In Honor of the Vote to Increase Socialism Today - Greed

This was forwarded to me in email, and I think Mr. Friedman's remarks are particularly pithy in light of today's vote on so-called healthcare reform, but really is designed to enslave millions of people to the Government.



Andrew Wilkow covered this very well today, and the idea is thus:
The difference between Government attempting to do something, such as provide lower cost healthcare, and private enterprise is simply self-interest, or "greed".

A businessman who sets out to perform a task for the public does so out of the want to earn money or prestige for themselves. Their want for better living conditions for themselves and their family drive them to take the risk of putting up their own money (and quite often that of other investors, who are also "greedy" to receive a return for their offering) to provide a good or service to people that need that good or service.

If the product is something that is actually needed by the public at large, and the businessperson can provide it at a cost that is below that which others are willing to pay, they receive income from that product. A successful product, with proper and careful management of the costs of manufacturing that product, results in success for that "greedy person". The greed actually provides a great incentive to improve the product, streamline the process it takes to manufacture that product, and even impetus to branch out and provide additional related products. The act of expanding that product's offering creates jobs and benefits many other people.

An additional pressure that requires better performance in the creation and provision of the product is competition. Attempting to charge a price above what the market will bear (e.g. what people will pay for that product) will either result in the public not buying the product, or a competitor seizing upon the opportunity to provide a similar product at a lower price. In both cases, subject to the limitations of technology and innovation, there is no way to provide a product (for an extended time) at a price below the total price of creating that product. Any attempt to do so requires additional investment by the person or other investors who, again, are motivated by a greedy want to receive a return on the money that they invest in that product.

Except in certain rare cases, it is very nearly impossible for a private entity to force the public at large to buy their product. Competition and public indifference are excellent motivators to stay as lean and mean as possible.

The Government, on the other hand, works thusly:

Like the private entity, the impetus for politicians to act is also greed. This greed is still defined as the urge to generate additional wealth and prestige for oneself, however, there are a number of key differences in the how a good or service is produced and provided to the public at large.

Unlike a private enterprise, a politician simply puts a gun in the face of a private citizen and demands the money it will take to provide that good or service. The politician (or bureaucrat) risks nothing themselves (except, perhaps, the risk of being voted out of office). This lack of risk also assumes that the pol is acting in a legal manner.

"Now hold on!" you might think, "nobody is robbing me at gunpoint for my tax dollars!" Think again, what happens if you do not pay whatever taxes the Government decides to levy on you this year? You get audited, and then fined. Don't pay the fine, guys with guns come to take you away. Resist being taken, and you can be shot.

So now, the Government is offering a product. Costs of creating that product are immaterial. If there's not enough money to create it, the pol just gets more to cover the overage. If the product isn't making any profit, that's ok, there's always more money available to ensure its longevity. In fact, because nobody in charge of creating that product has any real personal stake in its success/failure, there is absolutely no incentive to ensure that costs of provision and manufacture are kept streamlined and tight. What's better, since the cost of providing this product is "free" so far as the pol is concerned, the Government can even price competing products right out of the market. When you think your cost is effectively $0, and your competitors all have to pay for workers, facilities, equipment, etc. out of their own pockets (and consequently watch their own fortunes and bank accounts increase and decrease with success/failure), it's incredibly easy for a Government product to simply run everyone else out of business.

How about supply and demand? Recall that the private entity has to ensure that there is a need for their product. People must want to consume their product, and have enough money to purchase it at a price that exceeds the cost of creating it. What do you do as a Government in this situation? Simple, you require that people purchase it. After all, you're the Government, if they refuse you, you can simply fine them. If they don't pay the fine, well, then you get to arrest them. And if they don't want to be arrested, you simply shoot them and move on with life.

So what does this have to do with so-called Healthcare Reform?

Simply this:
A group of people who are totally unaccountable for their success/failure, grows ever closer to passing a law that says you must purchase a product - healthcare. This product's composition will be controlled by those politicians (it must be an "approved" plan), and you will at all times be enrolled in that approved plan or the IRS will fine you. If you persist in being uncovered, and do not pay your fine, you will go to prison for 5 years. If you refuse to go to prison, you will be shot. If this were China, they'd do all of the above just the same, except they'd send the bill for the bullet to your family afterwards.

Meanwhile, this group of unaccountable people will be effectively in charge of the insurance companies. Without any personal stake in the success/failure of of these companies, they will mandate how much profits those companies can make, how much they can pay their executives, how much profit goes to stock holders, and what plans they can offer. In effect, those politicians will be able to control whether an insurance company survives or not, on an unaccountable whim. Their irresponsible behavior, driven by bribes and lobbyists, will cause companies with "connections" to prosper, while companies that are looked upon less favorably (or whose superior product offering presents a threat to established, inferior companies) will rot on the vine and be driven out of business.

Ultimately, the consumers of Healthcare, "common" Americans, will be bankrupted and killed in droves whilest waiting to see a Doctor for serious ailments such as Cancer. There will be no market forces ensuring innovation, controlling the costs of provision, and ensuring wasteful actions are punished. Costs will rise sharply, premiums will rise sharply, and service will fall off as more and more money is dumped into increasingly bureaucratic management structures and unchecked spending.

So what is greed? When tempered by personal risk, greed is literally the engine of human innovation, the suppressor of costs, and the creator of jobs and opportunities. When a method of greed is found where a greedy person has no risk of failure, however, exploitation and ruination of everyone involved will surely follow.

As Friedman stated, in summary, greed is good, and the Government can, in and of itself, create nothing. Only Private Parties have the proper motivation to invent, create, and provide goods and services.

John Cornyn - Conservatives have to yield to reality. Bullshit.

A letter sent to John Cornyn in response to this article in The Hill, brought to my attention by David Codrea at War on Guns.

"Conservative primary voters "have to yield" to reality, Senate Republicans' campaign chairman said Wednesday.

Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), suggested that conservatives need to have a more realistic sense of which races are winnable and with which candidates.

"Folks on the right, and frankly I'm one of them in terms of voting record, have to yield to the world as it is and not necessarily how they wish it would be," Cornyn told Reuters for a story about centrist Rep. Mike Castle's (R) bid for Senate next year in Delaware."

To which I replied:

Really? I wrote you earlier this year praising you for taking a more Conservative message. I voted for a Democrat for Senator last November for the first time ever based on your voting for the first Bailout. If you'll recall, I told you that only by acting like a Conservative did you have any hope of receiving my vote the next time you're up for election.

The reason, the ENTIRE reason the country is in the state it's in today, with Socialists and Leftists occupying the Whitehouse, House, and Senate (and soon the Supreme Court) is precisely because the Republican Party violated their Contract with America, and then swung hard left. Appeasement has not worked for the Israelis, and it sure as hell isn't going to work for the RNC.

New York found out recently what happens when you run a Republican that "can win", despite what their real non-Conservative past is - the so called Republican up and quits, sending their supporters to the Democrat.

