Intellectual Splatter

Occupy Wall Street and The Tea Party

2011-10-15T14:14:00.005-05:00

I've been following the Occupy Wall Street situation lightly lately, and I think there are portions of this blog post that have some significance.

The best part is the venn diagram near the bottom. I think that true freedom lovers (of which some Tea Parties are not), should be reaching out to the OWS crowd to attempt to bring them to a better understanding of the consequences of centralized power. I commented on the above post, and in that comment I suggested that people read two different books by very different authors.

1) The Wrecking Crew by Thomas Frank
I also began a review of this book in the past but failed utterly to complete it.

2) The Road to Serfdom by F. A. Hayek
I am still reading this book, but even the introduction(s) deal directly with the topic at hand.

In The Wrecking Crew, he talks about the noble bureaucrats that went to D.C. to make a great government work, but that evil people (he claims that this is just how conservativism works) have gone through and appointed people to these positions to benefit corporations and other entities.

My response to the whole of this novel is "How could you imagine that it would work any differently when you concentrated so much power in one appointed office?" I think it really comes down to the flawed notion that anyone in Washington D.C. can be "accountable to the people". They are too far away and too secretive to ever trust with any power.

In the introduction to The Road to Serfdom, F. A. Hayek begins to address exactly this premise, especially the one that was rampant in Europe in the early 20th Century. In the early 20th century, many nations attempted various forms of socialism. It was a philosophy whose time had come. Unfortunately, it suffered from exactly the dangers outlined in The Wrecking Crew. "The People" set up a powerful central government that could take care of directing the economy, setting wrongs back to right, and generally helping people. Unfortunately, as it is inevitable to happen, ruthless and evil men came to power (in different ways and to different results in the various countries), and the results were disturbing. In Germany, it gave rise to Hitler, Italy, Musolini, and Russia, Stalin.

The things that these countries had in common were that the people were convinced that they would benefit from central control of the economy. I think this is the core fallacy that some (many?) in OWS are falling prey to. If more can have their eyes opened to history, and the fact that this is not a new idea, nor an untried one, we can convince them that they are correct that there is a problem in America, but that the solution is slightly different than they may have imagined.

I'd like to reach out to OWS people locally to attempt to establish common ground and find out which Presidential candidate they'll be supporting this time around.

Invitation for Obama to "go Unilateral"

2011-07-28T08:04:00.003-05:00

I for one think that the Republicans trying to tempt President Obama into showing that he has zero respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law is a good idea. I'd like to see the House Republicans refuse to pass anything, President Obama try to make an executive signing statement, and then we impeach him. It would just make him the third President in a row that deserves impeachment.

Executive power has grown to extremely dangerous levels, and drastic measures need to be taken to reassert the Constitutional limits.

As many who have knowledge of the situation have stated, the August 2 "deadline" isn't really a deadline. It's when the Federal Government must stop sending out 100% of the payments it plans to send out. It doesn't flip over to 0% at that point. It flips over to not being able to send out checks that exceed income. Since the wonderful IRS milks money from everyone in the country every paycheck, the Federal Government will have plenty flowing in to continue to make payments on plenty of programs.

Maybe they'll stop being able to afford some of the un-Constitutional ones and things will be better. The choice on which ones to stop paying for does rely upon the President. Therefore, if Senior Citizens stop getting Social Security checks it will be completely the Executive Branch's mismanagement that causes it.

I'm sure most conservatives could go down a list of all the different Departments of x y and z that they'd like to see not get any money.

The bottom line is that the powers in Washington are playing the game of fear, and we have to be bold and courageous enough to call their bluffs and force our Congressman to vote against every debt increase.

I urge you to support Capping the Debt.

Thanks for having me on air this morning, even if it was brief with three people waiting.

Don't fear the "Drop Dead Date". No one will die, except the un-Constitutional spending.

(This is a reproduction of an email I sent this morning to Nick Reed with KSGF, the local radio talk show host)

Edit: The title refers to 15:15 into the President's address to La Raza.

Public Grocery Stores

2011-04-24T20:42:00.003-05:00

From Cafe Hayek, Grocery School

Suppose that we were supplied with groceries in same way that we are supplied with K-12 education.

Residents of each county would pay taxes on their properties. A huge chunk of these tax receipts would then be spent by government officials on building and operating supermarkets. County residents, depending upon their specific residential addresses, would be assigned to a particular supermarket. Each family could then get its weekly allotment of groceries for “free.” (Department of Supermarket officials would no doubt be charged with the responsibility for determining the proper amounts and kinds of groceries that families of different kinds and sizes are entitled to receive.)

Except in rare circumstances, no family would be allowed to patronize a “public” supermarket outside of its district.

Residents of wealthier counties – such as Fairfax County, VA and Somerset County, NJ – would obviously have better-stocked and more attractive supermarkets than would residents of poorer counties. And, thanks to a long-ago U.S. Supreme Court decision, families would be free to shop at private supermarkets that charge directly for the groceries they offer; such private-supermarket families, though, would get no discount on their property-tax bills.

When the quality of supermarkets is recognized by nearly everyone to be dismal, calls for “supermarket choice” would be rejected by a coalition of greedy government-supermarket workers and ideologically benighted collectivists as attempts to cheat supermarket customers from out of good supermarket service – indeed, as attempts to deny ordinary families the food that they need for their very survival. Such ‘choice,’ it would be alleged, will drain precious resources from the public supermarkets whose (admittedly) poor performance testifies to the fact that these supermarkets are underfunded.

And the small handful of people who call for total separation between supermarket and state would be criticized by nearly everyone as being, at best, delusional and – it would be thought more realistically – more likely misanthropic devils who are indifferent to the malnutrion and starvation that would sweep the land if only private market forces governed the provision and patronizing of supermarket. (Some indignant observers would even wonder aloud at the insensitivity of referring to grocery shoppers as “customers”; surely the relationship between suppliers of life-giving foods and the people who need these foods is not so crass as to be properly discussed as being ‘commercial.’)

I've been enjoying the posts at Cafe Hayek. This one put a nice twist on the Government School debate, arguing from my position.

See also Alliance for the Separation of School and State

Political Discourse

2011-03-20T01:12:00.005-05:00

I'm fairly disappointed, though many would be surprised by this. I have just removed my "subscription" in my RSS reader from one of the local blogs here in Springfield, MO. I have no intention of providing links to this blog, even though I have relatively zero traffic flowing to or out of my blog.

My disappointment lies at it's roots a strange expectation that education minded bloggers, whom I clearly disagree with, could still remain open to the discussion of important topics. Unfortunately, the content of this particular blog has no purpose other than to mock the people that the blogger disagrees with politically. It is not being used to make anyone more aware of the real issues, or to facilitate conversations that could answer questions that people have.

This blogger of course has every right to use his Internet platform to achieve whatever ends he deems desirable. However, I have reached the point where I believe it to be completely pointless to even waste my time reading what he publishes.

His readers seem to have quite a bit in common with the anonymous trolls that frequent the Springfield News-Leader comments section. Overall, they produce nonsense that is a waste of time to read.

If anyone can point me to the blog(s) of liberals, democrats, socialists, moderates, whatever label you may apply, that actually participate in discourse over the salient political topics of the day, I would be glad to invest my time in reading them, and potentially participating.

Election Quickie

2010-11-04T18:54:00.005-05:00

Well, since it has been over a year since my last post, I won't attempt to make this post a long and drawn out one.

I am pleased and excited that Melissa Leach has been elected to represent the Missouri House's 137th district. She will be a strong voice for Liberty in Jefferson City.

My friend Eric Burlison was reelected to the 136th, so he will get another two years to continue his fine representation of the citizens of Springfield.

At the National level, Ron Paul was reelected, and Rand Paul was elected to the Senate, marking the first time a son will serve in the Senate while his father is serving in the House. These two upstanding citizens will be fighting from both chambers of Congress for Liberty, Sound Money, and Peace.

Many other things happened this week in politics, and I'm sure you can find better sources than my blog to find out about them. Try out the Campaign For Liberty for starters.

A Thought about Rights

2009-10-18T12:28:00.002-05:00

It is apparent through the modern public discourse that there are a great number of people that have a difficult time discerning what is a right vs what is a need or desire.

I have a simple scenario that might assist.

Imagine you are alone on an island. We'll assume that you own the island and there is no dispute over that ownership. You have a right to everything that you want to do on that island. There is no government, there are no other people, you can do ANYTHING you want. Those are your rights.

