Jesse Ventura's show Conspiracy Theory had a certain cheese factor to it, but the Police State episode scared the crap out of me if there is the slightest bit of truth to it. The episode focused on FEMA camps and fusion centers that our government has allegedly set up in the case of a SHTF scenario like an economic collapse, civil unrest or pandemic and now, according to Alex Jones, all traces of the episode have been removed from TruTV.

Don't forget, we also had the RAND Corporation study entitled A Stability Police Force for the United States: Justification and Creating U.S. Capabilities that outlines the creation of a Stability Police Force (SPF) in the US for use "in a range of tasks such as crowd and riot control" come out just last year. It makes you wonder if the former MN Governor was on to something else that the ruling class does not want us to know.

InfoWars.com
Alex Jones, a consultant to TruTV’s Conspiracy Theory, can confirm that the controversial episode “Police State,” which dealt with FEMA camps and fusion centers, has been pulled from air and essentially “memory-holed” due to behind the scenes pressure.

In short, the series of inconsistencies with the re-airing and promotion for “Police State” posted by We Are Change and Federal Jack (below) is all true, and more. The episode was de-listed from TruTV’s website, bonus clips associated with the episode were removed from the website, its encore airings were canceled and it was not played during the recent Conspiracy Theory marathon. Alex cannot elaborate further without compromising his sources, but you have heard people associated with the show discussing on the radio how certain unnamed powerful people did not want this impactful episode to air, how shadowy figures have been caught rummaging through the trash of producers for the show, and beyond.
Watch for yourself...while you can.

“Police State”
Premiered Fri, November 12 at 10P
It’s been said the government has a plan to declare martial law and round up millions of United State citizens into concentration camps. Jesse may have found a conspiracy in plain sight as he investigates the proliferation of law enforcement Fusion Centers around the country. And they may be connected to hundreds of detention centers ready to accept prisoners at the stroke of a Presidential pen. TV-PG-L






Related Posts with Thumbnails