If you are looking to lose yet more seats in November, I recommend you continue this idiotic course of running "moderates", also known as "people who are going to vote with the Leftists anyways". Conservatives are absolutely done voting for RINOs, we're done getting screwed by the people that are supposed to be on our side, and we're absolutely finished playing "the game" of voting for the lesser of two evils.

Go ahead, run RINOs, we'll be happy to put up our own candidates, and if that ends up losing the seat to a Democrat, at least we know for sure where they're going to stand on the issues we care about.

The jig is up, it's time to put your money with your mouth is and put up candidates with bold differences from the Democrats or we'll do it for you in the form of a third party. The continued relevance of the Republican Party is on the line, and you're playing house with the Democrats instead of coming up with a bold plan to regain the trust of your core constituencies.

Wake up and get in the game.

I've liked many of the things Cornyn has said (and done) recently, but an attitude such as this is what continues to play right into the Leftist's hands. I'm done voting for the Republican even though voting third party (or even voting Democrat) may put the Democrat in anyways. That little charade of a game has screwed us time and time again.

No more RINOs.
No more so called Republicans that vote with the Left.
No more "lesser of two evils".

No more, I'm done playing your game.

The Fall of the Republic - Portions of Health Bill Not Amendable/Repealable

It came to the attention of many that there are apparently provisions of the Health Disaster that is about to be unleashed upon the failed experiment that was the States United that are, in fact, un-amendable and un-repealable. I can't think of any way to force the dissolution of the States than to start passing legislation for which there is no legislative remedy.

This is a relatively long video, but it is worth a watch as a demonstration of the farce that is the Senate under Reid.



Understand this. The section that Senator DeMint is quoting states specifically that it is amending the "Rules". The Parliamentarian (who is supposed to be a non-partisan interpreter of the law and rules) in return is ruling that in fact the section does not say what it says. There are ways to amend the Senate rules - those ways take a 3/4s vote (which these tyrants can not get). Like amending the Constitution, it is supposed to be very difficult to amend the Senate rules - those rules are, by their very nature, designed to prevent a majority from riding roughshod over the minority. Those rules, in fact, protect the people of the United States from a tyrannical group getting a majority control and turning dictatorial.

Harry Reid's Senate has finally publicly decided that the rules no longer apply to them. They are finally so drunk on power that they truly believe they can do whatever the hell they want, without regard for the consequences. If this is any idea what will be happening over the next year as we wait for the next set of elections, I have a great fear that the damage done will be completely irreversible. What better way to ensure secessions and possibly Civil War then to finish off the Rule of Law, which after the recent bailouts and shady goings on related to them, already was near-death.

Do you understand what this means?

I've got a better idea...

Priest in Britain Advises Congregation to Shoplift

"My advice as a Christian priest is to shoplift," Jones reportedly told churchgoers during his Sunday sermon. "I do not offer such advice because I think that stealing is a good thing, or because I think it is harmless, for it is neither."

"I would ask that they do not steal from small family businesses, but from large national businesses — knowing that the costs are ultimately passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices," he continued.

Great idea, but I have a better one. His parishioners should start by keeping the money they're giving to the church, or even better, just taking what they need out of the offering plate as it goes by. They could also avail themselves of the bread/crackers and wine kept on premises for communion to feed themselves.

Yeesh.

These folks just love to villify corporations that have evolved to employ millions (thereby feeding the families of those millions), not to mention the millions more in charity those organizations give out each year.

Bunning "Gets It" and Blasts Bernanke

About time someone in Congress seems to "Get It" about the economy and specifically the completely illegal actions of the Federal Reserve.

This came courtesy of Karl Denninger at the Market Ticker. Please take a read over there and call your Senator today.

It is far past time for "Extend and Pretend" to stop, and real fiscal reforms to be enacted.

Limited Government - Oxymoron?

This clip is very long, however, it is also full of some very interesting analysis.

While I don't agree that anarchy is the way to go (the original intent of a limited Constitutional Republic - which we no longer have - suits me just fine), these two gentlemen have their crap together and have some very intelligent observations.



(Hattip to the Militant Libertarian for the heads up...)

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety...

...deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Some words attributed to Benjamin Franklin that ring ever truer with each passing day in our once great Nation. If you've been reading at all, you've likely heard of the new scanner they want to use at airports. It bounces energy off of you to essentially form a relatively detailed image of your shape underneath your clothes. Yes, it can detect things that a metal detector can not, it can also show your 'junk' to an airport screener in a room. But don't worry, those "ultra professionals" in TSA will immediately delete the image. Promise.

'Naked' scanner in airport trial

If perchance you haven't heard of it, or you've seen the sanitized images in our media, perhaps this will better illustrate my point.



But remember, this is just a reduced for web, small image. Imagine this full sized, splashed across the screen.

All of this is older news, however, what rekindled my irritation is the absolute sheep responding to this article at the bottom. Yes, they're British, and therefore have been conditioned from birth to suckle at the tit of the nanny state, but still, you'd expect a little more spine from human beings.

Or perhaps not.

If it meant that as passengers we were more secure and also meant we didn't have to go through the added hassle of undressing then I can't see why people would complain, especially given the authorities assurances that the images are destroyed.
Steven Todd, Glasgow

Destroyed? Absoutely sir! We always destroy...err...what's that on YouTube? Is that Halley Barry?

I think it would be very embarrassing to go throughout the scanner. But if it is going to keep us safe from terrorists then it is worth it and essential. I'm sure the person seeing the images will see so many every day that they will not be in the least bit interested in our naked bodies.
Roy Woolnough, Watford

Sure Roy. They'll be happy to point and fall out of their chair laughing at your tiny...ahem.

I'd rather have this, than be fully searched. If it speeds up check in, and makes travelling less stressful, bring it on. I think because of the amount of unnecessary surveillance we appear to be subject to, good ideas get a little too much criticism when they arrive.
Eddie, Edinburgh

Sure Eddie, anything for the children, I mean air travelers eh? Hey, did you know that you can hide explosives in your rectum? Bend over and pass me the lube!

You know, why don't we just start putting one of these on every street corner and make people utilize them to pass by on the sidewalk. You want to be safe, don't you?

The Revolution

I'd like to draw attention to a quote I've had at the bottom of the blog for a bit:

"But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution."

- John Adams (emphasis mine)

While I have to agree with Vanderboegh that events have progressed to what will very likely result in bloodshed, my thoughts have returned repeatedly to the quote above.

At what point did the Colonists, many of them "good" British subjects, suddenly realize that the Crown was truly no longer (if it ever had been) operating in their interests. How many years did it take for the reality to sink in that they truly were on their own. Their "betters" didn't give a shit about them, and in fact saw them only as pawns to be moved about the board and, in fact, sacrificed as the whim struck.

