"… the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government" -- Thomas Jefferson:
If you spend a few days listening to left wing commentators on the news you’ll soon come to the conclusion that they hate all conservatives with a passion. We’re usually described as “red necked, mouth breathing, racist, retarded, teabaggers”… and that’s just for starters! I do object to their use of the word “hypocrites” though, as I think that’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Come on guys, you keep preaching that we need a “meaningful dialog”, but rabid name calling isn’t helping that situation very much! Quoting one of the more polite left wing commentators speaking about right wing conservative constitutionalists; “It’s enough to make you think they’re just making it up as they go along. It clearly can’t be the case that every single law cherished by progressives just happens to be unconstitutional. Yet the reality is even worse. When the right’s view of the Constitution was ascendant 75 years ago, basic protections such as a restriction on child labor were declared unconstitutional; laws banning discrimination were unthinkable; and Social Security was widely viewed as next in line for the Supreme Court’s chopping block.”
“… every single law cherished by progressives just happens to be unconstitutional”… Hmm… He’s got a point there, although I would argue that not all of the laws favored by the left are unconstitutional, it’s just that I have a hard time thinking of even one that is legal, or at least that was passed in accordance with the guidelines of our Constitution. Personally I favor a good many of those laws, but the US Congress does not have the authority to pass, or enforce, any kind of nationwide law that might strike their fancy. The several sovereign states do have that right, but congress does not. My much maligned pundit continues with; “These conservatives are over-reading the Tenth Amendment, a provision of the Constitution that provides Congress’s power is not unlimited.” Whoa up there a minute boyo, are you perhaps trying to tell me that the power of Congress should be unlimited!? Certainly I’m no legal eagle, but even a cursory reading if the Constitution most definitely states that federal power is limited to only a very few duties, and nothing more! Jefferson's words are about the simplest explanation available of that. The federal government is authorized to exercise only those powers specifically delegated to it by the constitution, and in no way does it allow the assumption of any other powers or authority. Historically, many people argued against forming a national union, fearing that a federal government would gain too much power over the states, which is exactly the situation that we’re faced with today. Jefferson reassured the states, saying that they, being sovereign and independent, have the “unquestionable right to judge of the infraction.” The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights were devised to protect the citizen’s freedom from encroachment by both state and federal authority, specifically dividing governing power between federal and state authority, and reserving the ultimate governmental authority to the people themselves. The entire idea of “sovereign states” and a limited federal authority was to give us “home rule” in nearly all cases, and I surely don’t have to be a legal scholar to understand that!
We’d have to look long and hard to find anyone who isn’t aware of the “birthers”, who, according to the mainstream media, are a weird fringe group that thinks Obama is a foreign born “Manchurian candidate” of some sort. (A “fringe” consisting of nearly 29% of the American public.) Well, the left likes to call anyone that disagrees with ‘em a fringe group, inferring that all “fringers” (?) are obviously far right wing mental cases of one sort or another. But another quite large “fringe” group that’s been in the news lately are the “tenthers”, that apparently are a very dangerous bunch of people who have the gall to believe that the US Constitution means what it says!
One political writer claims that; “So-called “tenther” conservatives are determined to use their twisted reinterpretation to shrink national leaders’ power to the point where it can be drowned in a bathtub. They must not be allowed to succeed for three reasons: Tentherism is dangerous, Tentherism has no basis in constitutional text or history, Tentherism is authoritarian.” Well, yeah, I can agree with part of that… but not in a way that would make the author very happy! Certainly we should hope to “shrink national leader’s power”, as semi-powerless “leaders” are quite preferential to a flock of petty tyrants sitting in Washington DC, incessantly handing down arbitrary “laws” to control every waking moment of our lives! And yes, “tentherism” is dangerous… in fact it could be downright fatal… to both big government and rampant socialism. Now the part I disagree with, that “tentherism” has no basis in constitutional text or history… Thomas Jefferson and James Madison authored the Virginia and Kentucky Resolves. Madison argued that “the powers of the general government” result “from the compact to which the states are parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting that compact,” (our Constitution), and are “no further valid than they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact….” As such, the States have the authority to “interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining, within their respective limits, the authorities, rights, and liberties, appertaining to them.” Jefferson was somewhat more direct in the Kentucky Resolves. He said that the States “delegated to [the federal] government certain definite powers, reserving, each state to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force….” So where did he get that from? Well, it was expressly stated in the Tenth Amendment! Finally, we see the “tentherism is authoritarian” claim. Well, yes it is… it certainly does limit federal powers, and in no uncertain terms either, which is what infuriates progressives. Just think, if our elected officials respected and supported the 10th amendment and state sovereignty, all of these overreaching federal social mandates would be null and void… everything that D.C. has done, under “authority” that they are not specifically allowed, by Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. And that means just about everything congress has done over the last hundred or so years!
At least one good idea (that should be completely unnecessary) came from Congress recently. Rep. John Shadegg of Ariz. introduced H.R. 450, called the “Enumerated Powers Act”, a more or less procedural act that would require all bills introduced in the U.S. Congress to include a statement that specifies the Constitutional authority under which it’s proposed. "The founders intended and wrote in the Constitution that the federal government could do certain things but it can't do just anything it feels like," Shadegg said, "And yet, it is doing whatever it feels like." Sen. Tom Coburn of Okla. introduced the companion bill in the Senate (S. 1319), with 24 co-sponsors signing on. But I doubt either bill will be passed by Mr. Obama’s tame Congress.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Wolf Plan
At a recent meeting of the Idaho County Commissioners, the subject of an Idaho County Wolf Management Policy came up. This is something guaranteed to raise the hackles of nearly everyone in the county, about as surely as hearing a wolf howling at night near your hunting camp will. The first question that came to my mind was; why do we need a county plan, when we’ve already got all sorts of State and Federal plans on the books? A second thought came immediately after; yeah, all sorts of contradictory plans… emanating from the Federal Wildlife people, the EPA, State Fish and Game authorities, about a scadzillion rabid environmentalist’s, PETA, bleeding hearts, and the “experts” in the Federal Court System, but I haven’t noticed any community organizers or Je$$e Jackson being involved… yet. Unfortunately Canadian Grey Wolves have been introduced into our local ecosystem, and apparently we’re going to have to learn to live with ‘em, like it or not. Personally I really don’t see why we need more wolves anywhere in the country, after all don’t we already have more than enough politicians, bankers, lawyers, tax assessors, and bill collectors trying to eat us out of house and home?
