Archive for the ‘Law’ Category

Failed States: No not Somalia

October 7, 2009

California, the golden state, the land of American dreams, the place where I was born. What was once a land of milk and honey in the eyes of many is taking a hard dive into reality. I left there in 1978 after the passing of Proposition 13 made  two classes of  citizens a matter of law. It sealed me and so many others into a group of never will haves. It was big government mob rule democracy at it’s worst.

People are saying that unemployment is the worst it has been in sixty years. I beg to differ. During the Carter fiasco real unemployment in San Diego County was in reality well over twenty percent among the non government sector. I had people with advanced degrees pumping gas along side me at University City Arco.

The answer, at the time, was more socialism, and higher taxes. At least that was the solution offered up by Governor Moonbat and crew. New laws on Gun Control were being passed faster than most Californians could keep up with. New laws on vehicle emissions made it all but impossible to keep your vehicle running. At least legally.

The police concentrated on those dope smoking hippies and anyone that didn’t wear a crew cut while allowing white collar criminals the run of the state. The elites, when they were prosecuted, were given a slap on the wrist, or allowed to post bail and run across a border like Polanski did.

While at the same time a friend came home and found two thugs raping his wife. They then beat him to a pulp, until he was able to get to his 357, and put an end to their nefarious ways. The California response to that home invasion and sexual assault was to imprison him. He died there, and his wife later committed suicide. So much for the California dream, and that was many, many years gone by.

Lead by a RINO California is still in trouble up to it’s nose, and may very well be going down for the third time. I blame the people for the states demise. They keep on electing big government authoritarians. People who believe that others are too stupid for their own good. People who believe that government has the answer to every problem. People who are better than thou, and that will show you the error of your ways.

The Guardian wrote a really swell piece about all this. The grammar and spelling are magnificent. Worthy of superior marks in English Composition. But, the article misses the point completely even as they do such an eloquent job of describing the situation unfolding in California.

READ THAT HERE

I started this blog a few years ago, and, as I stated in one of the earliest pieces. Government most often creates problems, or makes them worse. While Freedom, and Liberty find solutions. My thoughts have not changed.

Warfighter 101: The Taliban lamentations

October 6, 2009

“Information, the first principle of warfare. Know thine enemy, but first you must know yourself.” Was that Sun Tzu? A later strategist? Who cares really, it is fundamental knowledge, and GWB blew it. The other day I started reading a rather long article. One that should be required reading for every Officer and NCO in our entire Armed Forces as well as the Commander in Chief.

In war, it is, and has been for some time a well understood tactic that winning the brain game can ensure a victory. Sometimes even without bloodshed, or minimized actual violence. Destroy the enemy’s will to fight; demoralize him, make him believe in his heart and soul that he cannot be victorious. Target any leaders that will spring up among them, and destroy them, utterly. To drive the point home. Let them hear the lamentations of not only their women, as Conan would say, but of their fellow warriors as well. Make them believe that even their God has forsaken them… Victory will be assured.

We, as in the allied forces were about to make history. The Taliban were on the ropes and a real win, by outsiders, had never before been done in Afghanistan.

But then, we took our eye off the target. It was as if we were at a Trap Shoot and shifted from singles to doubles without taking out the first clay first…

Doubt my words? Read this, in it’s entirety. Yes, it is a long read. Nothing of true value is ever easy though. This is however invaluable , if you are to understand the psychology of warfare. Of victory, and war-fighting.

The Taliban in their own words

FCC strikes at those that Blog: endorsements under fire

October 6, 2009

We told you that the FCC was about to begin regulating the internet, and no, not just about child porn and terrorism. It seems that endorsements will be targeted, and yes, by means of force and / or fear. For the moment, it appears that only money making is targeted. Soon though I can see them going after political blogs as well. The devil will be in the details to be sure, the new FCC Czar notwithstanding. To be sure, this has been in the works for some time, and in all honesty I simply cannot blame the current administration for dreaming up this authoritarian camels nose.

So? Full disclosure: I looked at my blogroll and sidebar and found, right there at the top, Front Sight Training. Yes they do charge for their services. They also have more give away programs than I can keep track of. Including a certificate that I was sent that is for a free course, of my choosing which to date I have not availed myself of. Then there is the Gun Owners of America, and the National Rifle Association. Both of which collect dues, and accept donations. I receive nothing from them other than using their “contact my representative” tools, and use some of their works on this blog, or in citations. On occasion I receive a hat or some other trinket. But never any actual money.