Civility

2009-09-20T19:12:00.004-05:00

Today I participated in something that I have rarely done over the past year or so. After seeing on Twitter that Steve Helms had a piece about Health Care published in the News-Leader, I headed over to give it a look. I found there the many reasons that I had basically written off the News-Leader's online comment section.

1) Anonymous comments
2) Endless slander
3) Complete avoidance of the topic at hand

For some reason, the comments section attracts some of the least desirable communication from people in the community. Unfortunately that's part of the problem. We have trouble knowing for sure whether the participants are even from this area. Even if we did know for sure they were, we don't know who most people really are. I'm not against anyone's right to privacy, but I think anonymity brings out horrible things in many people.

There were people that claimed to be on the left, and others that claimed to be on the right that couldn't stop slandering each other, calling names, and generally being unpleasant. Now if they were making a point in an unfriendly way, I could probably look past the muck, but many of them fail to remember what the piece was even about.

I'm not expecting everyone to get along, but I do expect people to talk about the subject at hand. It is ridiculous.

It also seems that even when I take the time to present calm arguments in favor or against a particular idea that I either am completely ignored, or people attempt to draw me into the fray by attacking me, instead of responding to the ideas and concepts presented.

It is wearying. I will most likely continue to avoid the News-Leader in the future.

I think that citizens would benefit greatly by having an environment that encouraged well thought out and researched discourse on the topics. I also think that our representatives should have a place where all their constituents (not just those of their own party) were given a voice on issues. I think that the Citizens Brigade would satisfy this.

Media Dominance

2009-09-09T21:56:00.003-05:00

The media is defeating us. By spreading lies and painting the political scene as divided and irreconcilable, they've defeated the American people. For my purposes here I'm not even talking about my desires to return our nation to a Constitutionally limited Federal Government. I'm talking about the ability to govern ourselves, to see our neighbors as neighbors instead of enemies in the trenches of warfare.

Maybe people should wake up and realize that Religion and Politics aren't the last subjects we should be talking about, they're the first. They're the most important topics to discuss. We need to learn again how to disagree with people without hatred. To take opposite positions of an argument without vilification of our fellow citizens.

I blame education. I expect my children to grow up confident in their beliefs, willing to discuss them calmly with anyone, and to care for the needy, no matter what they disagree with them about. The Government schools claim that they teach tolerance and diversity, but they do not. They claim that they teach acceptance and unity, but they do not. Today's schools gloss over the truth. They refuse to debate the issues that matter most. They are dismissive, claiming that when two people make statements that can't possibly BOTH be true, that those are just their opinions, and that we're all entitled to them. We can all be equally right in our own minds.

The Government schools are only working to create pupils that will accept knowledge as it is given to them. All of the subjects are separated out, these receptacles of "facts" are not encouraged to discover how all of creation relates to each other, how all disciplines rely upon the same foundational truths. They are not taught to challenge every assertion in their own minds, or to plow through things that they don't understand to experience the insight of discovering some truth on their own.

Now they are encouraged to rely upon their fellow students as well as the authoritative knowledge givers. If they're not sure about something, they should find out what the group thinks and agree with them.

I think we need a return to the Trivium. We need to reevaluate the educational processes that brought us so many revolutionary ideas through the years. We need to equip children with the tools of learning, instead of providing them their daily fish.

People whose intellect I respect are being led to draw conclusions that just don't fit with reality. I know I'm picking on this person quite readily, but I know he can handle it. I'm not as interested in winning the fight to convince him, but to try to ring some bells and wake everyone up to how much the media is crafting the boundaries of this conversation. Just consider the current headlines about the political situation similar to this kind of headline "Could your toaster kill you? Find out at 6!". Sensationalism to the extreme!

Educated people would cause this kind of insanity to die. If people weren't just consumers of information, instead of critical thinkers, the media would be forced to change it's tone. People would just turn the nonsense off. Unfortunately, the information consumers turn into ripe targets for advertising, and as the politicians are quick to remind us, the economy is driven by consumption. If we stopped consuming like sheep and cows, our economy would fall apart. I'll save the economy for another post.

If you're a Christian, please review the Call to Dunkirk:

If you don't agree with abandoning the "public" schools for Biblical reasons, please consider the Alliance for the Separation of School and State. Their site has a wealth of different perspectives in support of taking our children out of the Government schools.

Please tell me what you think. Without intellectual retorts, I cannot refine my thoughts and purge from them the falsehoods. I do not claim to have everything figured out.

One Health Care Proposal

2009-09-08T20:31:00.003-05:00

The Cato Institute has a proposal for the rhetorical onslaught from President Obama.

The President accuses his opponents of defending the status quo, or demanding that we do nothing. I have seen the wisdom in giving a detailed set of options to attack the same problems in a less centralized manner.

Below are the 7 proposals from the Cato Institute with my thoughts interspersed.

1. Let individuals control their health care dollars, and free them to choose from a wide variety of health plans and providers.

The more freedom individuals have, the better they can responsibly control their health care costs and fight for better care.

2. Move away from a health care system dominated by employer-provided health insurance. Health insurance should be personal and portable, controlled by individuals themselves rather than government or an employer. Employment-based insurance hides much of the true cost of health care to consumers, thereby encouraging over-consumption. It also limits consumer choice, since employers get final say over what type of insurance a worker will receive. It means people who don’t receive insurance through work are put at a significant and costly disadvantage. And, of course, it means that if you lose your job, you are likely to end up uninsured as well.

Absolutely right on the money. The biggest complaints echoed from the people are that they don't want to lose their insurance if they lose their jobs. Losing insurance at any point is problematic for people, but especially those that have degenerative conditions because the insurance companies have pre-existing condition exclusions.

3. Changing from employer to individual insurance requires changing the tax treatment of health insurance. The current system excludes the value of employer-provided insurance from a worker’s taxable income. However, a worker purchasing health insurance on their own must do so with after-tax dollars. This provides a significant tilt towards employer-provided insurance, which should be reversed. Workers should receive a standard deduction, a tax credit, or, better still, large Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) for the purchase of health insurance, regardless of whether they receive it through their job or purchase it on their own.

I just want to emphasize that the Federal Government through the IRS has greatly influenced the very problems that we face today. Don't expect them to see the problems that they've created and turn towards proper solutions. The Government always trends towards more centralized power, and that inherently invites corruption. When the Government picks winners and losers, most people are losers.

4. We need to increase competition among both insurers and health providers. People should be allowed to purchase health insurance across state lines. One study estimated that that adjustment alone could cover 17 million uninsured Americans without costing taxpayers a dime.

Some conservatives that I respect are concerned about this portion of the plan. They do not want to give any opportunity to the Federal Government to take over regulation of things that are currently handled by the States. As long as this step is executed with explicit prohibitions on the Federal Government to define what insurance is, and does not give them any influence over the content of the insurance, I can support this.

5. We also need to rethink medical licensing laws to encourage greater competition among providers. Nurse practitioners, physician assistants, midwives, and other non-physician practitioners should have far greater ability to treat patients. Doctors and other health professionals should be able to take their licenses from state to state. We should also be encouraging innovations in delivery such as medical clinics in retail outlets.

State to State licensing should be handled in a cooperative manner, not by the Federal Government. Once again, it is proper to distrust the Feds. I think that on a state by state basis we should relax the licensing and allow competition to prosper in our state. This is something that should be done by the State legislature. Allow more people to treat less risky ailments. Just give more freedom to people to participate in medicine that they desire, such as midwives, herbal treatments, etc.

6. Congress should give Medicare enrollees a voucher, let them choose any health plan on the market, and let them keep the savings if they choose an economical plan. Medicare could even give larger vouchers to the poor and sick to ensure they could afford coverage.

Yes, any plan to offer a transition away from Government control.

7. The expansion of “health status insurance” would protect many of those with preexisting conditions. States may also wish to experiment with high risk pools to ensure coverage for those with high cost medical conditions.

I'm not familiar with health status insurance. Generally speaking, most problems would be solved if you provided a structure to keep people insured in a fair manner. Maybe each state should create a transfer method. If you were insured with certain types of coverage, but want to change companies, the state might require that insurance companies use the application information from when you were first insured to prevent pre-existing condition problems. I'm not very sure about that.

One thing that may work is that if you are diagnosed with an illness such as diabetes, the insurance company could basically be required to designate a payout amount that they now owe you, that could be transfered to other companies if they choose to handle the coverage. It makes a little sense since one of the major reasons to have insurance is to protect against catastrophic events in your health. The removal of your employer from the equation would be another major benefit to this situation. Each individual could negotiate their own insurance contract instead of the take it or leave it options with most employer driven insurance. People would be self interested in scouring the contracts, or hiring lawyers to do it for them. Better contracts would attract more customers, and would bring profits to more types of insurance companies.