None-the-less, I discussed the subject with Commission Chairman Skip Brandt, who said; “Back in 2003, I danced the dance with the Federal Government, in helping draft the ‘Idaho Wolf Management Plan’. A Plan they said they would accept, so to get the wolves delisted. Now they, via a Federal Judge, have gone back on the deal. This is just like Arizona and their immigration issue, a different issue but still a situation where a Federal Judge acting as a little god, steps in to override our legislative process. It is obvious that the Federal Government is not going to protect us, and the State is not going to step out and take on the Federal Judges, so it is time we (Idaho County) need to step up to the plate and put those on notice that we are going to prepare to protect our County.”
Wolves are the “apex predator” in nature, surpassed only by man. Found in all parts of the world, canis lupus irremotus consists of about 32 sub-species, 24 of which are found in North America, with the Canadian Grey Wolf being the largest and most aggressive. The wolf native to Idaho is described as the “Idaho Gray Wolf”, a smaller and somewhat less aggressive version of the Canadian wolf. These predators were purposely eliminated in Idaho decades ago due to severe depredations and a continuing threat to the safety of the early residents of this state. That elimination created an environment of security for humans, wildlife, and livestock that became a cornerstone of our local heritage, custom, and culture. Today, those threats are reappearing with the migration of wolves into our area.
It’s been widely claimed by activists that a healthy wild wolf has never attacked a human on this continent, although history states otherwise. Attacks on humans are uncommon, probably because with all the additives in our diet we taste bad to ‘em, but attacks have occurred, both in the early years of settlement and much more recently. (After a cursory search of the internet, I had gathered a list of eighteen such attacks before I quit bothering to collect them. Those stories are quite sickening.) One of the more heart rending newspaper reports from 1888 reads; “NEW ROCKFORD, DAK, March 7 - The news has just reached here that a father and son, living several miles northeast of this city, were destroyed by wolves yesterday. The two unfortunate men started to a haystack some ten rods from the house to shovel a path around the stack when they were surrounded by wolves and literally eaten alive. The horror-stricken mother was standing at the window with a babe in her arms, a spectator to the terrible death of her husband and son, but was unable to aid them. After they had devoured every flesh from the bones of the men, the denizens of the forest attacked the house, but retired to the hills in a short time. Investigation found nothing but the bones of the husband and son. The family name was Olson. Wolves are more numerous and dangerous now than ever before known in North Dakota." (Saint Paul Daily Globe) More recently, in March of this year, 32 year old Candice Berner, a special education teacher, was attacked and killed by wolves (confirmed), while jogging near the Alaskan village of Chignik Lake. Her body, partially eaten, was surrounded by wolf prints. Canada’s Algonquin Provincial Park was the scene of another attack. In August, 1996, the Delventhal family of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were spending a family vacation in Algonquin and joined a group of Scouts in "howling" at the wolves. That night 11 year old Zach Delventhal decided to sleep out under the stars. Young Zach suddenly felt excruciating pain in his face, where a wolf had bit him and was dragging him from his sleeping bag. Zach screamed and his Mother, racing to his side, picked him up, saturating her thermal shirt with blood from his wounds. The wolf stood less than a yard away, so she yelled for her husband Thom, who charged the wolf. The wolf retreated and then charged repeatedly, until finally leaving. "The boy's face had been ripped open. His nose was crushed. Parts of his mouth and right cheek were torn and dangling. Blood gushed from puncture wounds below his eyes, and the lower part of his right ear was missing." Zach received more than 80 stitches to repair his face. There are many more similar reports.
We also hear that wolves only prey on old, sick, or injured animals, but wolves are opportunists that prey on anything they can catch, both killing to survive, and purely for the sake of killing. In Yellowstone National Park the elk population was considered overly high, and it was argued that wolves should be introduced to naturally cut back the overpopulation of elk. So, the Canadian Grey Wolf (an invasive species), was forcibly introduced into Yellowstone by the US Fish and Wildlife Service in order to curry favor with the tree hugging environuts. Well, more wolves do mean less elk as they depredate the herd, and this continues until the elk, and all other wildlife are eradicated, then the wolf population either dies off due to disease and starvation… or moves out of the area in search of more prey. Then the elk can increase in numbers due to fewer wolves. This is usually referred to as the “Teeter-Totter of Nature”, but where in this cycle do wolves become a problem to man and livestock, due to limited prey? According to an Idaho Fish and Game officer I spoke with recently, wolf packs have already decimated the Lolo deer and elk herds, and are now eating their way in our direction. What happens when those packs reach the Camas Prairie (as they already have in small numbers), with our numerous farms, livestock, and people? It is a documented fact that wolves often kill more than they require for food, somewhat similar to a blood thirsty weasel in the hen coop. Historically, many wolves were well-known for their extensive killing. The "Custer Wolf" was estimated to have killed $25,000 worth of livestock (figuring inflation from 1920 to today, that’s about $550,000 worth). The "Aquila Wolf" in Arizona was known to have killed 65 sheep in one night and 40 at another time. "Three Toes of Harding County" in South Dakota killed 66 sheep in two nights shortly before its capture. And these were not diseased or rabid animals as the treehuggers would have you believe.