So there you have it. How long before the FCC uses the IRS to become their attack dog? How long until a pattern emerges where it will become obvious that Conservative, Libertarian, or Constitutionalists blogs are being targeted while left wing hit sheets like Moveon.org and the notorious Hufpo are allowed to spew hate and vindictive unabated?

Read on…

Bloggers who offer endorsements must disclose any payments they have received from the subjects of their reviews or face penalties of up to $11,000 per violation, the Federal Trade Commission said Monday.

The agency, charged with protecting consumer interests, had not updated its policy on endorsements in nearly three decades, well before the Internet became a force in shaping consumer tastes. The new rules attempt to make more transparent corporate payments to bloggers, research firms and celebrities that help promote a product.

“Given that social media has become such a significant player in the advertising area, we thought it was necessary to address social media as well,” said Richard Cleland, assistant director for the division of advertising practices at the FTC.

Full Story

Bloomberg Follies: 450 Mayors Petition Obama To Adopt Broad Gun Reform

October 5, 2009

It would figure that a Straw Purchase Felon and his cronies would seek to get even more money for a rouge agency to hammer their agenda home. Using the same old lies and misrepresentations to forward their warped plan for hegemony over you and yours.

We, the people, need to put a stop to these renegades that have committed treason to their oaths.

Read about this latest threat HERE

To Arms! To Arms! The Canucks are coming!

October 3, 2009

At least that sure appears to a major concern of the impostor in chief. Granted, in this day and age we need secure borders more then ever. Will there ever be a President with the balls to actually do it though..?

The U.S. Border Patrol, part of the Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection, is responsible for securing a total of 8,607 miles of border, including the U.S.-Mexico border, the U.S.-Canada border and some sectors of coastline. Each year, the Border Patrol sets a goal for “border miles under effective control (including certain coastal sectors),” defined as an area in which the Border Patrol detects an illegal border crosser and can be expected to succeed in apprehending that person.

In its May performance review, DHS said the Border Patrol’s goal for fiscal 2009 was to have 815 of the 8,607 miles of border — less than 10 percent — under “effective control.” The goal remains the same for fiscal 2010, meaning DHS does not plan to secure a single additional mile of border in the coming year. On Aug. 31, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report to Congress on the effectiveness of the Border Patrol. Its findings were not exactly encouraging.

For example, the Border Patrol established three performance measures to report the results of checkpoint operations, and while they provide some insight into checkpoint activity, they do not indicate if checkpoints are operating efficiently and effectively. Second, GAO found that a lack of management oversight and unclear checkpoint data-collection guidance resulted in the overstatement of checkpoint performance results in recent reports, as well as inconsistent data collection practices at checkpoints. Furthermore, individuals GAO contacted who live near checkpoints generally supported their operations but expressed concerns regarding property damage that occurs when illegal aliens and smugglers circumvent checkpoints to avoid apprehension.

Here’s the kicker: The U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long, with only 697 miles under “effective control,” but the Border Patrol plans to decrease the 17,399 Border Patrol agents on that border by 384 agents in Fiscal 2009. Some 414 will be added to the Canadian border for a total of 2,212. Maybe BO is concerned about the Canucks crossing the border for U.S. health care — at least until ObamaCare ruins that option.

SOURCE

Growth, Taxes, and the Economy

October 3, 2009

What follows is nothing more than what anyone learns in Economics 101. What does that tell you about the so-called leaders that we have around the nation..?

What should young adults be thinking about who they support politically?

A report just released by the Tax Foundation has given the unwelcome title of least “business-friendly” states to — no surprises here — New Jersey, New York and California. On the other end of the spectrum is South Dakota, which has the most business-friendly tax system, followed by Wyoming and Alaska. Evaluating states based on taxes that matter most to businesses — corporate income, individual income, sales, unemployment insurance and property taxes — the foundation found that the blue state trio boasts “the most inhospitable [tax structures] to economic growth.” The foundation noted, “The ideal tax system … is simple, transparent, stable, neutral to business activity, and pro-growth.”