Single Payer

2009-09-08T00:11:00.003-05:00

Senator McCaskill is not being honest with us when she says that the public option won't lead to single payer. At least Barney Frank is.

Why are we allowing the media and the organized progressive movement to define this debate?

Welfare, Warfare, and Liberty

2009-09-07T16:34:00.003-05:00

Racism and Anonymity

2009-09-07T16:23:00.003-05:00

I was having a conversation with Jack, and the subject of racism kept cropping up.

At one point, Jack said:

Or the ones who complain that the News-Leader prints too many pictures of Black people.

I replied:

Oh, and let me say that the comments section of the News-Leader is a gathering of some of the most foul and undesirable people on the planet. There are people that don't fit that mold, but I don't understand why they participate. The anonymity of that message board is destructive and distortive. The majority of those people refuse to use any sort of respect for other people or even the English language. Please do not base either your perceptions of the right OR the left on anonymous forums of that sort.

People that spew forth hate, calling names and condemning entire people groups don't really deserve to be listened to... They should not be silenced by the Government, but they should not be listened to by citizens. The best thing to do to a racist is ignore their filth. There are racists in both the major parties. It's just as racist to claim that people need more assistance based upon the color of their skin as it is to claim that certain skin colors have limitations on their potential.

Generally speaking, I do not think that the comments section of the News-Leader assists in the purpose of Journalism. If the citizens of Springfield want to have a dialog about the issues of our community, they should be capable of that under their real names. Anonymity should not be squashed by the Government by any means, but I think it is damaging the debate. If I ran a forum for public discourse, I would not allow anonymous commenters.

Schneier and Bierfeldt

2009-07-08T07:38:00.003-05:00

Bruce Schneier mentioned Steve Bierfeldt's case against the TSA in today's post.

Please give it a read, and if you haven't heard of Steve's case, follow the ACLU link and listen to the audio of his interrogation.

It is time to stand up for our rights. Join your local liberty loving groups today! I strongly recommend the Campaign for Liberty.

I Actually Did Vote for the $87 Billion, Before I voted Against It

2009-05-27T19:55:00.004-05:00

Maybe President Obama could say: "I opposed the unlawful detainment before I devised a new system for it"

I tend to avoid bashing the President in general because there's plenty of people doing it, but this clip isn't from a Bush cheerleader. Rachel Maddow has been accused of being about as liberal as they come. How bad is it when liberal news casters can't find a way to support your policies?

In case you don't like watching video clips, or can't where you are:

President Obama gives a speech standing in front of the original copy of the Constitution of the United States of America, and proceeds to bash the Bush administration's policies of detainment and refusal to allow prisoners due process. All the while, he trumpets phrases such as "an abiding confidence in the rule of law", or "to ensure that they are in line with the rule of law", yet unveils a new plan to "have a thorough process of periodic review so that any prolonged detention is carefully evaluated and justified".

Holey Roof Batman! We can have our cake and EAT IT TOO! The cowboy administration of the past formed an "ad-hoc legal system" that was an abomination to the rule of law, but President Obama is going to make sure that the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches work TOGETHER to eliminate personal liberty. Change?! Not one bit.

I am sick to death of Democrats fawning over how pleasant this President is to listen to and "we finally have a literate man in the White House", and the Republicans are falling all over themselves claiming that this man is an all new downfall of our nation.

The Federal government doesn't care about you or your rights. They are collecting power as fast as they can, and they're using partisan hatred to achieve it.

Greene County Coordinator

2009-05-24T02:00:00.003-05:00

Eric Vought, the Region 7 Coordinator for Campaign for Liberty has recently enlisted me as the Greene County Coordinator. This position is responsible for all activities in the County, and I have been crunching numbers and spreadsheets trying to contact as many people as possible in a short amount of time.

I sent out several emails, and hope to make contact via phone to a select few people. I am very curious to find out if anyone out there has any advice for organizing and coordinating among political activists, especially Liberty loving ones that are probably often about as easy to lead as cats.

What days of the week and times of day seem to be the most successful at trying to contact people? What types of things offend people, and are there ways to leave a positive impression even to people that don't want to think about politics?

If you are a reader that doesn't know anything about this Campaign for Liberty thing, I suggest you go read about it.

We're having a meeting Saturday May 30th from 7PM - 9PM at the Library Center (south Campbell), and any are welcome to attend. This will be an informational meeting about what the Campaign for Liberty is trying to achieve on a local level. If you're a fan of the Constitution, limited government, and freedom in general, I think we have something that can interest you. Please consider dropping by and checking things out.

Washington D.C. is in the Crosshairs (Legislatively)

2009-05-06T21:52:00.003-05:00

Support for HR 1207 has been growing all across the country from a surprisingly diverse coalition of people. Tomorrow in the Washington Times, an open letter to the House of Representatives will be published on page A5.

HR 1207 is a bill that allows the Government Accountability Office to Audit the Federal Reserve.

Read a full introduction and the plain text of the article on the Campaign For Liberty blog.

Also, you should check out HR 833 as well.

Reader Stars

2009-04-25T09:15:00.004-05:00

From oldest to newest, here's what I caught up on today

Ron Paul is diligent to address the House of Representatives as often as he can, but is anyone listening?
Ron Paul: Living Beyond Your Means Will Force You to Live Beneath Your Means

Somewhat boring, but hey, our Second Amendment rights as individuals are extremely important.
Obama's Attorney General Pick Questioned on Gun Rights

Fat Jack got some star treatment too....
ISN'T THIS WHAT GOT US IN THIS MESS TO BEGIN WITH?

Hey, I do have another side of nerdy. I'm a programmer by day. I really want to get some Grails code going.
Grails Tips Part I – Domain Classes

I started to follow Bruce Schneier because of his work with cryptography and general security while I was helping O'Reilly become PCI compliant in their stores. Everything but his squid posts have been interesting to me since then though.
Jeffrey Rosen on the Department of Homeland Security

More Grails fun. I'm hoping there's a way to accomplish that with less code in the GSP. I'm not really fond of the idea of going back to scriptlets.
Google Calendar integration within a Grails GSP

The main thing I say about Israel is that if the United States and the United Nations got out of the way, I'm sure there'd be a resolution reached by Israel. We should end foreign aid to the entire middle east, including Israel, because we actually give more money (in total) to Israel's enemies than to Israel.
Recommended Reading 3: Dershowitz Makes The Case For Israel

Alas, it is time to fight back the jungle in my front yard. No more time for catching up.

Corruption in Government is a Symptom, not the Disease

2009-04-21T23:04:00.005-05:00

Dan Mitchell at the Cato Institute has another video installment. This time, he's discussing the strange persistence of corruption throughout all administrations, all congressional balances through the last 30 years.

Please consider breaking out of the Republican - Democrat dichotomy. We can't just cheer for "our team" any more. Wake up and demand accountability of your own team, whether that be the Democrats in power, or the desperate Republicans who will say anything to regain power.

Safety

2009-04-18T12:38:00.002-05:00

Not much more needs to be said...

Emergency Preparedness

Interesting Video on Education

2009-04-18T10:32:00.004-05:00

I haven't done much research into the creators of this video, but I agree with what the video says. I also emphasize so much more the rights and freedoms of the parents. It is the trampling of our rights that must be fought against on principle. Parents should have the rights and responsibilities in educating their children.

I wrote this up several days ago. Forgot to finish it off. I hope it's interesting.

Internal Checkpoints

2009-04-17T22:44:00.005-05:00

I am posting this video with some trepidation. I have researched this pastor, and I do not agree with his preaching style, nor with several points of his Theology. I do not think that his position as a pastor has anything to do with the contents of this video. He appears to have simply stood firm in his 4th Amendment rights and he paid the price for his stand. Once again, I am not posting this video as support for his pulpit, but I do stand in support of his rights as a Citizen of these United States. Even if he were my enemy, I would stand in support of his freedom.

Here's how it works when you have a camera and are prepared to resist their unlawful demands. (This second video is by a completely different person. I have no knowledge whether they know anything about each other)

This is not propaganda, these are citizens of the United States asserting their Constitutional Rights. It is time for all men and women of this nation to rise up and assert our rights. I do not advocate violence under any circumstance. It is our duty to resist men and women that would take away our freedom. It is time for Civil Disobedience.