The real question, and hazard, is the killing of people by wolves, and it’s bound to happen again. Humans continue to expand their range, and wildlife habitat continues to shrink, whether we like it or not. We can add in those people who believe wolves will sense their love and reciprocate, so they head off into the woods to lure their “majestic” spirit animal closer with a sandwich. Milton P. Skinner, in his book “The Yellowstone Nature Book” (published in 1924) wrote, "Most of the stories we hear of the ferocity of these animals... come from Europe. There, they are dangerous because they do not fear man, since they are seldom hunted except by the lords of the manor. In America, the wolves are the same kind, but they have found to their bitter cost that practically every man and boy carries a rifle..." Skinner was right, the areas of Asia where wolf attacks on humans commonly occur today are the same areas in which people have no effective means of predator control. India alone suffers about a hundred people killed by grey wolves, every year, and now the 9th Circuit Court wishes the same on American citizens! So now, we’ve got wolves in our area, where they, as a federally protected species, have absolutely no reason to fear us, as the courts won’t allow us to do anything in our own defense. Best keep the kids (and your pets) in the house nowdays, and teach them not to run out and pet the big doggie that’s suddenly wandering around the yard! You might also want to carry a gun when you go out hunting for firewood.
It appears that environmentalists rule in Washington DC, and our state legislature can’t or won’t stand up to them. It also seems that Federal Circuit Court Judges know more about wildlife management in here Idaho than do the trained and qualified wildlife biologists we employ. So… I guess we’re on our own to defend ourselves, our children, and our property. I don’t know what form a county wolf management policy will take, but it certainly looks like we need to do something before we’re up to our ears in these voracious killers!
Who knows, I just might ask the commissioners if we perhaps could send a few bus loads of environmentalists (and the black-robed deities that sit on the federal bench) out into the woods, where they too can enjoy the experience of dancing with wolves.
None-the-less, I discussed the subject with Commission Chairman Skip Brandt, who said; “Back in 2003, I danced the dance with the Federal Government, in helping draft the ‘Idaho Wolf Management Plan’. A Plan they said they would accept, so to get the wolves delisted. Now they, via a Federal Judge, have gone back on the deal. This is just like Arizona and their immigration issue, a different issue but still a situation where a Federal Judge acting as a little god, steps in to override our legislative process. It is obvious that the Federal Government is not going to protect us, and the State is not going to step out and take on the Federal Judges, so it is time we (Idaho County) need to step up to the plate and put those on notice that we are going to prepare to protect our County.”
Wolves are the “apex predator” in nature, surpassed only by man. Found in all parts of the world, canis lupus irremotus consists of about 32 sub-species, 24 of which are found in North America, with the Canadian Grey Wolf being the largest and most aggressive. The wolf native to Idaho is described as the “Idaho Gray Wolf”, a smaller and somewhat less aggressive version of the Canadian wolf. These predators were purposely eliminated in Idaho decades ago due to severe depredations and a continuing threat to the safety of the early residents of this state. That elimination created an environment of security for humans, wildlife, and livestock that became a cornerstone of our local heritage, custom, and culture. Today, those threats are reappearing with the migration of wolves into our area.
It’s been widely claimed by activists that a healthy wild wolf has never attacked a human on this continent, although history states otherwise. Attacks on humans are uncommon, probably because with all the additives in our diet we taste bad to ‘em, but attacks have occurred, both in the early years of settlement and much more recently. (After a cursory search of the internet, I had gathered a list of eighteen such attacks before I quit bothering to collect them. Those stories are quite sickening.) One of the more heart rending newspaper reports from 1888 reads; “NEW ROCKFORD, DAK, March 7 - The news has just reached here that a father and son, living several miles northeast of this city, were destroyed by wolves yesterday. The two unfortunate men started to a haystack some ten rods from the house to shovel a path around the stack when they were surrounded by wolves and literally eaten alive. The horror-stricken mother was standing at the window with a babe in her arms, a spectator to the terrible death of her husband and son, but was unable to aid them. After they had devoured every flesh from the bones of the men, the denizens of the forest attacked the house, but retired to the hills in a short time. Investigation found nothing but the bones of the husband and son. The family name was Olson. Wolves are more numerous and dangerous now than ever before known in North Dakota." (Saint Paul Daily Globe) More recently, in March of this year, 32 year old Candice Berner, a special education teacher, was attacked and killed by wolves (confirmed), while jogging near the Alaskan village of Chignik Lake. Her body, partially eaten, was surrounded by wolf prints. Canada’s Algonquin Provincial Park was the scene of another attack. In August, 1996, the Delventhal family of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were spending a family vacation in Algonquin and joined a group of Scouts in "howling" at the wolves. That night 11 year old Zach Delventhal decided to sleep out under the stars. Young Zach suddenly felt excruciating pain in his face, where a wolf had bit him and was dragging him from his sleeping bag. Zach screamed and his Mother, racing to his side, picked him up, saturating her thermal shirt with blood from his wounds. The wolf stood less than a yard away, so she yelled for her husband Thom, who charged the wolf. The wolf retreated and then charged repeatedly, until finally leaving. "The boy's face had been ripped open. His nose was crushed. Parts of his mouth and right cheek were torn and dangling. Blood gushed from puncture wounds below his eyes, and the lower part of his right ear was missing." Zach received more than 80 stitches to repair his face. There are many more similar reports.
We also hear that wolves only prey on old, sick, or injured animals, but wolves are opportunists that prey on anything they can catch, both killing to survive, and purely for the sake of killing. In Yellowstone National Park the elk population was considered overly high, and it was argued that wolves should be introduced to naturally cut back the overpopulation of elk. So, the Canadian Grey Wolf (an invasive species), was forcibly introduced into Yellowstone by the US Fish and Wildlife Service in order to curry favor with the tree hugging environuts. Well, more wolves do mean less elk as they depredate the herd, and this continues until the elk, and all other wildlife are eradicated, then the wolf population either dies off due to disease and starvation… or moves out of the area in search of more prey. Then the elk can increase in numbers due to fewer wolves. This is usually referred to as the “Teeter-Totter of Nature”, but where in this cycle do wolves become a problem to man and livestock, due to limited prey? According to an Idaho Fish and Game officer I spoke with recently, wolf packs have already decimated the Lolo deer and elk herds, and are now eating their way in our direction. What happens when those packs reach the Camas Prairie (as they already have in small numbers), with our numerous farms, livestock, and people? It is a documented fact that wolves often kill more than they require for food, somewhat similar to a blood thirsty weasel in the hen coop. Historically, many wolves were well-known for their extensive killing. The "Custer Wolf" was estimated to have killed $25,000 worth of livestock (figuring inflation from 1920 to today, that’s about $550,000 worth). The "Aquila Wolf" in Arizona was known to have killed 65 sheep in one night and 40 at another time. "Three Toes of Harding County" in South Dakota killed 66 sheep in two nights shortly before its capture. And these were not diseased or rabid animals as the treehuggers would have you believe.