The recent marches show that the Revolution, as President Adams defined it, has already begun. It certainly has not progressed to an open shooting war....yet....however, the continued demonization and minimization of the complaints of MILLIONS of Americans is only pushing the country farther towards the abattoir. With each Democrat that screams RACISM!, and each Republican that chooses to pretend that their constituency will shut up and go away, those citizens that are taking to the streets to SCREAM their displeasure and defiance at the RANK TYRANNY of an out of control group of elitists are pushed further and further towards actions that go far beyond words. Actions that are completely irreversable.

And Ladies and Gentlemen (such as you are), there isn't much civility left past our current attempts at discourse. In the previous entry I have posted a video by a man who began blogging a couple of years ago when he saw the economy being fraudulently manipulated by the elite. Day after day, Karl Denninger has called for prosecution and reform to bring the economy to an honest and sustainable state. He has sent countless faxes to his representatives, he has sent countless signed petitions demanding redress of grievances. He has exhausted EVERY peaceful means available at his disposal to be heard. And yet, here we still sit. In the past, I've heard him get loud when truly evil acts were being perpetrated against investors and the American people, but I've never actually seen him lose it to this degree (and absolutely RIGHTFULLY so!). And frankly, he's not even apparently interested in flat out politics.

What does that tell you about other fellow Citizens who are beginning to awake from their slumber?

To those in our so-called Government who believe themselves to be in control of this flaming train wreck, proceed at your own risk. You serve, and even uttering that word with respect to your actions makes me nauseous, US. WE are the reason you sit in that cushy seat with your cushy pension on the way. WE allow YOU to be there. YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT! The time for "polite" (you'd call it "racist", or "manufactured") gatherings in public squares across the Nation may be coming to a close. And I warn you, the end of discourse brings the rise of only one thing, and it will mean blood.

Fed Up

Absolutely nothing I can add to this.



Backup for most of his assertions at: http://market-ticker.denninger.net
The rest of it is available on Fox News.

Wake up.

Guns on Amtrak?

You know, I've always liked the thought of Amtrak, except when I travel I just about always do so with my concealed handgun (stowed as needed per Federal Regs). Amtrak has never been an option for me since they have a significant anti-gun rule....that would be no guns whatsoever.

Imagine my surprise when this gem from My Way News caught my eye:

The Senate voted Wednesday to permit passengers on the Amtrak passenger railroad to transport handguns in their checked baggage.

The proposal, approved by a 68-30 vote, seeks to give Amtrak riders rights comparable to those enjoyed by airline passengers, who are permitted to transport firearms provided that they declare they are doing so and that the arms are unloaded and in a securely locked container.

"Americans should not have their Second Amendment rights restricted for any reason, particularly if they choose to travel on America's federally subsidized rail line," said Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., who made the proposal.

Wicker's amendment would deny the railroad its $1.6 billion taxpayer subsidy unless it changes the gun policy.

It still has to be included when they combine the House and Senate bills, but if it's not a worthless "hey House, we're gonna put this in to look pro-Gun but we'll just strike it when we combine the bills" then Amtrak may become an option again.

Idiots at Work

Homeless use of motels still on rise

So, the State is paying for motel rooms for families. Here is what got me:

Tina Brooks, undersecretary of the department, said 1,010 families - including more than 1,400 children - are now living in motels, at a monthly cost of about $2.8 million for taxpayers.

Ok boys and girls, lets do the math:
$2.8mil per month, divided by 1,010 families equals....

$2772...PER MONTH

Lets see, I have a 3 bedroom home, in a state with low cost of living (I...shock...actually moved here because of low taxes, a good job market, and low cost of living...amazing I know). I pay around $1000 a month all-in without utilities.

Are you seriously saying that the state of Mass. can't find lodgings for these people that aren't three times as expensive as an average home loan? I know real estate might be more expensive there, but holy crap.

That's ok though, because they're expecting $44mil in stimulus funds (that would be OUR MONEY by the way) to continue to blow on their mess.

Pent Up Consumer Demand???

Remember, if we can just free up the credit markets, the consumers will start spending, rainbows will appear, and, as Karl Denninger so aptly put it, Unicorns that shit Skittles will appear and shower us with "gifts".

Little problem though (other than the Unicorn)...

Americans say they plan to maintain their spending patterns as they are uncertain about the direction of the economy over the next six months.

Only 8 percent of U.S. adults plan to increase household spending, almost one-third will spend less, and 58 percent expect to “stay the course,” according to a Bloomberg News poll. More than 3 in 4 said they cut spending in the past year.

Bloomberg had an article on current consumer behavior today, which went on to say

Underscoring consumers’ austere attitudes, 77 percent of respondents say they have cut back on spending during the past year, 59 percent say they have made a bigger effort to pay off debts and 48 percent have put more money aside as savings.

Because consumer spending accounted for 70 percent of the economy since 2001, the speed and strength of a recovery may depend on how quickly Americans loosen their purse strings.

People aren't going to start spending again until they de-leverage themselves. They can't get a loan or a new credit card because they already are carrying too much debt, and have wrecked their credit scores. This is compounded by banks knowing that the crap they have on their books isn't worth what they say it is (hint: it's worth 30% or more less than they claim). This means they aren't solvent, and are doing everything they can to bank capital to reduce their leverage themselves.

Winter is coming, and it's looking colder by the second.

Stop "Recording Artist Caused" Global Warming!

World celebrities sing to stop global warming

Hey guys, didn't anyone tell you that, apparently, CO2 causes Global Warming? If you really cared, you wouldn't all have started exhaling all that greenhouse gas while you were singing! Not to mention all the energy you were consuming getting to/from the recording studio and whilest recording!

Try a plastic bag over the head and cinch it tight...stop Global Warming today! No fair cheating and taking the bag off now!

Winter is Coming

Karl Denninger continues his treatise on the current Economy, and I have a hint for you, it's not "Green Shoots".

We have been given a gift - a six month (up to now) to couple-of-year (maybe) time frame in which to recognize the truth, break up these behemoth organizations, force the bad debt into the open, default it, make depositors whole and in doing so shrink place our economy on a trajectory where debt-to-gdp will shrink to a sustainable level.

If we fail to do so before the rope runs out - and it will - our economy will collapse. The Federal Government will be forced to contract spending to what it can raise via taxes in the current economic climate - about half of what it spends now. Given our budget and where we spend money, this means a near-complete repudiation of Social Security and Medicare, a 50% or more cut to the military budget, and an elimination of all other federal programs. Unemployment will rocket to north of 25%. Our "just in time" economy will break down and there will be widespread, perhaps even critical, shortages of necessities - food and fuel.

Read the rest here, and while you're at it, take a look at what else he has to say.

Don't believe Karl? How about a Nobel Prize winning Economist.

Stiglitz, former chief economist at the World Bank and member of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said the world economy is “far from being out of the woods” even if it has pulled back from the precipice it teetered on after the collapse of Lehman.

“We’re going into an extended period of weak economy, of economic malaise,” Stiglitz said. The U.S. will “grow but not enough to offset the increase in the population,” he said, adding that “if workers do not have income, it’s very hard to see how the U.S. will generate the demand that the world economy needs.”