Interestingly, a study released earlier this year by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University ranked the same bottom three states among the five least free states in the country in terms of economic and personal freedom as measured by “state and local government intervention across a wide range of public policies.” New Hampshire, which tied for first in freedom, also came in as one of the Tax Foundation’s most business-friendly states.

Unfortunately, the most anti-business states have yet to fully grasp the connection. For example, it appeared to be news to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office when it announced this week that small business regulations have cost the state $492 billion and a whopping 3.8 million jobs, amounting to $134,122 and one job loss per small business in 2007.

So, freedom = economic growth, while burdensome government regulations = economic contraction. Coincidence? We think not.

Young voters went for Barack Obama by a 2-1 margin but they seem to be the generation hardest hit on the job front, with an unemployment rate significantly above the national 9.8 percent mark. Economists and other experts blame the increase in the minimum wage for part of the problem, yet layoffs and decreased hours among older workers have also backed up the job market. Entry-level jobs once performed by youths are being filled by adults who are punctual, polite, professional and simply grateful to have a job, even at minimum wage.

The consequences of this trend may turn out to be severe. Youths who can’t get that first opportunity may be held back economically for up to 15 years, according to a government study. This translates into slower economic growth down the road as a generation handicapped by high unemployment and jobs farther down the economic scale than their parents enjoyed at the same age attempts to scrape together funding to buy a house, a new car, or other needs and desires. Then again, as a demographic group, these young people are reaping exactly what they voted for.

“We’re putting Americans back to work doing the work that America needs done: Rebuilding roads, bridges and new schools, and all manner of construction projects across all 50 states. I’m not going to rest. I know the governors and candidates here are not going to rest, and I know that the American people are not going to rest until everybody who’s looking for work can find a job.” –The One, BO, just before the Labor Department announced another 263,000 lost jobs in September, which raised unemployment to 9.8 percent

SOURCE

Obamacare: A Public Service Announcement

October 3, 2009

When Hollywood celebrities weren’t busy defending director Roman Polanski for raping a 13-year-old girl 30 years ago (“It wasn’t rape-rape,” Whoopi Goldberg helpfully explained), they were fighting for the government takeover of health care. Funded by MoveOn.org, comedian Will Ferrell and other wealthy Hollywood celebrities recently put together a satirical public service announcement (PSA) in which the shtick was to feign sympathy for insurance executives in order to gain support for the so-called “public option.” Of course, the celebs claim the public option already has the support of “80 percent of Americans.” Such a claim is obvious horse pucky, as we non-celebrity types say down here in Tennessee. And the actors may not have noticed, but many, if not most, insurance executives are lobbying for ObamaCare. Ferrell, who makes about $20 million per film but can’t seem to find it in his heart to buy insurance for a single family, wants you to do it by government coercion.

The PSA contained such over-the-top garbage that it was ripe for parody. A group of conservatives did just that in a spectacular frame-by-frame mocking of these Hollywonks. Examples include, “Celebrities keep us informed so we don’t have to ask silly questions,” and, “If I had a kid and he had a bike and he broke his leg, my neighbor’s kid should have to pay for it” because “how else will our children learn that they’re entitled to other people’s money?” Finally, they conclude, “Join overpaid celebrities in fighting for legislation they don’t understand. They may not be real doctors, but they play one on TV.”

SOURCE

How stupid does Max Baucus think you are..?

October 3, 2009

Siege Warfare & Health Care Reform

Smelling what they rightly sense is their own blood in the water from the public backlash against the so-called “public option,” congressional Bolsheviks (i.e., Democrats) have retreated to lick their wounds from the loss of their erstwhile health care reform centerpiece. Or have they?

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) certainly doesn’t think so. Using a tried-and-true leftist tactic — two steps forward, one step back, gaining position under the guise of “losing” ground — Baucus re-grouped by championing his health care bill, the core of which rests on mandatory health insurance and massive Medicaid spending. How massive? Weighing in at $1 trillion, the bill is threefold the total cost of Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” programs of the ’60s.

Democrats want to cover everyone up to 33 percent above the federal poverty level (about $30,000 for a family of four), adding more than 11 million new bodies to Medicaid rosters by 2019. The total covered would be 70 million people, or roughly one-quarter of America’s population. Oh yeah: “Everyone” includes illegal aliens, or so say at least 21 House Democrats who signed a statement from the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus affirming the same. The Congressional Anglo Saxon Caucus has yet to weigh in.