The real question, and hazard, is the killing of people by wolves, and it’s bound to happen again. Humans continue to expand their range, and wildlife habitat continues to shrink, whether we like it or not. We can add in those people who believe wolves will sense their love and reciprocate, so they head off into the woods to lure their “majestic” spirit animal closer with a sandwich. Milton P. Skinner, in his book “The Yellowstone Nature Book” (published in 1924) wrote, "Most of the stories we hear of the ferocity of these animals... come from Europe. There, they are dangerous because they do not fear man, since they are seldom hunted except by the lords of the manor. In America, the wolves are the same kind, but they have found to their bitter cost that practically every man and boy carries a rifle..." Skinner was right, the areas of Asia where wolf attacks on humans commonly occur today are the same areas in which people have no effective means of predator control. India alone suffers about a hundred people killed by grey wolves, every year, and now the 9th Circuit Court wishes the same on American citizens! So now, we’ve got wolves in our area, where they, as a federally protected species, have absolutely no reason to fear us, as the courts won’t allow us to do anything in our own defense. Best keep the kids (and your pets) in the house nowdays, and teach them not to run out and pet the big doggie that’s suddenly wandering around the yard! You might also want to carry a gun when you go out hunting for firewood.
It appears that environmentalists rule in Washington DC, and our state legislature can’t or won’t stand up to them. It also seems that Federal Circuit Court Judges know more about wildlife management in here Idaho than do the trained and qualified wildlife biologists we employ. So… I guess we’re on our own to defend ourselves, our children, and our property. I don’t know what form a county wolf management policy will take, but it certainly looks like we need to do something before we’re up to our ears in these voracious killers!
Who knows, I just might ask the commissioners if we perhaps could send a few bus loads of environmentalists (and the black-robed deities that sit on the federal bench) out into the woods, where they too can enjoy the experience of dancing with wolves.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Texas
Congress, in its infinite wisdom, has recently “laid down the law” to the several sovereign states, in the form of a Senate vote that singled out Texas, sending them a message that they’d better get back to doing what they're told by our nations capitol! And what brought this about? Well, the Governor of Texas, in accordance with the provisions of the 10th Amendment to the Bill of Rights, actually had the audacity to tell Washington “no.” Ignoring the “fact” that Sodom-on-the-Potomac is the source of all money and “we know best” wisdom, Texas said “no” to federal educational funding that comes with excessive strings attached. They said “no” to federal unemployment insurance funding that comes with similar strings. And they said “no” to federal interference with state authority to regulate gas and oil exploration. Apparently, as per our illustrious congress, we must jump when Washington says “jump”, but when we don’t… the powers that be along the Potomac will punish us by withholding federal funds. But where do they think those funds come from?
It’s surprising to me that so many Americans don’t understand how all this works. In days long past, local government (local [county] people) collected the taxes, allocating a portion of those funds to the state government. From there, the state handed a pittance to the federal government, which did not have the authority to levy taxes on the citizens. Additionally, the feds were allowed to collect import fees and such, which gave them enough of an annual income to function within their constitutionally defined limits, if they maintained a balanced budget and didn’t get carried away with foreign adventures. Our currency was based on the limited supply of gold and silver, which meant that the government couldn’t issue paper “fiat” money either. The national government did have the authority to borrow money when necessary, but the payments on that debt were required to come from the rather limited annual budget. The President could ask Congress for money of course, but the House of Representatives, as the direct representatives of the citizenry, held the purse strings and if they said “no”, the President had best figure out some other way to finance his bright ideas. The Senate got into the act as well, representing the best interests of the sovereign states, NOT the people therein, and if the House cooked up some wild scheme that might cause untoward national suffering, the “cooler and wiser” heads in the Senate retained the power to tell the House “no”, by refusing to vote in favor of whatever bill.
Overall the nation’s economy worked pretty well under the old system, although there were occasional up’s and downs, usually brought about by the “get rich quick” shenanigans of both homegrown and foreign bankers, assorted financiers, and the occasional corporate “Robber Baron”. Naturally, and as has happened throughout human history, the rich slowly got richer and the poor slowly got poorer. But still, if the rich guy made an error in judgment (and lacking federal “bailout” funds), his fortune could disappear overnight. If the poor guy decided that enough was enough, he could always load up the family wagon and head west where he could, with a little luck, make his own fortune. It was a boom time for a young “Rough and Ready” nation that believed in individual liberty, personal responsibility, and the freedom to do what you darn well pleased without government interference. Then came the Civil War… and the federal government’s appropriation of the power to extort taxes directly from the citizen. Used in an on-again off-again manner for years, it became permanent in 1913 with the 16th amendment. 1913 was a bad year for the country, as it also saw the adoption of the 17th amendment which allowed the direct election of US Senators. Coincidentally, the 1860’s were also the era in which the theories of socialism reared their ugly head in Europe, and promptly immigrated to the United States where it soon found a ready audience among the poorest inhabitants of our larger cities. Today our tax dollars are handed out to nearly everyone who thinks they have an social entitlement to the wealth of the nation (or might vote for leftist politicians), even if they didn’t do anything to earn it. (See what happens when you don’t control immigration…)
The thirteen American colonies separated from the British Empire in the course of a severe disagreement over taxes, specifically the question of “Taxation without representation”. Now, the descendents of those colonists are finding themselves burdened with excessive taxes and a skyrocketing national debt, that our representatives can’t seem to get a handle on. Even worse, government at all levels is making every effort to increase our taxes even more so they can provide the “services” and “entitlements” that so many unproductive Americans demand. Taxes that quite obviously come out of our pockets, and then are handed out to all sorts of unnecessary government agencies where the money inevitably ends up buying votes for liberally minded politicians. Since the days of the New Deal the federal government has used our tax monies to make state and local government (along with the American public) dependent of federal largess, and has used the threat of withholding those tax dollars to bend us to federal will, which is exactly what Texas is presently attempting to avoid. ‘Course nobody seems to realize that if those taxes were collected locally, and distributed locally, as was done in days long past, the overall tax bill would be a whole lot lower, and we’d all be ahead of the game… well, except for the Gestapo agents employed by the IRS perhaps.