The Federal Reserve faces a “quandary” in ending its monetary stimulus programs because doing so may drive up the cost of borrowing for the U.S. government, he said.

“The question then is who is going to finance the U.S. government,” Stiglitz said.

The Pump is On

Denninger is continuing his crusade against "the pump", that is, the constant hyping of "green shoots" and "economic recovery" by the main stream media, while job losses keep climbing, companies continue to post 30% declines, and the Government continues to spend us into oblivion.

Listen at this link (sorry, things are loading really slow at the moment, it's worth the wait):
Denninger Lays Down the Law

When you're done with that, it's certainly worth reading his recent posts as well.
http://market-ticker.denninger.net

I know, it's heavily financial, and a little dry at times, but really take a look at what is going on in the markets - what is really going on.

The fix is on. Are you in or out?

Are all of our banks insolvent??

Karl Denninger wrote what I feel to be one of his best pieces yet on the current state of our finances, and managed to even extend the idea to tie into the state of Liberty itself in the country. He even managed to work in mention of the gentleman carrying the AR-15 I wrote about last night.

Please read here: Will It All Come Tumbling Down?

Consider his words, and how they should affect your daily actions and mindset.

A "Disturbing" New Trend

Last week, I posted "Remember...when *we* protest we're terrorists...", regarding the substantial difference between many anti-Bush left wing protests and the current folks out attempting to explain to the Statists that we don't appreciate their attempts to turn this once Great Nation into a cesspool of Marxism.

A comment was left by Cheddar, one of my longer standing readers, asking this:

How about the open carry folks in AZ at BHO's speech?

One thing I really like about Cheddar is their penchant for asking fair, well phrased questions that make me think. Great job by the way Cheddar, I always value your questions for kicking me up into the next level of thinking.

He was referencing this late breaking story today:


Ok, let's get past the anchor's idiocy calling it a "machine gun", and ignore the on-site reporter's eye rolling and not so subtle emphasis on certain words in order to attempt to denigrate the gentleman carrying the rifle. Honestly, I had actually made an attempt to seek out the Fox station in Phoenix for this embed in the hopes that some of that crap would be minimized.

Here, in my opinion, is what you have:

1. The Police made absolutely no arrests, not even for some lame trumped up trespassing or disturbing the peace charge.
   
2. The gentleman with the AR-15 has it slung, muzzle end down. He isn't holding it in hand, brandishing it, or otherwise acting "threatening.
   
3. He isn't trying to get into the event.
   
4. He has even taken the time to put on a tie and slacks, a very nice touch designed to prevent the "red-neck" sliming you just know these panty-wetting "journalists" want to slap on him.
   
5. He further is gifted with being able to conduct a coherent, thoughtful, reasonable conversation with the reporter interviewing him.
   

Take note of that last statement because I want no misunderstanding - I say that for no other reason than many folks of all walks of life, when they get on camera, can get a bit tongue tied or have affectations to their speech patterns that aren't the polished speeches and manicured accents you might be used to hearing on television. Take a quick listen to the people asking questions or making statements at any town hall and you'll quickly glom on to what I mean. This guy does a great job representing his view!

Is he there to make a statement? Yes. What statement is that? According to him, it is to exercise his rights under Arizona State Law (which I absolutely love being a former Arizonan myself) and the Constitution of the United States, while demonstrating his distaste for ObamaCare. In my opinion, what better way to call attention to the Bill of Rights than to exercise your First Amendment rights and your Second Amendment rights all at the same time?

You see, it's not about the fact that he was carrying weapons. In a recent article by Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman, a Statist hoplophobe reader named Frank asked:

Would it be appropriate for black and hispanic people to be allowed to openly carry guns everywhere in public, as well as to Town Hall meetings with Republican Congressmen?

I responded:

I would *love* to see more people peaceably carrying legal firearms. Fortunately I, unlike Frank, understand that race does not play a role in one's Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

The key to my statement is "peacably". That is, not being threatening, not acting mad dog crazy, not making nasty gestures or innuendos that violence could result, just simply carrying a firearm for what it is - a metal tool. A metal tool that can launch projectiles very accurately and at high speed, something to be respected, but still a metal tool. You'll notice the camera showing him with it slung muzzle down, and secured by his arm, but otherwise just sitting there.

This is in stark contrast to this:

Notice the gentleman with the truncheon. He has it in hand, waving it back and forth, and gestures with it while asking questions. He's also doing so at a polling place, in a position where they are obstructing the entrance. Their stances are confrontational, challenging. Some of the challenge in their voice may be to what sounds like a slightly snarky college student who is a little antagonistic himself - admittedly.

So back to our protester at the Obama speech. He's acting friendly, relaxed, and in control. He knows why he is there - to protest peacefully, and instead of a Gadsden Flag or a sign, he has chosen a firearm to show as his symbol of defiance against the ever rising tyranny in our Government. Now ask yourself these questions:

1. If he had done anything more outlandish than stand there and probably chant and yell with the protesters, do you think that he would have been arrested?
   
2. Assuming he wasn't arrested after doing something outlandish, do you really think the media would have used different footage than him standing there talking quietly with the reporter or standing in the crowd?
   

We know how the media wanted this to happen. They wanted him rabidly yelling at the camera, maybe waving the rifle around Platoon style, etc. Ok, fine, I chose a Fox News related station. How about CNN?

That we don't see any of this footage, not even on CNN, tells us volumes about his good conduct. The CNN reporter even talks of ANOTHER man in the crowd with an "patrol rifle". Again, no arrests, nobody shot, everything nice and calm.

Ultimately, I think the best quote came from Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan (who actually seems to have his head screwed on reasonably straight to be sure), who said:

"In both cases, the subject was not entering our site or otherwise attempting to," Donovan said. "They were in a designated public viewing area. The main thing to know is that they would not have been allowed inside with a weapon."

And that's it right there. The folks showing up are legally carrying firearms under their local state laws, and certainly under the auspices of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, while not actually intimating violence in any way, shape, or form, are likely those among us whom I feel are the most grounded in the true sense of Liberty that this Country was founded upon.

That some folks are hoplophobes and have bought into Helmke's sewage, leading them to wrongfully believe that the mere presence of a firearm turns anyone into a slavering ravening killer, are not in any position to lecture me on my rights. As I have posted in the past, those rights are granted simply by dint of my being on this planet, and can not be revoked or questioned by man.

I say that so long as these folks are not creating a situation in which the Secret Service feels that their job can not be performed adequately, and are remaining on the proper side of the law (and yes, to say that in light of my statement immediately above is a little contradictory, but face it - we don't need that kind of publicity - not yet at least), I wish that more people would show up peaceably exercising their rights like this. If nothing else, these folks remind the Statists in power of just how tenuous their hold is on those they would rule. These gentlemen now showing up armed to places where there are likely SS Snipers pointing large calibers at them are refreshing that little wedge of "oh shit" doubt in the Statists' heads. This idea is much better explained by Vanderboegh in recent his post entitled: Gambit: "Waco Jim" Cavanaugh and Gran Torino

As to what the Statist term is for these armed Patriots - it's likely:
Pencil-dicked Redneck Rightwing Teabaggers. Damned straight.