These check points were not set up on major highways coming across the border. These check points harass the Citizens of the United States in their lawful conduct of their lives. It is unconstitutional to place a border patrol check point across a highway that does not intersect with the border. The dissenting justices in the US v Martinez-Fuerte case demand that check points on interior highways that do cross the border are unconstitutional, but unfortunately they were outnumbered.

Opinionated

2009-04-05T18:42:00.003-05:00

Well, I decided to weigh in on several topics over at the Springfield News Leader Forums.

First was the opinion piece entitled "No radicals among Ron Paul backers".

I didn't think it appropriate for anonymous individuals to slander a whole group of people with no refutation. Honestly, they currently still don't have anything to say in response to a well reasoned line of questions. I hope the conversation turns to more rational terms, but I somehow doubt it.

Next, I commented on the piece entitled "Aggressive believers not an issue locally", which is a weak response to a piece in the past of an atheist bemoaning the religious people in the are.

Honestly, atheists and agnostics tend to be extremely intolerant of people with beliefs other than their own. It's comical that they have that complaint about religions. One commenter brought up the freedom we need in Education. I spoke more extensively on that topic.

After that, I offered my thoughts on the purpose of government when it comes to protecting life on the piece "Take a pill, don't take unintended lives".

I think that many people confuse the Pro-Life / Pro-Abortion issue. One of the first ways they confuse it is calling one side Pro-Choice instead of Pro-Abortion. The next thing that is done to cloud the issue, is arguing from a moral viewpoint. Morality isn't something the Government can enshrine. The first amendment protects individuals Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness explicitly when it comes to Speech and Religion.

Finally, I challenged Len Eagleburger on his fear mongering in the piece, "Vote for candidates with experience"

I do not think he actually makes a case for his candidates in his piece. He only casts shadows of doubt without basis. I presented some of the campaign promises of the group I support, Donegan, Ibarra, Martz, and Ellison (DIME). We'll see if he joins me in discussion, or remains in his fear mongering state.

Food Production Insanity

2009-03-28T15:37:00.003-05:00

I'm sure at least one of the people supporting this act thinks they're helping consumers. It's just insanity to think that the Federal Government can keep track of every piece of food from creation through all the steps of production. It must stop!

Small farms and food businesses may very well save us from the modern Great Depression, yet the Federal Government seems to want to accelerate our decline.

Check out the Well-Fed Neighbor Alliance on Facebook, or at their Home Page.

MIAC + More

2009-03-26T21:10:00.006-05:00

I'm not exactly a prophet. I haven't been saying publicly enough the things that I've believed in over the last 2 years. I have believed strongly that the honest and true patriots that have supported the Bush Administration in its power grab were making a dire mistake. The question I brought up more often than not was this:

Will you still support the Government having these powers when they are in the hands of the Democrats?

This question is now more significant than ever. I am calling on all those who opposed the damage to Civil Liberties under the Bush administration continue in their opposition of the Obama administration's abuse of power. Here in Missouri, I call on those same people to continue to bring to the light of day anything that infringes upon individual rights.

We have learned that the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) has produced and distributed a report that instructs State and Local law enforcement to be on the watch out for groups that range from extremist to every day patriotic conservatives. One patriot has already been the victim of harassment by Governor Nixon's administration, and is going public with his response. It appears that if you make a request to the Governor's office under the Sunshine Law, it is possible for you and your friends to be investigated by the law enforcement agencies.

LetterToGovernorNixon

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Business & Legal miac sunshine law

(Wow, Scribd.com is pretty cool.)

Computing Goodness

2009-03-26T00:19:00.003-05:00

Well, this is my first blog post from my new computer. It's not anything particularly impressive, except when contrasting it with the old one.

CPU
Intel E5200 (2.5 GHz dual core)
vs
AMD Duron 1.3 GHz

Motherboard
Gigabyte EP45-UD3L
vs
MSI K7Turbo

Video Card
Gigabyte Nvidia Geforce 9500GT (PCI Express 2.0)
vs
PNY Nvidia Geforce 7800 (AGP)

Case
Antec Nine Hundred
vs
Unspeakable Cute thing my wife picked out

Power Supply
Antec EA650
vs
Antec True380S

Hard Drive
Western Digital SATA 750 GB
vs
Western Digital IDE 40 GB
Western Digital IDE 20 GB

RAM
2x1GB G.Skill PC-6400
vs
1.25GB various PC-133

Optical
SATA DVD Burner with LightScribe
vs
IDE 6x CD-RW
IDE 2x DVD

Misc
Rosewill 52 in 1 Card Reader
vs
1.44 MB Floppy

Speakers
Logitech X-540 5.1 Surround Sound
vs
Altec Lansing 2.1

Monitor
Acer X223W (22" Widescreen LCD)
vs
Sony 19" CRT
Viewsonic 19" CRT

Router
Linksys WRT54GL
vs
Pentium 120 with no working fans running floppy based Coyote Linux

Operating System
OpenSuSE 11.1
vs
Windows 2000 Pro

I'm extremely pleased with the new setup. I can actually sit at my desk and use the computer. Before the two 19" CRTs completely covered the surface of my desk. The LCD is bright and large, and with the 5.1 speakers, watching movies is much more enjoyable than it was.

I don't have any TV's to speak of in my house (A little 13" junker that the kids get to watch movies on), so this is the biggest display here. One of the 19" beasts got hooked up to my wife's MacBook Pro 15" to give her much more screen real estate. It helps in flash quite dramatically. The old system is going to be kept around until I'm sure I have everything set up properly here. Then I'm going to clean it up and upgrade the kids entertainment center by putting the other 19" CRT there and ripping some of the more valuable DVD's that they like to watch. That way there's no risk for those movies to get scratched or their boxes to get destroyed. All the Pixar movies come to mind first.

Earmarks and Such

2009-03-10T18:58:00.004-05:00

I've been having a rather long discussion with Paul Seale of Arena Of Ideas about earmarks.

Earmarks are an ingrained process in the current flawed budget process. By flawed budget process I mean that when Congress approves a budget, any money that they do not allocate for a specific purpose is given to the Executive Branch to spend in any way they see fit. This is the process that most needs changing, and we the Citizens of this Nation are the only ones that can do it. We must reign in the size of the budget of the Federal Government. We must shut down many of the Executive Departments such as Education, Energy, etc.

Earmarks are unconstitutional. This statement is supported by Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, and the 10th Amendment. Earmarks, by their very nature are allocations of Federal Money for either a state or congressional district SPECIFIC purpose. Even when we interpret the General Welfare Clause quite broadly, the Uniformity Clause reigns it back in by demanding that the efforts of the Federal Government must be uniformly applied across the States. Earmarks must stop, but they are a symptom of the budget process, not a core flaw in our Federal Government.

To reform the budget, we must require the budget to only include things explicitly authorized by Congress. They must allocate funds to anything they determine as necessary to make the Federal Government fulfill its Constitutional duties. One massive step in that direction would be to pass the Enumerated Powers Act.

My discussion with Paul digressed into a discussion about individual Congress people, and candidates for Congressional offices. This was a mistake and a significant distraction. I do not feel that my statements in that discussion were incorrect, just irrelevant to the topic at hand.

In addition, I have to acknowledge something that I mentioned in my latest comment. Paul was not combative or insulting in any part of this discussion. For that I am very grateful. We have all witnessed situations where disagreements over Politics devolve into shouting matches or simply name calling and lies. My conversation with Paul has in no way approached those problems. I hope to keep the conversations flowing between us.

Campaign For Liberty Regional Event

2009-02-09T20:38:00.004-06:00

Missouri is the lucky state to host the first Campaign For Liberty Regional Conference. I've placed a schnazzy new banner image on the right hand side of my page to let everyone know about it. (I don't get any money for that, but it would be worth your while to click it and check it out).

I'm excited about the possibility of making the trip to the conference. I may have a better opportunity to get Dr. Paul to sign my copy of The Revolution, or to get Judge Napolitano to sign Nation of Sheep (of course I'd have to buy a copy of that first).

I hope that I can manage to get there. It will be an exciting and educational weekend.

Contacting Washington D.C.

2009-02-07T18:50:00.005-06:00

Well, not only did my google reader suffer from lack of attention, my Downsizer Dispatches languished in my inbox as well. Today I'm playing catch up there as well. There were 13 dispatches since the last time I contacted my congresspeople, several were about the stimulus, so I sent this nonsense:

Please cut federal spending.