The uproar in Texas has yet again brought up the question of secession. A question that has nearly everyone in the country upset it seems. The loony left is foaming at the mouth because if the Union broke apart they’d then loose their free ride at taxpayer expense, while the radical right is climbing the walls because they are sick and tired of being forced to pay for every crazy thing the left thinks up. Several states have already filed legal challenges to federal usurpation of the states constitutional authority, and many more are preparing to do so. All across America secessionist groups are forming. They are forming out of anger and out of desperation at the thought of America becoming just another footnote in history. They're not terrorists as the Department of Homeland security would have us believe, nor are they the radicalized militia groups the media so loves to hate; they’re Americans purely and simply, loyal to our constitution. Today they’re fragmented, each focused on their own cause. But sometime in the near future our government is going to do something really stupid, and these groups will finally come together. When that happens, the left will be in serious trouble, and our country is going to be plunged into economic and political chaos that’s going to last for quite a while.
So, is it time for the United States of America to dissolve? I would hope not, but I sure don’t want to be standing around when Washington DC tells the Texicans they have to bail out California’s failed social programs in the name of “sharing the wealth”!
It’s surprising to me that so many Americans don’t understand how all this works. In days long past, local government (local [county] people) collected the taxes, allocating a portion of those funds to the state government. From there, the state handed a pittance to the federal government, which did not have the authority to levy taxes on the citizens. Additionally, the feds were allowed to collect import fees and such, which gave them enough of an annual income to function within their constitutionally defined limits, if they maintained a balanced budget and didn’t get carried away with foreign adventures. Our currency was based on the limited supply of gold and silver, which meant that the government couldn’t issue paper “fiat” money either. The national government did have the authority to borrow money when necessary, but the payments on that debt were required to come from the rather limited annual budget. The President could ask Congress for money of course, but the House of Representatives, as the direct representatives of the citizenry, held the purse strings and if they said “no”, the President had best figure out some other way to finance his bright ideas. The Senate got into the act as well, representing the best interests of the sovereign states, NOT the people therein, and if the House cooked up some wild scheme that might cause untoward national suffering, the “cooler and wiser” heads in the Senate retained the power to tell the House “no”, by refusing to vote in favor of whatever bill.
Overall the nation’s economy worked pretty well under the old system, although there were occasional up’s and downs, usually brought about by the “get rich quick” shenanigans of both homegrown and foreign bankers, assorted financiers, and the occasional corporate “Robber Baron”. Naturally, and as has happened throughout human history, the rich slowly got richer and the poor slowly got poorer. But still, if the rich guy made an error in judgment (and lacking federal “bailout” funds), his fortune could disappear overnight. If the poor guy decided that enough was enough, he could always load up the family wagon and head west where he could, with a little luck, make his own fortune. It was a boom time for a young “Rough and Ready” nation that believed in individual liberty, personal responsibility, and the freedom to do what you darn well pleased without government interference. Then came the Civil War… and the federal government’s appropriation of the power to extort taxes directly from the citizen. Used in an on-again off-again manner for years, it became permanent in 1913 with the 16th amendment. 1913 was a bad year for the country, as it also saw the adoption of the 17th amendment which allowed the direct election of US Senators. Coincidentally, the 1860’s were also the era in which the theories of socialism reared their ugly head in Europe, and promptly immigrated to the United States where it soon found a ready audience among the poorest inhabitants of our larger cities. Today our tax dollars are handed out to nearly everyone who thinks they have an social entitlement to the wealth of the nation (or might vote for leftist politicians), even if they didn’t do anything to earn it. (See what happens when you don’t control immigration…)
The thirteen American colonies separated from the British Empire in the course of a severe disagreement over taxes, specifically the question of “Taxation without representation”. Now, the descendents of those colonists are finding themselves burdened with excessive taxes and a skyrocketing national debt, that our representatives can’t seem to get a handle on. Even worse, government at all levels is making every effort to increase our taxes even more so they can provide the “services” and “entitlements” that so many unproductive Americans demand. Taxes that quite obviously come out of our pockets, and then are handed out to all sorts of unnecessary government agencies where the money inevitably ends up buying votes for liberally minded politicians. Since the days of the New Deal the federal government has used our tax monies to make state and local government (along with the American public) dependent of federal largess, and has used the threat of withholding those tax dollars to bend us to federal will, which is exactly what Texas is presently attempting to avoid. ‘Course nobody seems to realize that if those taxes were collected locally, and distributed locally, as was done in days long past, the overall tax bill would be a whole lot lower, and we’d all be ahead of the game… well, except for the Gestapo agents employed by the IRS perhaps.
The uproar in Texas has yet again brought up the question of secession. A question that has nearly everyone in the country upset it seems. The loony left is foaming at the mouth because if the Union broke apart they’d then loose their free ride at taxpayer expense, while the radical right is climbing the walls because they are sick and tired of being forced to pay for every crazy thing the left thinks up. Several states have already filed legal challenges to federal usurpation of the states constitutional authority, and many more are preparing to do so. All across America secessionist groups are forming. They are forming out of anger and out of desperation at the thought of America becoming just another footnote in history. They're not terrorists as the Department of Homeland security would have us believe, nor are they the radicalized militia groups the media so loves to hate; they’re Americans purely and simply, loyal to our constitution. Today they’re fragmented, each focused on their own cause. But sometime in the near future our government is going to do something really stupid, and these groups will finally come together. When that happens, the left will be in serious trouble, and our country is going to be plunged into economic and political chaos that’s going to last for quite a while.
So, is it time for the United States of America to dissolve? I would hope not, but I sure don’t want to be standing around when Washington DC tells the Texicans they have to bail out California’s failed social programs in the name of “sharing the wealth”!