Time to Celebrate?

Liberals complain over Obama concession

So it sounds like the Public Option might be gone from the ObamaCare bill. Time to celebrate???

HELL NO

What's still in there? Well, the Government will still be in charge of defining each and every plan - what's in 'em, how much they cost, who's eligible, etc. Those plans ARE STILL MANDATORY. Once anything changes in your contract with your current provider, you'll be forced to select one of the Government plans. Bye-bye health plan you like and have already - for good.

Even better, the IRS will DEMAND that you demonstrate that you are enrolled in an approved healthplan. Gone are the days where if you're young and decide to opt out of the whole thing. You can't prove to the IRS that you're in a plan? They fine the shit out of you and forcefully enroll you. Can't afford it? They don't care. Want the Liberty of choosing what you do with your healthcare? GONE

So what are the costs of these plans? Nobody can tell you. You'll find out 18 months after the bill becomes law. We do know that your taxes WILL go way up, Medicare will be cut to the bone (say good-bye to Grandma while you still can), and that the Government will do the same great job running it that they have with Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, and the entire fucking country, which is now approaching $12 TRILLION in debt.

I wouldn't trust these idiots to mow my lawn, let alone tell me whom I may see and when if I get a serious illness.

Turn up the volume. I want to see ears bleed in Washington D.C. The only correct option is KILL THE BILL. ALL of it. Every last rotten, stinking, bleeding, oozing, liberty destroying Marxist line of it.

Thinking about getting the swine flu vaccine?

Swine flu jab link to killer nerve disease: Leaked letter reveals concern of neurologists over 25 deaths in America

The Boomer lad has been posting about this topic over at Boomers and BS. I figured I'd add this little gem from the Daily Mail to the pot to keep it at a boil:

A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a confidential letter.

The letter from the Health Protection Agency, the official body that oversees public health, has been leaked to The Mail on Sunday, leading to demands to know why the information has not been given to the public before the vaccination of millions of people, including children, begins.

It tells the neurologists that they must be alert for an increase in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.

The last time we tried vaccinations for Swine Flu was in 1976. The following happened:

• More people died from the vaccination than from swine flu.(emphasis mine)
  
• 500 cases of GBS were detected.
  
• The vaccine may have increased the risk of contracting GBS by eight times.
  
• The vaccine was withdrawn after just ten weeks when the link with GBS became clear.
  
• The US Government was forced to pay out millions of dollars to those affected.
  

The Government is going to ramp up a message that everyone should get this vaccination soon. In fact, I have seen a billboard that always has a request for medical testers for various products asking for people to test a new H1N1 (they didn't call it swine flu on the billboard...hmm) vaccine already. While I'm normally not against all vaccinations, you might want to give a little extra thought and do some research before blithely receiving this one. Be wary of any attempts to "require" this vaccination at your work or childrens' school.

Please take some time to read the article linked to in the title, get some research done, and make your own informed decision.

Remember...when *we* protest we're terrorists...

Analysis: Press Largely Ignored Incendiary Rhetoric at Bush Protest

Everyone repeat after me. Haranguing and assaulting people going to a fund raiser for President Bush is "Democracy in Action". Saying your peace at a Town Hall is "people committing political terrorism", or "paid operatives of the Health Insurance Industry".

Slashing tires and jumping on the hoods of cars is a spirited protest. Insisting that the doors remain open at a public Town Hall so that you can hear and being beaten by SEIU thugs for handing out Gadsden Flags is just desserts.

Stoning cars containing Government Staffers is "peaceable assembly". Explaining why you don't like the idea of Socializing Health Care is "racist".

Everyone got that?

Now shut up and get out of the way you bunch of worthless, badly dressed, no toothed, racist, rednecks. How dare you question the great and powerful Oz!

Next Stop - Civil Unrest?

Western Rifle Shooters and Sipsey Street Irregulars, and heck, most other Threeper related blogs have been talking more and more about the potential for civil unrest over the last year.

The volume is being turned up at public events for Obamacare. And despite the claims of the elite Statists in Washington, it is not being orchestrated by anyone any more than any of the Liberal protests over the last eight years were. What truly scares the DemocRATs is that they think (rightly so) that they are losing the initiative and malaise from Conservatives that has allowed them a free pass at anything that they cared to pass for far too long.



What ultimately is being represented by these protests and scuffles is that folks, on the edges of both sides are finally coming to the ultimate realization that their wants and views are NOT compatible, and that no amount of "talk" is going to bridge that gulf.

Does this sound familiar? I'd posit that a similar situation began to evolve prior to the Revolutionary War. Then, as now, there was a small portion of the populace that vehemently disagreed with the Crown, and another small portion that sided with the Crown with just as much (or perhaps less - they did lose after all). Recall that only a small percentage of people actively fought that war - most folks were bystanders or tacitly helping one side or the other (or both).

Whether or not Obamacare passes, the Statists will not stop their drive to turn the United States into a failed Socialist Utopia - the same failed "utopias" that have seen the rest of the world plunged into obscurity, poverty, and tyranny. As these people strive to control everything down to the very air we breathe, more and more freedom loving people will wake up from their TV induced trance to take action against the insidious creep. At some point, a key event will take place that will snap both sides into action, and the country very likely will be plunged into open warfare.

The time has come to make sure your ducks are in a row, and that you are prepared to survive. There are any number of great articles on the various blogs on the left nav-bar here. While many of us obviously can't afford to go the full nine yards, or perhaps can not release our minds to come to grips with where we really are, taking any steps you can afford/rationalize is certainly better than taking none at all.

Be prepared and be ready. If things fall apart, they'll do so very rapidly and with little more in the way of warning than we're getting now.

Crop Duster Becomes Close Air Support

I saw this on the news tonight, and luckily found an article on it.

Meet the Air Tractor AT-802U. Have some crop dusters filling up your airplane dealership? Can't sell them to farmers? Hey, uparmor them, add a gatling gun, some hard points for rocket pods and bombs, and sell them to various gub'mints around the world.

You have to admit, these suckers are built to carry large volumes of liquid, have excellent low speed handling characteristics, unimproved airfield operations capability, along with cockpits that provide the pilot with an excellent view. They'd likely make a pretty good close air support platform, as long as the other side doesn't have ground to air missile capabilities.

A fascinating idea and another example of great American ingenuity and entrepreneurship.

More information is available here.

Snow said the airplane is being marketed as a counter-insurgency craft.

He said the plane has a maximum airspeed of 210 miles per hour and it can stay aloft for more than 10 hours.