As an added bonus, those not covered under Medicaid must purchase health insurance (the so-called “individual mandate”) or face fines up to $25,000 and/or one year in prison for tax evasion. You may recall the “individual mandate” as the “not-really-a-tax” tax (an IRS “excise tax,” to be precise), which President Barack Obama lamely defended last week when confronted by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos with his promise not to raise taxes on middle class families “by a single penny.” At $1,900 per person for the tax-that’s-not-a-tax, and not withstanding his creative wordsmithing, Obama would be into most Americans for a couple hundred thousand pennies’ worth of broken promises.

However, since entitlements are leading the charge toward national bankruptcy with the lion’s share of the nation’s $12 trillion debt and $100 plus trillion in existing un-funded liabilities, isn’t it required of citizens to ask whether more entitlement spending is warranted when we can’t even fund existing programs? This question is even more relevant at the state level, where all but two states face either substantial or severe shortfalls. Notably, Medicaid is on average the second largest element of state budgets, trailing only slightly behind K-12 education.

Let’s also not miss the salient lesson from this sordid vignette: The fight for freedom is a constant struggle against siege warfare. In this case, under the guise of health care “reform,” statists would redistribute wealth while accruing power to the government, and if they can’t accomplish their goal one way (the “public option”), they will do it another (Medicaid with the “individual mandate”). The only way to counter this constant siege against liberty is to remain vigilant and vocal against these Trojan horse ruses.

As if to punctuate this lesson, Sens. John Rockefeller (D-WV) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) both promised to raise amendments to the Baucus bill adding — you guessed it — the “public option.”

SOURCE

How Much Will The Anti-gun ObamaCare Bill Cost?‏

October 3, 2009

Senator Baucus Thinks You’re Too Dumb to Understand Legislation
— Don’t let your two U.S. Senators go along with his arrogance

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://gunowners.org


Friday, October 2, 2009

It didn’t seem like such an unreasonable request.  Before the Senate Finance Committee passes one of the most important pieces of legislation in our lifetime, we (the American people) wanted to see two things:

* First, the actual language of the latest anti-gun ObamaCare bill.

* Second, a definitive Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reading of the cost of the legislation, based on its specific language.

But, incredibly, this simple request is too much for Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, who intends to force the committee to vote on the bill with nothing but a “quickie guesstimate” of the cost — a “guesstimate” which CBO will have to reach WITHOUT EVEN HAVING ACCESS TO THE ACTUAL LEGISLATION.

That’s right.  The committee has virtually finished consideration of the health care bill — the most important in our lifetime — AND THERE IS STILL NO LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE.

Shouldn’t we at least have a cost estimate that is based on what is actually in the bill?  Yes, but a full CBO cost estimate would take two weeks — and this is inconsistent with efforts by liberal Democrats to cram this bill quickly down the throats of the American people.

Moreover, don’t you realize that “legislative language is very complex” and the American people are just too stupid to understand it.

Well, are the members of the committee too stupid as well?  And what about the CBO?  Is it too stupid?

A Third World country would be embarrassed by the sleaze, corruption, and fraud being used to pass the most expansive government intrusion into health care of our lifetime.

It’s time to put an end to these disgusting tricks.

ACTION:  Call your two U.S. Senators.  Ask them to oppose any ObamaCare legislation — at least until we have two things:

1. The actual legislative language.

2. A definitive Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reading of the cost of the legislation, based on what’s in the bill.

You can call your two Senators toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

You can also use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your senators the pre-written e-mail message below.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

I would urge you, in the strongest terms, to resist considering any health care bill from the Senate Finance Committee until we have at least two things:

* First, the actual legislative language.

* Second, a definitive Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate of the cost of the legislation, based on legislative language.

It has been reported that, incredibly, this simple request is too much for Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, who intends to force the committee to vote on the bill with nothing but a “quickie guesstimate” of the cost — a “guesstimate” which CBO will have to reach WITHOUT EVEN HAVING ACCESS TO THE ACTUAL LEGISLATION.

It is unfathomable to me that the committee has virtually finished consideration of the health care bill — the most important in our lifetime — AND THERE IS STILL NO LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE.