Monday, August 2, 2010
Experts
"A lie makes it halfway around the world while the truth is still putting its shoes on in the morning." - Winston Churchill
For most of my life I’ve had an abiding interest in the various sciences, and I’d like to think I have a fair understanding of the basics at least. Scientists are for the most part pretty sharp people, and usually are the undisputed experts in their respective fields. With that expertise goes fame and fortune, along with a good deal of public trust. Historically, scientists lived up to expectation, even if they did get into some real donnybrooks among their peers! (In particular I’m thinking of the 1870’s “bone wars” between paleontologists Marsh and Cope, over who first discovered what dinosaur.) None-the-less, scientists were pretty honest about their studies, findings, and conclusions. In recent times however, attitudes seem to be changing somewhat. Consider the thousands of scientists we’ve heard, weeping and wailing, as they discuss the threat of “global warming” and the outlook for humanity. All the problems, according to them, are the result of mankind’s dependence on fossil fuels. But if we check into their credentials we find that a very large percentage of them have absolutely no expertise on the realm of climatology or metrology, and were merely parroting the unsubstantiated work (some of which was deliberately falsified) of others!
Science is and must be precise, rigorous, and above all accurate. Science is after all about discovering laws of nature that have existed forever. Newton “discovered” (not invented) the laws of gravity, while Einstein discovered (not invented) the theory of relativity. The invention of the computer, of aeronautics, rocketry, or even of the internet, was not science, it’s nothing more (or less) than an expansion of technology and engineering. Most inventions however are based on prior scientific discoveries such as thermodynamics, electromagnetism, solid-state physics, abstract mathematics, Boolean logic, fluid dynamics and so on.
Like the soothsayers of old, scientists want to predict the future. To do so they have devised many a theory, many a mathematical model that provides some insight as to how things might work, allowing them to predict what will happen in the future. With that, it’s possible to predict the positions of the Sun, the Moon, and the stars for hundreds of years to come quite accurately. Yet an accurate forecast of the weather for the day after tomorrow is quite difficult. (I reckon that’s why we called the weather forecasters “Weather Guessers” back in the days when I was flying.)
.
Mathematics is the preeminent tool of science, providing the means to analyze, correlate, predict and express physical or natural phenomenon. Mathematic results are also very hard to fake, unless the input data is erroronious, either by observational error, carelessness, or in some cases deliberately to gain a certain result. For the soft sciences (human behavior, social interactions, “polls” and such), a branch of mathematics called statistics is quite useful, along with being one of the most misunderstood and misused forms of mathematics.
Twisted statistical data, and the suppression of key points leads to numerous examples of flawed reasoning. The “science” of statistics uses irreproducible experiments, disregards peer review, sometimes passes fiction as fact, and a number of other techniques, which are used in the promotion of the pseudo-science known as “public opinion polls”. (Pseudo-science looks like science and sounds like science to most non-scientists, but is purely “junk science” none-the-less.) The fallibility of statistics led to coining the phrase “Lies, damn lies and statistics”. Consider, a few years back, an analysis of traffic accidents showed that 70% of auto accidents happen within 10 miles of home. This led to the idea that people are more careless when they are close to home. While the statistic might be true, their interpretation was erroronious. The reason why most accidents happen close to home is that most of the time, people are close to home! Using the techniques of junk science, you can almost always prove that you’re right no matter what the claim. Consider that global warming is a plausible phenomenon, and there is evidence that the earth is warming, but there is no conclusive proof that global warming is real. (It’s a hypothesis, not a proven fact). However, environmentalism and flawed statistics have raised global warming to the arena of gospel truth, thus allowing Al Gore to make a lot of money from a movie (and collect a Nobel Prize)!
The science of statistics is also an effective tool in political propaganda and activism. If you want to promote socialism for example, merely run a study that shows socialism has wonderful advantages and effects, while the lack of socialism leads to hunger, famines, depravation and such. (You do have to conveniently ignore the experience of the socialist world over the last few decades though.) Such science is a dangerous yet convincing version of the scientific process. You may not read the journals every day, but if it is not peer reviewed, and tested by independent scientists, it can’t be relied on.
Such faulty "Junk science" is often used to advance special, and often hidden, agendas, as we see nearly every day. The mass media may use junk science to generate sensational headlines, while other members of the media use it to advance their social and political agendas. Personal injury lawyers often use such junk science to fool juries into awarding huge settlements, then use the verdict to extort even more money from businesses fearful of future cases. Social activists use such “science” to achieve their goals in environmentalism, welfare, and gun-control. Bureaucrats commonly use junk science to expand their authority and to increase their cut of the budget pie. As was done with global warming, politicians can use junk science to gain favor with assorted special interest groups or to be "politically correct." And finally it’s amazing how many “community activists” use such junk science to blame our free society for the problems of the poor and underprivileged, all over the world.
For most of my life I’ve had an abiding interest in the various sciences, and I’d like to think I have a fair understanding of the basics at least. Scientists are for the most part pretty sharp people, and usually are the undisputed experts in their respective fields. With that expertise goes fame and fortune, along with a good deal of public trust. Historically, scientists lived up to expectation, even if they did get into some real donnybrooks among their peers! (In particular I’m thinking of the 1870’s “bone wars” between paleontologists Marsh and Cope, over who first discovered what dinosaur.) None-the-less, scientists were pretty honest about their studies, findings, and conclusions. In recent times however, attitudes seem to be changing somewhat. Consider the thousands of scientists we’ve heard, weeping and wailing, as they discuss the threat of “global warming” and the outlook for humanity. All the problems, according to them, are the result of mankind’s dependence on fossil fuels. But if we check into their credentials we find that a very large percentage of them have absolutely no expertise on the realm of climatology or metrology, and were merely parroting the unsubstantiated work (some of which was deliberately falsified) of others!
Science is and must be precise, rigorous, and above all accurate. Science is after all about discovering laws of nature that have existed forever. Newton “discovered” (not invented) the laws of gravity, while Einstein discovered (not invented) the theory of relativity. The invention of the computer, of aeronautics, rocketry, or even of the internet, was not science, it’s nothing more (or less) than an expansion of technology and engineering. Most inventions however are based on prior scientific discoveries such as thermodynamics, electromagnetism, solid-state physics, abstract mathematics, Boolean logic, fluid dynamics and so on.