“It can be used for missions for intelligence gathering and surveillance. It would fly at about 160 miles per hour for patrolling,” he said.
(emphasis mine)

Gun Control...It works...really!!!!

Obese Houston inmate found with gun after 5 searches

So let me get a handle on this. You hoplophobic gun grabbers want to make the entire United States a gun free zone. You really and honestly believe that somehow all the criminals will just stop using guns if you make them "illegal". And yet, you can't even keep your freaking prisons gun free?!?!

An obese Harris County jail inmate turned over a pistol that had been hidden in the folds of his skin after he went through at least five searches upon his arrest and was booked into two different local lockups, authorities said.

The stupidity of the gun hating elitists astounds me.

They're making a list, and checkin' it twice...

...and they're going to send armed thugs to your door whether you're naughty or nice.

One thing I really like about being a Texan is having John Cornyn around. While I may not agree that the issue I'm about to talk about is a First Amendment issue, it certainly does smack of the Statists' need to suppress all dissent and information, to ensure their spin is the only message heard.

GOP Senator: White House Encroaching on First Amendment

“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.”

This, as the DNC releases this ad, which was featured on Hannity's radio show today:

Wow. First, we're terrorists in training. Now, we're "mobs" or people paid by deep pocket health insurers to unreasonably question those poor Statists. Talk about projection from the party of ACORN! These folks truly think that Obama "overwhelmingly won" the election! They honestly think that no sane person could possibly disagree with continuing down the road that will completely destroy the free market in this country. Folks, the margin of actual votes by which Obama won was pretty tight, and there is no "mandate" to wreck what's left of this once great Nation.

So while we're talking about making lists, like many folks on my blog list (and who have me listed on their lists), we've been noticing some rather fun visitor stats of late. After posting about holding Harry Reid accountable for his flat out lies regarding the August deadline set by Obama, Pelosi and the DemocRATs for passing "health insurance reform" (that's what they're calling it this week), I had a number of visits from Washington, including one from the Senate Sergeant at Arms. Frankly, I find it rather entertaining.

So, they're making a little list in Washington, and they're checking it twice. I'm sure it's just for their information though, so they can respond to those nasty lies being told by folks who want only to be LEFT ALONE. People who want simply to have an opportunity to keep their hard earned money, and to live their life in peace.

I'm sure that all those Chicago thugs that Obama has in his administration won't use those names for anything nefarious. Yeah right.

It's for the Children! Really!

Sin Bins for Worst Families

I really thought this was a joke, but apparently it is not.

The Children’s Secretary set out £400million plans to put 20,000 problem families under 24-hour CCTV super-vision in their own homes.

They will be monitored to ensure that children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.

Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks, while parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction.

So that's about it for Britain then. Their lefty Statists have finally gone completely off of their rocker. However, in a sick parody of the merging we've had between Republicans and Democrats here, their "right wing" secretary states:

But Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: “This is all much too little, much too late.

Too little, too late. Installing CCTV cameras in people's homes is too little.

These are the same Statists that do not trust their citizens subjects with arms. Do you believe, even for a moment, that the Obamanoids here, or their Republican sympathizers, would hesitate at all to do the same thing in the United States?

I'm already hearing of hints of forced vaccinations in some of the versions of the Health Bill that are floating around. What's next?

Keep your powder dry.

Jury Tampering

You're (Probably) a Federal Criminal

This article was featured on David Codrea's excellent "War on Guns" blog recently. While David had his normal excellent and witty thoughts on this piece, and I hope if you haven't you'll go take a look, something else in the article caught my eye.

According to the government, when Krister was in jail in Alaska due to the first unjust charges, he had "abandoned" his fuel-cell materials in Idaho. Unfortunately for Krister, federal lawmakers had included in the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act a provision making it a crime to abandon "hazardous waste." According to the trial judge, the law didn't require prosecutors to prove that Krister had intended to abandon the materials (he hadn't) or that they were waste at all -- in reality, they were quite valuable and properly stored away for future use.

With such a broad law, the second jury didn't have much of a choice, and it convicted him. He spent almost two years locked up with real criminals in a federal prison. After he testifies today, he will have to return to his halfway house in Idaho and serve another week before he is released.

The second jury didn't have much of a choice? Really?!? Folks, there's this little thing called "Jury Nullification". The entire point of being judged by a jury of your peers is not so some Judge, or hell the U.S. Government can railroad you into prison! The point of a trial by jury is so that your peers can sit in judgment of the law!!

If you've ever sat on a jury, you may have heard the Judge ask if you'll follow their instructions to the letter. They might have said that you must decide the case based only upon the evidence given and the law it stands on. This is entirely incorrect.

The jury has the power in our system to declare that in the particular situation they sit in judgment of, the law does not apply. They can decide this based on extenuating circumstances, or even because they DISAGREE with the law itself.

That second jury had the opportunity to tell the Government that when that poor man was initially arrested and railroaded into prison, he had NO CHOICE as to the disposition of the materials he uses in his research and business. This situation would be similar to a Police Officer handcuffing me to a pole in a mall, ordering me to leave the premises, and then arresting me for trespassing because I didn't leave.

Of course not every trial and every situation needs this treatment by the jury. There are obviously any number of crimes out there for which the perpetrator, if guilty, needs a good long stay in the pokey. However, before you get your next jury duty notice, please go to the Fully Informed Jury Association's web site and get familiar with the material there.

Know your rights as a jury member. Don't let some poor sap who has fallen afoul of any number of the thousands of unjust laws floating around out there go to prison simply because of circumstances beyond their control!

Personal Accountability

Or the lack thereof.

From TheHill.com comes this:

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Democratic Conference Vice Chairman Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Conference Secretary Patty Murray (D-Wash.) also acknowledged that critics will "pour it on" during the coming August recess and they plan to respond in kind.

Reid said reporters created a fictitious deadline of a successful vote by the August recess, and downplayed the fact that the chamber won’t meet that mark.

“That is a deadline that you created,” Reid told a group of about 75 reporters. “It’s not like we don’t have a product. Significant progress has been made … The mere fact that this wasn't done by last Friday or by five o’clock doesn't mean we’re not going to get a quality product."
Emphasis mine

Really Mr. Reid? Obama and y'all didn't have anything to do with that so called "fictional" deadline?

Important statement at 7:15 if you don't want to listen to this bullshit for 9 minutes.

Your DemocRATs control the House, Senate, and White House Mr. Reid. Obama, Pelosi and yourself have been making public statements for weeks saying tripe to the effect of "it WILL pass". And yet it hasn't. Not yet. Your failure to live up to the deadline that you and your statist jackass friends set for yourselves is your failure and yours alone. At least be man enough to stand up and admit you blew it.

From Our "Rapidly Heating Earth" Comes This!

"This is probably just a perception, but I just have the feeling that the glaciers are melting, the snow capping the mountains is less than it was 12 years ago when I saw it last time," [Canadian Astronaut] Thrisk was quoted as saying. "That saddens me a little bit."