To stimulate the economy, reduce the size of the Federal Budget. Allow the private sector to invest those released funds in the most productive way possible. The nation doesn't want the pork. We want you to start admitting that you cannot run the United States' economy, and start repealing laws, shrinking budgets, and cutting taxes. By all means don't pass this massive mistake that some are calling a stimulus bill.

Mr. Jeremy Young

A couple more were about OSTA:

Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "One Subject at a Time Act" (OSTA). You can find the text of the legislation here: http://www.downsizedc.org/osta-legislation.shtml

If you think that there is merit in portions of the "Stimulus" bill, it should be reasonable that each particular action could be presented for its own up or down vote. This would create the transparency, honesty, and accountability that so many have lauded over the last year or so. The One Subject at a Time Act (OSTA) is a piece of legislation that is needed so very badly, especially today. It is shameful that so many of you in Washington feel that slamming dozens of unrelated laws into one bill still qualifies as doing your job honestly. The OSTA would require all portions of a bill be related to the Title and Summary of that bill. I will not vote for any politician to go to Washington D.C. without supporting OSTA.

Step up and show all of us in Missouri that you are dedicated to transparency, honesty, and accountability when serving We The People. Co-sponsor OSTA today.

Mr. Jeremy Young

The same two focused on RTBA:

Congress needs to start reading the laws it passes. Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Read the Bills Act." I know you have the power to introduce this legislation on your own, without waiting for anyone else. I urge you to do so. This is a much-needed, common sense reform. I can see no justification for not introducing it. I'm telling my friends about it, and I look forward to hearing that you've introduced it. You can find the text of the legislation here: http://www.downsizedc.org/rtba_legislation.shtml

Stop voting for bills that you haven't read. Just like the One Subject at a Time Act, I cannot support any politician that will not commit to supporting the Read The Bills Act (RTBA). We The People are demanding accountability and responsibility of our Representatives and Senators. We demand that Congress make available the final text of all bills for at least SEVEN days before they can be voted upon. Tyranny is the only result when Congress rushes legislation through without reading it or even allowing the public to see the full text. We cannot accept the politics of fear that have seen new heights from 9/11 and the Financial Crisis. Both of these scenarios have been manipulated and capitalized upon by the corrupt leaders in Washington D.C. to expand the Federal Government faster than our nation has ever witnessed.

I demand that you do your job and Read The Bills that you claim to be capable of voting for or against. Multiple hundreds of pages of legislation cannot be analyzed and processed by any human being in several hours, much less several days. Co-sponsor the RTBA today.

Mr. Jeremy Young

Finally, I wrote about NAIS as well:

Please do everything in your power to stop the Department of Agriculture from implementing or promoting the National Animal Identification System (NAIS).

NAIS will not make our food supply safer. The costs of the mandates that NAIS places upon production will drive small yet honest farmers and ranchers out of business.

In an ideal world, we should disband the Department of Agriculture altogether. Today, I am asking you to work to prevent NAIS from being enforced upon our hard working small and family farmers.

Mr. Jeremy Young

Even though I send unique messages each time, our two Senators and Representative do not feel the need to even send me a form letter reply. I'm not feeling very well represented. It's not like I voted for Blunt though. Bond isn't running, as everyone knows, and McCaskill is an Obama cheerleader, therefore quite out of my voting radar. I suppose it makes sense for them to respond to the people that they actually represent and not me. I don't guess I expect anything more of them, since they're just part of the corrupt Washington machine. I would love for just one of them to prove me wrong though.

I won't be holding my breath.

Catching up on the Reader

2009-02-07T11:25:00.010-06:00

I haven't taken the time to read the things that I find interesting over the past several weeks. Here are some examples of what I wanted to catch up on (oldest to newest):

Education is an Experiment

In Memoriam: Marshall Fritz

Judge Andrew Napolitano on the Bailout Flip-Flop

How to Become a Genius

Public School Not Good Enough for President’s Kids

Two Reflections on Education

Dan Mitchell on Tax Havens

Killing Robot Being Tested by Lockheed Martin

1930's Inflation Propaganda*

The Path Toward Independence, Autonomy and Freedom for Christian Schools in America

Guantanamo under Obama*

Essay vs. Multiple Choice Thinking

James Bamford Interview on the NSA*

The Yummy Donut of Status Quo Bias

A False Sense of Security

Hayek on Meet the Press

Who is Ron Paul?

When Voting Machine Audit Logs Don't Help

Risk Mismanagement on Wall Street

Ron Paul on "Morning Joe," 1/27/09

Obama's So-Called Stimulus

OK, well that only got me part of the way through January 27... I'm going to take a break and do other things. Happy reading / watching.

*-- Information I don't necessarily fully agree with

Ron Paul is a Lunatic

2009-01-22T22:23:00.003-06:00

Watch this, and see if you don't agree. What kind of insanity is it to claim that the United States cannot borrow money from around the world and consume everything we desire? We're the greatest nation on earth! We can all have 2.7 cars per household and Houses that are priced at 3-5 times our annual salary! We don't have to save up for that new 52 inch plasma TV either, we can just whip out the Discover card right now and enjoy!

Oh, and so is Peter Schiff. Nay saying negative Nancies the both of them!

FYI, I don't agree with my subject. I just figured I'd be sarcastic once in a while.

Controversial Dispatch

2009-01-21T20:46:00.003-06:00

The Downsizer Dispatch warned us that they were going to take on controversial topics, and today they dropped the bomb. I have found myself to agree with the Downsize DC mission in every one of their campaigns that I've read. Todays is no exception. Today, January 21st, the Dispatch tackles the War on Drugs. Anyone that has had the misfortune of listening to me rant in person has probably heard me say something to the effect of "I agree with the Libertarian Party on a great many issues, but they cannot find political success by leading with weed." I still think this to be true, I don't think politicians that are making weed smoking one of their top issues will succeed. However, at the same time, the Federal Government has no Constitutional authority to make it a crime for people to put substances into their own bodies. Furthermore, as I've stated below, the War on Drugs is not a net benefit to society. It creates more crime and drains more from our economy than a situation where these substances were legally obtainable would. Read what I wrote to our Congresspeople, and please, weigh in with your thoughts.

The civil war currently raging in Mexico, and much of the international terrorist threat, is fueled by the obscene, black-market profits made possible by drug prohibition. Please defund the Mexican drug lords and the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan by ending drug prohibition.

Alcohol is something that a growing number of people have a problem with. Some people abuse it. Many people use it and receive health benefits from it (wine for instance). There are people in our country's history that have convinced the Federal Government to step in and rid our great nation of the vice that is alcohol. Prohibition was a crime and corruption disaster in our nation. We solved those criminal problems not by perpetual escalation of arms and punishment for the use of alcohol, but by making it legal again.

The Federal Government does not have the right to define for all people what a safe use for substances such as Marijuana can be. I am personally against the use of consciousness altering substances, and I take no part in their production or consumption. However, I do believe strongly that people should have the right to make their own decisions about what substances to put into their own bodies. The ending of prohibition on more substances will act to dramatically reduce crime by reducing the cost of these substances. Fewer people will have to steal to feed their addictions, addictions which cannot be treated by jail time. Sales of these substances will be legal, so that turf wars will not have to be fought out by drug dealing gangs and other organized crime.

In particular, we would see other industrial benefits by the legalization of Hemp, which is of course associated with Marijuana. Hemp is a very easy to grow fiber that could be used to fuel innovation in many of our domestic industries.

The bottom line is that I'm pleading with you to consider this controversial subject and work to end the Federal Prohibition on Drugs. The War on Drugs has had many casualties, but none of them were the usage of drugs, only the people that died in gun fights and those that were incarcerated for potentially harming themselves.

Mr. Jeremy Young

Kudlow is Wise to have Peter Schiff as a Guest

2009-01-21T19:47:00.002-06:00

In the last week, Kudlow & Company on CNBC has had Peter Schiff on twice (1/15 and 1/20). These cable networks always manage to match up Peter Schiff with some outspoken positive thinkers (I couldn't think of something that wasn't slanderous) that want us to believe that it's all working, we just need patience, or that the Federal Reserve can eventually get us out of all this. Over and over again in the past Peter has spoken the truth that the Federal Reserve and the US Government are spending us into oblivion, and eventually we MUST deal with the liquidation of this bad debt. That liquidation will be painful no matter how it happens, there's no happy ending to 10+ trillion in Government debt, 53+ trillion in unfunded Government entitlement spending, and who knows how many trillions of bad derivatives. It's all a huge house of cards, and we can't make our financial situation healthy by stacking it all higher.