Like the soothsayers of old, scientists want to predict the future. To do so they have devised many a theory, many a mathematical model that provides some insight as to how things might work, allowing them to predict what will happen in the future. With that, it’s possible to predict the positions of the Sun, the Moon, and the stars for hundreds of years to come quite accurately. Yet an accurate forecast of the weather for the day after tomorrow is quite difficult. (I reckon that’s why we called the weather forecasters “Weather Guessers” back in the days when I was flying.)
.
Mathematics is the preeminent tool of science, providing the means to analyze, correlate, predict and express physical or natural phenomenon. Mathematic results are also very hard to fake, unless the input data is erroronious, either by observational error, carelessness, or in some cases deliberately to gain a certain result. For the soft sciences (human behavior, social interactions, “polls” and such), a branch of mathematics called statistics is quite useful, along with being one of the most misunderstood and misused forms of mathematics.
Twisted statistical data, and the suppression of key points leads to numerous examples of flawed reasoning. The “science” of statistics uses irreproducible experiments, disregards peer review, sometimes passes fiction as fact, and a number of other techniques, which are used in the promotion of the pseudo-science known as “public opinion polls”. (Pseudo-science looks like science and sounds like science to most non-scientists, but is purely “junk science” none-the-less.) The fallibility of statistics led to coining the phrase “Lies, damn lies and statistics”. Consider, a few years back, an analysis of traffic accidents showed that 70% of auto accidents happen within 10 miles of home. This led to the idea that people are more careless when they are close to home. While the statistic might be true, their interpretation was erroronious. The reason why most accidents happen close to home is that most of the time, people are close to home! Using the techniques of junk science, you can almost always prove that you’re right no matter what the claim. Consider that global warming is a plausible phenomenon, and there is evidence that the earth is warming, but there is no conclusive proof that global warming is real. (It’s a hypothesis, not a proven fact). However, environmentalism and flawed statistics have raised global warming to the arena of gospel truth, thus allowing Al Gore to make a lot of money from a movie (and collect a Nobel Prize)!
The science of statistics is also an effective tool in political propaganda and activism. If you want to promote socialism for example, merely run a study that shows socialism has wonderful advantages and effects, while the lack of socialism leads to hunger, famines, depravation and such. (You do have to conveniently ignore the experience of the socialist world over the last few decades though.) Such science is a dangerous yet convincing version of the scientific process. You may not read the journals every day, but if it is not peer reviewed, and tested by independent scientists, it can’t be relied on.
Such faulty "Junk science" is often used to advance special, and often hidden, agendas, as we see nearly every day. The mass media may use junk science to generate sensational headlines, while other members of the media use it to advance their social and political agendas. Personal injury lawyers often use such junk science to fool juries into awarding huge settlements, then use the verdict to extort even more money from businesses fearful of future cases. Social activists use such “science” to achieve their goals in environmentalism, welfare, and gun-control. Bureaucrats commonly use junk science to expand their authority and to increase their cut of the budget pie. As was done with global warming, politicians can use junk science to gain favor with assorted special interest groups or to be "politically correct." And finally it’s amazing how many “community activists” use such junk science to blame our free society for the problems of the poor and underprivileged, all over the world.
We the People (again)
I recently watched an on-line video that I thought was quite impressive, certainly patriotic, and definitely to the point. I also understand that it has leftists, or at least a large number of them, literally foaming at the mouth. For anyone with a computer and who might be interested it can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVAhr4hZDJE, but I’d suggest that hard core believers in Mr. Obama’s vision for America give it a pass. Presented in the form of an open letter to “President Obama”, it starts with;
“We the People” have stated resolutely we reject your vision for our country. You claim you have not heard us.
“We the People” have assembled across America resisting your efforts to subvert our constitution and undermine our liberty. You claim you have not seen us.
“We the People”… While the left endlessly belabors the point in claiming to represent the majority of Americans, it is “we the people”, as in American citizens in large numbers, who oppose the “change” being forced upon us. If you follow the polls, something like 63.4%, or two thirds of the American people, do oppose Mr. Obama’s version of America, some quietly, and others quiet vocally. Granted that he did receive a majority of the vote in 2008, something like 52.9% to Sen. McCain’s 45%, we really should keep in mind that of an estimated 208 million eligible voters in this country, only 131 million voted in the last election. Then, considering how worked up the liberal left was over Mr. Obama’s candidacy, I rather think that the percentage of liberals who turned out to vote far exceeded the percentage of conservatives, skewing the numbers in their favor. This of course does not reflect well on the Conservatives who did not bother to vote for whatever reason. Certainly anyone who did not cast their ballot in the last election has no grounds for complaint if things aren’t going the way they’d like, or if the world seems to be falling apart around their ears!
“We the People” goes on to say: “Our greatest treasure is freedom -- the absence of restraints on our ability to think and to act. The corollary of freedom is individual responsibility. We believe in the power of the individual.” I can hardly argue that point! Every dictator, every tyrant in history, has engaged in a massive effort to control what subjugated people say, what they think, and how they act. But the ability to think for oneself, and hopefully act accordingly, is the single God Given right that no man can ever take away from us. It might become dulled through endlessly repeated lies and political propaganda, it might become misguided in those people who willingly believe everything they’re told, but the right to think for oneself can be ended only by death. With that ability to think goes individual responsibility. We are after all, individually responsible for our actions. (“The ‘debble made me do it” isn’t acceptable.) We might use the age old excuse of “but I didn’t think…” which seems to be getting more popular every day, but it makes no difference if an individual thinks or just follows the herd, he does have the ability to think, and is thus solely responsible for his action or inaction.
A few years ago President Bush said, “History moves toward freedom because the desire for freedom is written in every human heart.” Quite so… quite so… How many people through the centuries have risked all, even their lives, to escape tyranny? Remember the people trying to cross the Berlin wall? Strangely enough, many of those people escaped to this country, the United States of America! How ironic it is that many of their descendants now toy with the idea of rejecting freedom, in favor of liberal socialism, while so many others are “to busy” to defend that freedom!