Reminds me of Al Gore, I think he invented space flight.

Meanwhile, in "real science" land:
3,000 Low Temp Records Set This July!

Of course, the above article comes complete with a bunch of giant disclaimers and "well, these outliers certainly don't represent any evidence of "Climate Change" (remember, now that people are starting to notice the Earth isn't actually warming, they're changing the lexicon to something even harder to quantify and disprove). Get past all that and take a look at what the numbers really are. I'm already hearing people coining the phrase "year without a summer". And this wouldn't be the first time that happened.

I still think man has great hubris to think that, short of seriously massive events such as large scale nuclear weapons usage, they can have any great and meaningful effect on the overall climatology of this planet. After all, we're competing with the sun, and large volcanic events, which themselves can singularly affect global temperatures by one and two degrees C. Remember, in geological history Alaska has been a tropical paradise, and glaciers have covered large portions of the planet.

What a mess.

Further Rumblings of the 10th...

I've said before that I firmly believe that the only way we're going to stem the tie of Statism in the Federal Government is by...well...Statism. Of the local kind of course.

Rick Perry has been making some fairly bold statements recently, including on the right of Texans to manufacture guns for use within its own borders without the BATFU having anything to say about it. That action, along with a 10th Amendment resolution (that likely had no teeth, yes, I know) unfortunately died in a filibuster at the end of the Texas session this year (along with a number of other bills I wasn't a fan of, so I'll call it par for the course). We are, however, still left with a potential wrecking shot from the cannon of ObamaCare.

Gov. Perry was interviewed by the Star Telegram today. Among other things, he said:

"I think you’ll hear states and governors standing up and saying 'no’ to this type of encroachment on the states with their healthcare," Perry said. "So my hope is that we never have to have that stand-up. But I’m certainly willing and ready for the fight if this administration continues to try to force their very expansive government philosophy down our collective throats." - Governor Rick Perry, TX

One of the problems with a strong Federalized system where the Rule of Law has been suspended is that a majority of looters can happily trample right over your Liberty, gleefully tearing the money out of your wallet, taking the roof from over your head, and the food out of your family's mouth on their way through. By keeping these types of programs managed locally, you can gain two immediate advantages:

1. It is far easier for the citizens of a State to affect how they are governed. Politicians are within driving distance, and deal with a smaller number of constituents, allowing them to be more responsive.


2. If you don't like the way your state is going, in a properly balanced system as envisioned by the Founders, you can always go to another state that is more in line with your beliefs.

All that aside, this is really a business opportunity. If one or more States were to secede and create an environment of Freedom and Opportunity such as envisioned by the Founders, I have a feeling we'd see an even more massive influx of businesses to this state. A lower tax environment, less oppressive regulations, and an already reasonable cost of living would make this a fine place to take up where The Republic of Texas left off so many years ago. Should the rest of the States United pass ObamaCare, Texas could become a haven for Doctors to continue providing the top notch care that currently brings people from all over the world to the US for treatment.

Allowing those Doctors to thrive by limiting their exposure due to tort abuses perpetrated in the current system, and therefore greatly lowering their costs could create a high-end health care haven that would bring millions in revenue to the state. Many higher-end Docs have already indicated they would move their practices to the Caribbean to flee the oppressive and draconian solution that is ObamaCare. Why not give them someplace closer and more stable to go instead?

This has the extra advantage of being reachable by a larger number of people who, while unable to go to the Caribbean for care due to costs, could easily load up the car and come down to Texas for top-notch treatment. The ability to actually get paid a reasonable wage would attract the talented Doctors and medical staff trapped in the USSA, and the ability to charge a rate that was dictated by the market rather than by a bunch of looter bureaucrats in Washington D.C. would attract medical research and development companies and their amazing new medical innovations - further increasing Texas' prestige as THE place to go for treatment.

I have come to the belief, as have many others in (or related to) the Threeper community, that the cause of Liberty and Freedom is lost to the entity known as the United States. Every year, rules are changed to allow more and more looters, those who don't pay taxes and therefore have no skin in the game (and no compunction against voting for people that will raise taxes), more and more agencies are created to enforce increasingly draconian regulations, and our "masters" become ever more violent in their attempt to cling to the "Authority" that those who should be our servants claim to hold over us. Illegal Immigrants will surely be given amnesty in the next year, resulting in an even further tip of the balances towards those who would loot rather than produce. The "minimum wage" will be raised ever higher, making it harder and harder for smaller businesses to pay their low-skill workers.

The only final recourse, short of "shooting the bastards" (is that Vanderboegh there?) is for one or more States to go their own way. This, unfortunately, will likely result in having to shoot the bastards anyways - we all saw how this type of activity went down in 1861.

Either way, secession or not, winter is coming. The darkness may fall when the final attempts to manipulate the economy fail epically, the "poor and oppressed masses" (read: looters) decide that it's not enough to slowly bleed the productive folks dry and decide to go after the golden egg with their own hands, or a foreign nation finally gets tired of buying our debt with an ever dwindling chance of ever getting their money back and demands payment in blood. Either way, something will break, it'll break big, and likely sooner rather than later.

Prepare and act accordingly.

Fed to Congress - We have no idea where that $500bil went...

Denninger's Market Ticker blog has an excellent excerpt from Bernanke's testimony today.

I'm heartened (just a tiny bit), to see that at least some of our Con's in gress are starting to ask the correct questions:

Listen and read here:Where Did the Money Go?

Ted Nugent Does it Again

For those of you that haven't been over to the LawDog Files, I'd like to direct you to a YouTube clip he posted earlier today. Yes, it's Ted on the 2nd again.

Take a trip over to LawDog's and see what's happening. He is an excellent storyteller and an upstanding Texan.

The LawDog Files

The Importance of Standard Capacity Magazines (and more than one of them)...

Akron police investigate teen mob attack on family

Out of nowhere, the six were attacked by dozens of teenage boys, who shouted ''This is our world'' and ''This is a black world'' as they confronted Marshall and his family.

The Marshalls, who are white, say the crowd of teens who attacked them and two friends June 27 on Girard Street numbered close to 50. The teens were all black.

''This was almost like being a terrorist act,'' Marshall said. ''And we allow this to go on in our neighborhoods?''

They said it started when one teen, without any words or warning, blindsided and assaulted Marshall's friend as he stood outside with the others.

When Marshall, 39, jumped in, he found himself being attacked by the growing group of teens.

There is a term for this, it's called "disparity of force". Very likely, most of the perpetrators of this attack weren't armed (then again, you never know), but they were being ruled by a mob mentality - anything goes, and boy isn't it fun to go with the crowd?

Ultimately, the sheer number of these people meant that there was very likely an affirmative defense for the application of lethal force had someone decided to break up the melee by shooting at these scum. While I will freely admit that shooting into a crowd of youths is truly not something anyone wants to do, the gentleman who ended up in the hospital with a concussion is very lucky he didn't get worse from the kicking and stomping. Kicking someone who is down is well known to cause serious bodily injury, and if there are "dozens" of people taking turns kicking, serious bodily injury is a foregone conclusion.