Contrary to Senator Baucus’ assumptions, the American people are not too stupid to understand legislation which will affect whether they live or die.

Neither are the members of the committee nor the CBO.

A Third World country would be embarrassed by the sleaze, corruption, and fraud being used to pass the most expansive government intrusion into health care of our lifetime.

Please vote against the legislation under these circumstances.

Sincerely,


—————————–

Olofson Update

You may recall that Gun Owners Foundation is taking David Olofson’s case to the Supreme Court.  Olofson was railroaded by the federal government.  The feds claim that when David loaned a friend a semi-auto AR-15 that malfunctioned at the range, he was guilty of illegally transfering a machine gun.  A major step on the road to the Supreme Court has now been taken, as GOF has filed its Petition for Certiorari.  You can read that document at: http://gunowners.com/Olofson-Petition-for-Certiorari.pdf

Political Economies: Command and Demand

October 2, 2009

What follows does not address the obamacare debate, however it is directly the center of what is just plain wrong with what is going on in D.C.

By Mike Rosen

Posted: 10/01/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT

There they go again. The latest stop on the world anarchist tour was Pittsburgh, site of last week’s G20 summit of international finance ministers and governors of central banks.While the grownups met indoors to discuss cooperation in the global economy, goons of various persuasions and incoherent causes did their thing on the streets. OK, they weren’t all violent goons. There were also some better-behaved familiar goofballs like Cindy Sheehan and assorted greenies, pacifists and socialists.

But the anarchists were the most committed. They were a mostly youngish mob bedecked in standard revolutionary garb: faded jeans, black T-shirts, bandanas and ski masks to cover their faces. Their contribution to the world economy consisted of throwing rocks, bricks and trash cans at cops, breaking Starbucks windows and assaulting ATMs. Those whose faces were uncovered seemed to be smiling more than scowling. But, of course, this is what these people do for fun.

As anarchist festivals go, this one was relatively tame. Property damage was under $100,000 and fewer than 100 people were arrested. Small potatoes compared to the riot at the G8 summit in Genoa in 2001 and the violence in Montreal, Seattle and Turin, Italy, at other gatherings of world economic and political leaders.

One group of anarchists, apparently auditioning for “American Idol,” taunted police officers with a chorus of: “We all live in a fascist bully state,” sung to the tune of the Beatles’ “Yellow Submarine.” They probably missed the irony. It’s only because of the civility and restraint of democratic governments like the ones these sociopaths so revile that they can get away with their antics. If they actually lived in a fascist bully state they’d have been shot, carted off to a concentration camp or a reeducation center. Icons of the world’s “People’s Democratic Republics” like Stalin, Mao, Castro and Guevara (the guy on the anarchists’ T-shirts) haven’t been so tolerant of dissent.

Anarchists have only a childish concept of what they’re against and not a clue about what they would have replace it. When better-armed anarchists break into their home, who are they going to call? Don’t bother dialing 911; nobody will be there.

In the anarchist paradise of their dreams, do they imagine that mattresses will replace banks as financial intermediaries? Political economies come in only two forms: command and demand. In a command economy, government decides what gets produced, how it’s done, who does it, and how it’s distributed. In a demand economy, the capitalist alternative, those choices are made freely in the market — with varying degrees of government intrusion. The debate among rational adults is over the degree of government intrusion. Once set in motion, government intervention and control tends to expand, becoming ever more difficult to reverse until it metastasizes into a command economy. History has shown us repeatedly and dramatically that command economies don’t work. They produce neither prosperity nor freedom.

By contrast, the tea party folks who have taken to the streets in the age of Obama understand the danger of excessively intrusive government and are trying to stand athwart it. They know what they’re for. But they’re rookies at protests and demonstrations. They’re not quite sure what to do. They certainly don’t want to break anything and they even clean up after themselves. This is not what they do for fun. Most of them would rather spend weekends with their families and are too busy earning a productive living on weekdays. When they turn out there are no face masks, no confrontations with police and no violence.

Isn’t it curious that the same Democrat politicians and liberal media types who condemned and ridiculed the law-abiding tea partiers haven’t uttered a peep in disapproval of the nasty rabble that made a ruckus and dirtied their diapers in Pittsburgh?

Mike Rosen’s radio show airs weekdays from 9 a.m. to noon on 850-KOA.

SOURCE