Let us add that we will preserve it only as long as devotion to freedom is expressed in the heart of our actions. When President Lincoln dedicated Gettysburg National Cemetery he declared, “It is for us the living . . . to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus so nobly advanced.”
Abe was right of course, the cause of freedom is… and will always be… an unfinished work. No matter how long and hard we fight in the cause of liberty, there will always be those who would enslave us. And today we’re doing little more than muttering and grumbling, allowing the loony left to “… have expanded government, violated our constitution, confounded laws, seized private industry, destroyed jobs, perverted our economy, curtailed free speech, corrupted our currency, weakened our national security and endangered our sovereignty.
By compromising our nation’s cultural, legal and economic institutions, you are ensuring that our children will never achieve the same quality of life as we enjoy today. Through generational theft you are robbing the unborn of opportunity. This is not acceptable. Not in America.
I for one refuse to believe that America’s “golden age” of liberty is behind us, and all that’s left for us is nothing more than a miserable existence as just another third world country. We are an exceptional nation and exceptional people that should be leading the world into an era of peace and prosperity, not just “sharing” the limited wealth we presently have, and with that leading the way down the slippery slope to misery, want, communism and hopelessness.
If you have a problem with how the country is being run, don't just whimper and whine about it, GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Do you really think politicians are interested in our arguments with each other?! We all gripe and moan about left wing - right wing politics, but when the truth of the matter is examined, they all play for the same team and they don’t care about anything but their assumed power and authority. Regardless of who's right and who’s wrong, it's not the government that will be our downfall, it's the division among American conservatives that will allow a runaway liberal government to destroy our freedom. Does anyone remember hearing the phrase "United We Stand, Divided We Fall"?
“NO WE WON’T” in 2012!! I can see November from my house, and if we act together, it’s all over for Obama.
“We the People” have stated resolutely we reject your vision for our country. You claim you have not heard us.
“We the People” have assembled across America resisting your efforts to subvert our constitution and undermine our liberty. You claim you have not seen us.
“We the People”… While the left endlessly belabors the point in claiming to represent the majority of Americans, it is “we the people”, as in American citizens in large numbers, who oppose the “change” being forced upon us. If you follow the polls, something like 63.4%, or two thirds of the American people, do oppose Mr. Obama’s version of America, some quietly, and others quiet vocally. Granted that he did receive a majority of the vote in 2008, something like 52.9% to Sen. McCain’s 45%, we really should keep in mind that of an estimated 208 million eligible voters in this country, only 131 million voted in the last election. Then, considering how worked up the liberal left was over Mr. Obama’s candidacy, I rather think that the percentage of liberals who turned out to vote far exceeded the percentage of conservatives, skewing the numbers in their favor. This of course does not reflect well on the Conservatives who did not bother to vote for whatever reason. Certainly anyone who did not cast their ballot in the last election has no grounds for complaint if things aren’t going the way they’d like, or if the world seems to be falling apart around their ears!
“We the People” goes on to say: “Our greatest treasure is freedom -- the absence of restraints on our ability to think and to act. The corollary of freedom is individual responsibility. We believe in the power of the individual.” I can hardly argue that point! Every dictator, every tyrant in history, has engaged in a massive effort to control what subjugated people say, what they think, and how they act. But the ability to think for oneself, and hopefully act accordingly, is the single God Given right that no man can ever take away from us. It might become dulled through endlessly repeated lies and political propaganda, it might become misguided in those people who willingly believe everything they’re told, but the right to think for oneself can be ended only by death. With that ability to think goes individual responsibility. We are after all, individually responsible for our actions. (“The ‘debble made me do it” isn’t acceptable.) We might use the age old excuse of “but I didn’t think…” which seems to be getting more popular every day, but it makes no difference if an individual thinks or just follows the herd, he does have the ability to think, and is thus solely responsible for his action or inaction.
A few years ago President Bush said, “History moves toward freedom because the desire for freedom is written in every human heart.” Quite so… quite so… How many people through the centuries have risked all, even their lives, to escape tyranny? Remember the people trying to cross the Berlin wall? Strangely enough, many of those people escaped to this country, the United States of America! How ironic it is that many of their descendants now toy with the idea of rejecting freedom, in favor of liberal socialism, while so many others are “to busy” to defend that freedom!
Let us add that we will preserve it only as long as devotion to freedom is expressed in the heart of our actions. When President Lincoln dedicated Gettysburg National Cemetery he declared, “It is for us the living . . . to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus so nobly advanced.”
Abe was right of course, the cause of freedom is… and will always be… an unfinished work. No matter how long and hard we fight in the cause of liberty, there will always be those who would enslave us. And today we’re doing little more than muttering and grumbling, allowing the loony left to “… have expanded government, violated our constitution, confounded laws, seized private industry, destroyed jobs, perverted our economy, curtailed free speech, corrupted our currency, weakened our national security and endangered our sovereignty.
By compromising our nation’s cultural, legal and economic institutions, you are ensuring that our children will never achieve the same quality of life as we enjoy today. Through generational theft you are robbing the unborn of opportunity. This is not acceptable. Not in America.
I for one refuse to believe that America’s “golden age” of liberty is behind us, and all that’s left for us is nothing more than a miserable existence as just another third world country. We are an exceptional nation and exceptional people that should be leading the world into an era of peace and prosperity, not just “sharing” the limited wealth we presently have, and with that leading the way down the slippery slope to misery, want, communism and hopelessness.
If you have a problem with how the country is being run, don't just whimper and whine about it, GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Do you really think politicians are interested in our arguments with each other?! We all gripe and moan about left wing - right wing politics, but when the truth of the matter is examined, they all play for the same team and they don’t care about anything but their assumed power and authority. Regardless of who's right and who’s wrong, it's not the government that will be our downfall, it's the division among American conservatives that will allow a runaway liberal government to destroy our freedom. Does anyone remember hearing the phrase "United We Stand, Divided We Fall"?
“NO WE WON’T” in 2012!! I can see November from my house, and if we act together, it’s all over for Obama.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)