Here's part one of the conversation five days before the inauguration:

Part two:

Next we have inauguration day where the markets took a beating in response to the event. Part one:

Part two:

Downsizer Twofer

2009-01-20T19:16:00.006-06:00

I responded to two Downsizer Dispatches today. The first, from January 19th, discussed some of the many assaults on liberty coming from the unelected bureaucratic agencies created by the Federal Government. I wrote to my Congresspeople the following:

Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Write the Laws Act." You can find a summary and the full text of the bill here: http://www.downsizedc.org/wtla_legislation.shtml
Here are three recent items which I consider unacceptable. They were all created with the force of law by people that we did not elect to represent us.

#1: FDA experts have voted to ban the drugs Serevent and Foradil for asthma patients. The vote isn't binding, but the FDA generally follows such recommendations. And yet . . .

* One-third of these experts disagreed with banning these drugs for adult patients
* The leading rationale was that many patients used them incorrectly by not pairing them with a steroid. But what about patients who took the drugs responsibly and correctly?
* The total cost of these drugs plus steroids is still cheaper than that of two other asthma drugs, Advair and Symbicort, which were approved.

In other words, the panel voted to limit the clinical options of doctors and increase the costs for patients.

Even so, it could have been worse. Some FDA safety experts wanted to ban all four drugs because they may cause one death in "somewhere between 700 and 4,000 patients."

They apparently didn't listen to Dr. Richard Gower, President of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology, who said, "We live in an imperfect world. All drugs have potential benefits and side effects."

#2: The FDA has also banned the use of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) inhalers (MDIs) beginning this year. CFC products are believed to cause ozone depletion, and most of them were banned internationally by the Montreal Protocol of 1987. However,

* Medically essential products, such as CFC MDIs, have been exempt
* Medical products account for, at most, 0.5% of CFC consumption, meaning the ban is not environmentally necessary.
* Replacement inhalers (HFAs) are still patent-protected, and no generics can be made until 2010. HFA MDIs are 2-3 times the price of CFC MDIs, and require more diligence to clean and maintain. The poor, who are already more likely to suffer asthma, are paying a tax on their health for the sake of a symbolic environmental gesture.
* There is no medical justification for banning CFC MDI's.

#3: The TSA's new proposed "Large Aircraft Security Program" (LASP) could ruin the general aviation industry.

* The same one-size-fits-all regulations will apply to both passenger airliners and non-commercial, business-owned jets that are used to move cargo and personnel. For instance, the "no-fly" list and Air Marshall provisions will apply to business planes even though the pilots usually know everyone on board personally.
* The definition of "large aircraft" is arbitrary, applying both to planes as small as 12,500 pounds and to 747's ten times that weight.
* Items that are prohibited in passenger jets will also be banned to employees in these smaller business planes, even if they are needed for their work. (Just think of what that will do to business efficiency in this time of recession.)
* Airplane owners will be forced to pay, at their own expense, for audits of their safety compliance. The audits won't even be done by government inspectors, but by private consultants.
* These rules can potentially expand to all aircraft and all airports.

The above three items are just a few examples of what federal regulatory agencies do to us, every day. They pass regulations and enforce policies that reduce our choices and increase our costs. While their actions often go unreported or are buried in newspapers, they profoundly affect large segments of our population and of our economy. Just ask asthma sufferers. Or the aviation industry.

All of this is done with little or no Congressional oversight. Instead, Congress passes general laws and expects regulatory agencies to "sweat the details." People have to obey agency dictates, even though they're created willy-nilly without any elected representation.

Mr. Jeremy Young

Today's dispatch focused on the fact that the inauguration will begin the first 100 days push to "DO SOMETHING!", and that looks like spending, spending, and more spending. Stealing from our Grandparents, Parents, Siblings, Children, and Grandchildren all in the name of trying to fix what was broken by reckless spending. In that vein, I wrote the following:

Please cut federal spending.

This new stimulus is a disaster building on the horizon. The Federal Government is not all-powerful, nor all-knowing. You as Congresspeople cannot know the path that we should take to escape this economic calamity. The only way to ensure an economic recovery is to reduce the size and scope of the Federal Government so that capital can be freed up to be used by the innovative and creative forces in our country. Our Nation became great in exactly this way, liberty to pursue whatever we have a passion for.

Mr. Jeremy Young

Reader Backlog

2009-01-12T22:05:00.005-06:00

I have 161 items in my Google Reader Starred List. I don't think I'm going to get to them all. The oldest is from September 18th, 2008. I think I'll make a pass through and try to weed through the lesser items to keep the best of them.

I've posted several times in the past so I'll make this brief. Peter Schiff on the economy. Watch and listen on YouTube... Just search for it.

I also love to listen to Judge Andrew Napolitano. I have some of his material starred for reading.

I have several posts queued up by Tammy Drennan of the Alliance for the Separation of School and State. I enjoy her work, and I usually need to spend time reading and pondering it to get out of it what I feel it is worth.

I read Schneier on Security. I work in computers, and it's always good to know a little about the field of encryption and security. His perspective about the War on Terror has given me plenty to think about.

Oh, and here's an interesting tidbit about stock market gains. It seems that all the biggest gains are during the worst of times (or leading up to them).

Being a tech nerd, I try to keep up with Grails. I haven't gotten much development done outside of work though.

Oh, did I mention I liked Dan Mitchel at the Cato Institute? Here he is talking about tax havens.

Oh, and we just need more inflation to get our country on its feet...

Sorry this post has been so choppy, but I've actually been reviewing my reader as I type.. Maybe my one reader will let me know if I should cut this junk out or keep it up.

A Splinter In Their Side

2009-01-12T21:17:00.003-06:00

Since I'm not significant enough to my United States Congresspeople (Representative Roy Blunt, Senator Kit Bond, and Senator Claire McCaskill), I can only consider myself a splinter, not a thorn. Even though I'm small, I'm working to make sure they hear my point of view. Today's Dispatch - "What Cokie Said" - involved the House Minority Leader speaking truth. He spoke of one of the aims of the Read The Bills Act, namely, that the "stimulus" bill should be made available in its final form online for seven days before it is voted upon.

I hope this is significant, and not just partisan power brokering, but time will tell. After reading the entire dispatch, I was inspired to write my Congresspeople. Three times. I wrote to them about:

The Read The Bills Act (RTBA) -

Congress needs to start reading the laws it passes. Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Read the Bills Act." I know you have the power to introduce this legislation on your own, without waiting for anyone else. I urge you to do so. This is a much-needed, common sense reform. I can see no justification for not introducing it. I'm telling my friends about it, and I look forward to hearing that you've introduced it. You can find the text of the legislation here: http://www.downsizedc.org/rtba_legislation.shtml

"I would ask the Democratic leadership to guarantee that such a bill will not be brought to the floor of the House unless there have been public hearings in the appropriate committees, the entire text has been available online for the American people to review for at least one week, and it includes no special-interest earmarks." -- House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

You should be familiar with the concept of making the text of bills available online for at least seven days. I've been writing to you repeatedly asking you to pass the Read The Bills Act (RTBA). The RTBA includes that provision and more which would lay the groundwork for restoring accountability and trust in the Congress by the people of the United States. Since the level of trust has been the lowest since the ratings have been recorded (9% approval rating) lately, I'd think that you wanted to help stand for something honest and genuine to regain some of it.

Let's try to hold Obama to his promises of change and consider this statement:
"I think the notion of a stimulus package online for a week before its voted on is just delightful. I mean, these bills are normally written in the dead of night with all kinds of things getting in them. ... Any big bill, I mean nobody usually knows what's in it at all when they're voting on it. That would be real change." -- Cokie Roberts, "This Week" roundtable on ABC, January 4, 2009 (-8:35 mark)

The RTBA would be REAL change, and change that shouldn't be partisan.

Mr. Jeremy Young

Then I got a little wordy and talked to them about the Enumerated Powers Act -

Please bring John Shadegg's 'Enumerated Powers Act' (HR 1359) to a vote as soon as possible, and please do all you can to support the passage of this bill.

While Congress, the President, the President Elect, and the Federal Reserve are running around demanding that things get done fast, let's not forget that there are only a few things that Congress can do according to the restrictions placed upon it by the Constitution of the United States of America.

I urge you to consider whether you have the Constitutional authority to enact the stimulus package that is being debated. Consider the Enumerated Powers Act, and pass this important reminder of the restrictions the Constitution placed upon you to protect We The People.