Take a moment to think this situation through and determine what your actions might be to prevent the death of a loved one who had done nothing wrong and was now being assaulted by a crowd of cowards. Realize that ten shots very likely won't be enough. Do you have "standard capacity" magazines?

What is most unfortunate about this situation is the following:

The Marshalls say they fear retaliation at home or when they go outside. They are considering arming themselves, but they're concerned about the possible problems that come with guns.

For now, they are hoping police can bring them suspects. They believe they can identify several of the attackers.

''This makes you think about your freedom,'' Marshall said. ''In all reality, where is your freedom when you have this going on?''

Mr. Marshall, your freedom lies in your ability to protect yourself and your loved ones. The Police won't be there if these thugs come back, you're going to be right back into the same situation - you and yours vs. all comers. The only "problems" that come with guns are those you bring upon yourself.

I sincerely hope that someone knowledgeable in armed self defense can sit down with Mr. Marshall and help him and his family make an educated decision to ensure he is able to take action to prevent this kind of thing from happening to his family again.

I also hope that the youths that perpetrated this attack see the error of their ways before they choose the wrong person to beat up. I'd much rather they live a full and rich life in harmony with society than end up bleeding out in a gutter after attempting their little game on someone who doesn't tolerate that kind of crap.

Liberals in Conservative Clothing

I had an unpleasant exchange with the person who asked me what my agenda on Social Security was yesterday. I now am reasonably convinced that they are either actually Liberals trying to stir the pot, or are people that call themselves Conservatives but really are of that breed that likes basic gun rights but thinks anything else is fair game as long as you "need it", and Liberty be damned.

You see, after stripping identifying information from their email, they told me it was private (alrighty, no problem) and they didn't want it on the blog. That's ok, I can understand that. However, they stepped out further, accusing me of "stoking my ego", threatened their support for sites that link to me, called me unethical, and then finished off by declaring I was un-American. When I pointed out to them it is kind of hard to sit on a high horse when you're chucking insults like that, they told me that they were done talking to me, demanded again I remove their email from the site, and threatened litigation if I did not.

I'll direct you back to my older post "The Art of Liberal Communication". If you'll recall, the typical Liberal's argument goes something like this:

1. Make an unfounded statement.
2. When challenged with facts on that statement, change the subject.
3. When the subject can't be changed, insult the person counter arguing.
4. If that fails, attempt to get the Police or Authorities involved, or stamp off in a huff.

Sound familiar? I think I actually erred by leaving off "or get lawyers involved" from #4.

In the end, this person chose to try and take a public discourse (or at least, I'd like this to be a public discourse - logically constructed arguments are more than welcome in the comments section, and you *can* post anonymously) privately for whatever reason, and I just don't operate that way. If you're going to question my agenda, great! Do so here, so that myself and others can learn. If everyone that had a problem with what I said demanded private attention by email, how are we supposed to have an open dialogue and learn from each other, let alone leave me the time to write what little I can on this blog?

Anyhow, whatever. The offending email is summarized, the world is back on its axis, and the Liberal in Conservative's clothing is (or should be) happy. And I suppose my ego is stoked, whatever the hell that means.

If you are so against Social Security, how do you propose we live in our old age?

I received an email from a so-called "Conservative" and "Pro 2nd Amendment" person today. I'll hit the highlights here:

Having searched http://tyrannyunleashed.blogspot.com/search/label/social%20security, this person went on to say they had lost their retirement in the recent market crash, and that at 60, they needed Social Security to live on. They then asked me what my agenda was.

The post they are referencing is here. As to my "agenda", it is simply this: We can not pay for this stuff. We just simply can not mathematically pay for it.

Social Security was never meant to be your sole retirement income. It was meant to provide a partial pension to make things easier. Workers were expected to provide personal savings, income from children, and corporate pensions to supplement Social Security to allow themselves to stay under a roof and fed.

Over time, corporate pensions have gone away, and in this day and age of consumerism, easy credit, etc, one can not necessarily rely on their children any more either. Observe further that we've gone from a decent house being a postage stamp (by today's square footage estimates) to a 3000sqft luxury retirement home in AZ.

Finally, since we now don't really have a Social Security surplus, the plethora of retiring boomers is creating a situation where Social Security has turned into a ponzi scheme. The money I'm paying into it is going straight into another investor's pocket to keep the checks flowing. And since we're facing a declining population of people paying into the system, we're headed for a giant shipwreck.

The coffers got this way by Congress deciding that Social Security funds were fair game for them to spend (sound familiar???) So now, the funds that this person paid into the fund for their own retirement are long gone - again, it's my money that is going to allow them to retire.

So here is the question. Should I keep paying my money into a system that I know will very likely be completely bereft and bankrupt by the time it's "my turn" to collect? Should I starve down the line because somehow I bear responsibility for Government mismanagement, when all this time it has been people older than myself putting up with the looting and repeatedly voting for more looters? By 2050, the annual Social Security deficit, in 2001 inflation adjusted dollars, will reach $419bil - almost half of the entire Income Tax revenues collected for a year.

The answer? I don't think that people who are about to retire should be cut off and starved, but I also don't think my income taxes need to be raised by 81% (to almost 44% of my income), crippling my ability to live and prosper, let alone save money so that I don't starve when I'm 65 and there is little in the way of social programs left to serve me just so that a bunch of people who didn't save enough to retire can do so.

Furthering my issues with Social Security is the awful return I will get from the monies stolen from me (assuming that number isn't flat out $0). As a single male born around 1977, I'll earn less than .5% on the money I put in to the system when I it is finally returned to me at 65. I could do far better than that on safe Government Bonds alone. Again, I am punished for others' irresponsibility.

Why do I say my money is "stolen"? The Supreme Court ruled in 1960 (Flemming v. Nestor) that I have no ownership or right to the monies taken from me for Social Security benefits. This essentially means that the Government could capriciously tell me next week that I will never see that money again, and I have no recourse (short of going to the rifle).

So what you're basically saying by insisting that I give you my money so you can retire, and insisting that I pay nearly double my taxes so that you retire, with the full knowledge that the system very likely can't survive even long enough for me to get my money back out of it, is that you don't give a good *** damn about my ability to stay solvent, to save for my own future, or to live my life as I please. You'd rather raise my taxes, empty my bank accounts, foreclose on my home, remove the food from my mouth, and trample my Liberty so that you can retire in comfort.

Pardon me if I don't agree with that.

I would encourage you, dear friends, to read about Social Security over at the Heritage Foundation. If you are truly Conservative and Pro-Constitution, I want you to understand what it is you are really demanding when you command us to save Social Security at all costs.

My agenda? My agenda is to attempt to ensure that everyone has the best chance, under the restrictions set forth in the Constitution, to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness in this country - and raising taxes to support failed Socialist programs is not the way to do that.