Mr. Jeremy Young

Finally, I just got down right annoying and sent them another note about the One Subject at a Time Act -

Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "One Subject at a Time Act" (OSTA). You can find the text of the legislation here: http://www.downsizedc.org/osta-legislation.shtml

OSTA would be a marvelous precursor to this "Stimulus" package that everyone is debating. It would require the bill to only contain language that pertains to One Subject. Grouped with the Read The Bills Act, and the Enumerated Powers Act, it would make the "Stimulus" easy for most Americans to understand. It would be much smaller, and would be much easier to debate and bring to a vote.

Enough is enough already. Stop voting for bills that are loaded down with rider after rider that are completely unrelated to the title of the bill. Quit spending OUR MONEY to buy votes from your opposition. If a bill isn't good enough to be passed on its own, then don't pass it at all.

Mr. Jeremy Young

At least I know their staff can't claim to not know who I am or what I'm going on about. I doubt that any of the three take time to read even the subjects of their emails.

Downsizer Dispatch - January 8, 2009

2009-01-08T23:21:00.003-06:00

In the past I've copied and pasted the whole dispatch, but I think instead I'll just link to the blog version of the dispatch.

Today's Dispatch: How to Stimulate the Economy

I agree wholeheartedly with today's assessment, and I'm actually becoming a fan of Dan over at the Cato Institute. He doesn't have an ideal speaking voice, but his ideas and the information he presents are excellent.

I responded with this letter to my DC overlords:

Please cut federal spending.

You can't spend the economy out of a recession. If you find a scientific study that supports the idea that Government spending stimulates the economy, please share it with all of us. We need to know that there's a reason other than increasing your own power and influence behind larger Federal Budgets.

Followed by another one:

Please cut federal taxes.

Nobel Prize winning Economist Milton Friedman discovered that consumer spending is only increased by confidence in the long term situation, not short term confidence. Spending by citizens stays at pace with what we expect our future income to be.

Having said that, it is immoral to try to squeeze more spending out of over-spent debtor citizens. Your policies of discouraging savings and encouraging reckless spending on throw away goods and services will not make this country stronger. It may inflate the numbers again in another bubble, but it will not save us.

You must lower spending, cut taxes, and balance the budget. Deficit spending is an inflation tax that is more sinister than any income tax. You are not collecting the money, but you are spending it anyway. This is theft from our future generations, and must stop.

Once again:

Balanced Budget!
Reduced Spending!
Cut Taxes!
SMALLER GOVERNMENT.

I doubt that my words are eloquent or effective, but at least they're hearing from me. I don't think there's any doubt what I'm asking for though.

City Council / Mayor Candidates!

2009-01-08T22:56:00.004-06:00

Even though I am the Treasurer of the Metro Republicans, I think I'm fairly unbiased in saying that tonight's candidate forum went extremely well.

I want to thank Jason for his live blogging coverage of the event, and for providing full audio for the whole event.

Specifically, I appreciate greatly the fact that Jason is providing information whole and un-editted so that citizens can have the necessary facts to be self governing (gee, that sounds like Journalism). Sure he gives his own take on things in the live blogging portion, but providing full audio is just an excellent service to the community, and I commend him on it.

I also want to thank all of the candidates that attended, I hope that the event will give many people the opportunity to know more about who these candidates really are, and to see how they interact with each other and a crowd.

I hate Viruses

2009-01-03T12:34:00.004-06:00

One of the things I have been working on during my vacation is a general overhaul of the computers that my in-laws use. There is one general use computer that I found to be so filled with viruses that I had quite a difficult time getting it cleaned up. I'll spare you the gory details and the mind numbing torture that it was during the process. In the end I used the following tools to make the beast clean again:

Kaspersky Labs Rescue Disk ISO

Avast AntiVirus

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware

Lavasoft's AdAware Free

Google...

I used all of the tools to help me remove all of the nasty viruses, but the key that helped me finish the job was the Malwarebytes'. I was almost ready to call it done because I had gotten all of the viruses that Avast would detect (even on a boot time scan). However, I still couldn't start up the Automatic Updates service in Windows XP. The service would immediately become disabled after enabling it. I learned that this is typical behavior of the Vundo family of viruses, and I was very surprised that Avast could not clean it. After malwarebytes took care of that virus, I was able to get the Automatic Updates to go through cleanly and am currently typing this post from that computer which is running smoothly and cleanly.

Most of what it takes to conquer these types of problems is patience and persistence. Know that if something looks weird, it probably is weird, and you should keep looking so that viruses aren't lurking out in the shadows waiting to collect and install more viruses, or share critical data with spammers and thieves.

Good luck if you run across these problems. You'll need it.

Spurts of Nonsense

2009-01-03T11:43:00.004-06:00

Well, over the last month things have been happening, but I haven't considered most of them blog worthy. Then again, maybe I set my standards too high. I think I'll try and lower my standards and just put more splatter on here and worry less about it being intellectual. :)

At work, the Information Systems Department has taken one for the team. We're in the process of moving away from the Secondary "campus" that O'Reilly Corporate maintains, to a new location that used to be a large Tennis facility. My team is quite lucky in that we got a large space and the ability and freedom to arrange it however we liked. The rest of the IS Department wasn't so lucky. I and the members of my team feel a little sorry for the rest of the department and are concerned that this may put downward pressure on some people's desire to keep this job. The good news is that O'Reilly is still a growing company, and the Automotive Aftermarket industry performs fairly steadily through recession, due to a general increase in the repair of vehicles instead of replacement. Above all else, this makes it a good company to be a part of in these economic times.

In politics, I'm slowly recovering from the disappointment of November, and am renewing my involvement in organizations such as the Springfield Metro Republicans, the Campaign For Liberty, the Young Conservatives, the Republican Liberty Caucus, and Downsize DC.

This week I've been visiting my wife's family in Texas. I'll probably talk more about that in another post.

Naomi Wolf on Lew Rockwell's Podcast

2008-11-24T19:59:00.003-06:00

I listened to this podcast, and came to respect Naomi Wolf a great deal throughout it. Lew Rockwell asks some of the questions in this interview, but Naomi Wolf asks some questions back, and the interchange is quite educational.

I may have to pick up her new book Give Me Liberty and give it a look.

The most interesting thing about Naomi Wolf, and the reason I am surprised to be suggesting that people listen to her is because she comes from the left side of the political spectrum. There are stances which she takes that I disagree with, but I don't think those stances are part of the substance of this book. What this book, and Naomi Wolf's work in general, symbolizes is a coming together of liberty minded individuals, whether they started on the left, the right, or nowhere, to fight for our freedoms.

If you don't think we need to fight for our freedoms, check out her presentation below:

When people first told me about this video, I was skeptical. I mean Naomi Wolf has written for the Huffington Post, she's known to be a liberal. I thought she was just a Bush basher. This is not a left vs right issue. It's a freedom issue, it's a liberty issue. This is something that every single person in America needs to evaluate and ponder deeply. If you are coming at this post as a person firmly on the right, you voted for McCain, you voted for Bush twice, and you would vote for Bush again, I still think there are things in this video you should look seriously at. Don't look at it as leftist propoganda, because you will miss an opportunity to truly be critical of our way of life and to discover just how many freedoms we've given up, especially since 9/11.

If you can't stomach the message from a liberal, check out Judge Andrew Napolitano, and any of his recent books. The Judge appears on Fox News in his Judicial Review segments, co-hosts a radio program called Brian and the Judge, and generally speaks strongly in support of Liberty.

Wake up. We MUST fight for our freedoms before it is too late. Everyone will lose if we let this nation become a police state.

Hard Questions about Education

2008-11-24T19:34:00.003-06:00

Tammy Drennan of the Education Conversation blog has a new piece out today. It is in reaction to an article in the Wall Street Journal that asks CEOs what they think the way to improve education in America should be.

She reacts strongly to the aims of the highlighted answers and wonders why no one seems to be asking the right questions about education these days.

1. How on earth did the human race manage to slog through thousands upon thousands of years of progress and innovation (think art, architecture, science, inventions, technology, philosophy, literature, music) all the way to the mid-1800s when Horace Mann and his kindred spirits finally got the various states of the USA to institute compulsory state schooling and saved humanity and the future?

I think most Americans are woefully under equipped to understand history. The school where I send my daughters goes through all of history 3 times. Grades 1-4, 5-8, and 9-12. One of the biggest events of the year is History Day, a performance where all students are graded based upon their participation in creative reenactments of the different parts of history. I find myself personally under-equipped for my life in the area of history. History is an underlying fabric that needs to be present to weave all of our knowledge into. We need to know how our current political, educational, and religious institutions developed, and what changes were in reaction to what events.

2. How on earth did America survive for over 200 years – and become the envy of the world – before the mid-1800s when Horace Mann and his kindred spirits – you know the drill… see No. 1.

What are the stated benefits of compulsory education these days? Is it to provide daycare to everyone? Is it to lower crime rates? Is it to improve unemployment? Is it to provide business with training for free? I'm not even sure what they're pushing as the "good reasons" for government schooling these days.

3. What is the purpose of education? Is it to shape all children into beings fit to serve the interests of the state and industry (this is what the early proponents of compulsory state schooling thought)? Is it to create faithful citizens who will defend the state?

Real education is to equip the students with the desire and ability to learn and think on their own. American schools do not accomplish this when left to their own devices. Most American students come out of High School extremely co-dependent and incapable of learning without being spoon fed information.

4. What makes you feel you have the ability or the right to influence or dictate policies that will force children to be instructed to the transcription of government officials and those with the power and the money to shape the thinking of those officials?

Excellent question. They don't. She goes on to state in her article that it all comes down to the parents. My wife and I have stepped up and made many sacrifices to provide our children with an exemplary education. One in which they will be required to think for themselves and work on the many forms of communication to become truly excellent citizens and stewards of God's Universe.

I encourage anyone out there that is a Christian and a parent to strongly consider taking your children out of the Government Schools, or better yet, never enrolling them in the first place. I even encourage any other parents that don't hold strongly to Christian beliefs to find an educational option where the school and the educators will come along side you and your family's beliefs and re-enforce the things you want to teach your children instead of undermining your fundamental belief system. There is no education without an underlying foundation of assumptions, and I think it is every parent's right to have teachers that lay the foundation along side you instead of counter to you.

Automotive Bailout?! Hell No!

2008-11-22T11:37:00.004-06:00

I have responded to this issue on other blogs (Larry's and Fat Jack's), but I figured I had enough to say that it could fit on my very own blog post.

Yes, the auto industry has been bailed out before. No we should not bail them out again.

They are big boys and girls. They can figure out on their own that the UAW is destroying the company.

If the companies are not efficient enough to be competitive in the American Automotive Marketplace, then they don't deserve to continue to make cars and trucks. Why would you want the Government to steal 25 billion dollars of our money and give it to the companies who can't make superior automobiles, nor at cheaper prices, and stay afloat? Those factories will be bought out by someone else wanting to make cars, whether it be new startup companies, or the existing successful companies, and people will get re-hired to work in them. Unless Michigan or the Federal Government step in and protect the Unions and say that noone can hire auto workers unless they are UAW and then the auto industry will simply leave Michigan altogether.

The laws in Michigan are already extremely burdensome for business. Manufacturing has been fleeing that state for many years, and the only way to encourage it to come back is to repeal laws and make it competitive again. This is the problem with Marxism, admitted by their own people. Marxism (control of all industry by the state) cannot work unless it comes into power globally and basically simultaneously. Any place that tries to control its people too heavilly will squish out all the entrepreneurs and make them flee to lands of greater freedom.

To Dr. Cline about the price floor on gasoline. What will a gas station sell their gas for if it cannot be less that 3.50? Why voluntarily give taxes to the government if I can sell the gas for 3.50 and keep all the profit? Oh, then we will need the federal government to come in and determine what the REAL price of gas is, so that it can collect its taxes. So we'll have a federal agency able to turn a spigot up or down to destroy any company that it desires. How is that a good thing? And please don't claim that there are people that can handle that power without corruption. Someone will appoint an Exxon* loyalist to that position and the other companies will somehow buckle and go bankrupt. (* insert any energy company's name)

So, no. Don't give a dime to the people that can't run a car company. If they don't have handouts, they'll figure out how to renegotiate contracts or sell off parts of the company. No government involvement!

It is the collusion between government and corporations which is the greatest danger to a free people.

Update: I figured it would be worthwhile to answer Larry's questions directly:

1) Will this bailout fix the Big Three or will they just continue to use to the money to keep the status quo? I believe they need to bring in people with innovating ideas on how to make better cars and alternative fuel sources. If they continue to do business as usual, I think they will go out of business within 10 years even with the bailout.

No, the core issues will not be addressed by propping up their current failures. The way to bring in fresh ideas is to allow them to struggle and get to the brink of failure. Executives will be fired, the companies might be split up and sold off, etc.

2) Will the Big Three pay back this money? If the taxpayers are expected to save them, then they should pay back every cent with interest.

No, a failing company cannot take an investment and generate a return on it.

3) Why are companies like Nissan, Toyota, and Honda successful in making automobiles in the U.S. while the Big Three need a bailout? What should the Big Three learn from these companies?

The other Automakers don't have the UAW dictating wages. The UAW pushed too hard and milked this cow to death. If the UAW releases its grip on wages and allows retired people (who retired at only 50) to have to come back and work for their benefits, and allows new hires to be brought in at competitive wages, then the company may survive. It's all about cutting costs.

Update 2:

Moreover I'm not pro-executive here either. Many costs can be cut at the higher levels of the company I'm sure. The company as a whole must be cost effective and efficient. If it is not it will wither and die. It will be defeated by a company that is willing to be more efficient.

Brilliance on the Economy

2008-11-20T22:44:00.003-06:00

Lew Rockwell interviewed Peter Schiff.

More predictions from Peter Schiff... Are we listening?

Watch for Bernanke and Paulson to claim that "We're not doing enough".

Watch for someone to claim "The Rich are taking our money and running".

Just listen to it.

Evidence of Predictions

2008-11-13T20:33:00.003-06:00

Scary and Amazing at the same time:

Every single person other than Peter Schiff in these clips was SO SO wrong, that's what is scary. Peter is amazing. He stands firm in his principles and predicts the reality that we now are comparing to the Great Depression. Why didn't people listen?

Update:

Even more Peter Schiff goodness:

The Wrecking Crew - Introduction

2008-10-19T15:32:00.005-05:00

(this post is incomplete, but if I do not get it out there, I may never be encouraged to continue)

Introduction (Follow this Dime):

Ok, first two pages... He weaves some nonsense about everyone thinking that really big corruption in government being a thing of the past. I disagree. Where there is power, there is corruption. See Lord Acton. He begins laying the groundwork for his premise "Republicans claim there are just a few bad apples... I say it's just the way Conservatism inherently works"

The author states

Corruption is uniquely reprehensible in a democracy because it violates the system's first principle, which we all learned back in the sunshiny days of elementary school: that the government exists to serve the public, not particular companies or individuals or even elected officials.

There are a number of things I disagree with from this paragraph:

The United States of America is NOT a democracy, it is a representative republic. The people do not vote directly on any policies of the United States

He's relying upon a readership that was brain washed by the government schools into thinking that the government is good for us.

He's also trying to claim that this assertion is basic knowledge.

The Federal Government of the United States of America is not a service organization. We can read The Constitution to find out why the government exists.

Corruption is bad, but it's also expected. It has nothing to do with the philosophy of the people the author calls conservatives. It has everything to do with the nature of power and mankind.

But Wait! The Introduction isn't over... I'm just lazy and haven't read / commented on all of it.

The Wrecking Crew by Thomas Frank

2008-10-18T23:31:00.004-05:00

I'm not sure how I'm going to structure this information. I've started reading the book in the title of this post. One of my Father's friends bought it for him, and he suggested I read it. My Father's friend is a lawyer and a liberal. He probably giggles and cheers while reading this book, whereas I groan and shake my fist while trying to muscle through the paragraphs. This is inherently because I disagree with most liberals that government can solve much of anything. I suggest that more people pay more attention to Lord Acton's Dictum about power and corruption.

I've decided to keep this overview post and link to further posts over each chapter, starting with the introduction.

The Wrecking Crew
- by Thomas Frank

Introduction: Follow This Dime

Part I - Insurgents

1. Golconda on the Potomac
2. Their Enemy, the State
3. The World as War and Conspiracy
4. Marketers of Discontent
5. From Paranoia to Privatopia, by Way of Pretoria

Part II - Saboteurs

6. "The Best Public Servant Is the Worst One"
7. Putting the Train in Reverse
8. City of Bought Men
9. The Bantustan That Roared
10. Win-Win Corruption

Conclusion: Reaching for the Pillars

Greene County Circuit Clerk coverage by LifeOfJason.com

2008-10-15T09:34:00.007-05:00

First off, let me state that Jason is doing an amazing job with his coverage of local politics. I am better off reading his coverage than I am any other source I have found. The way he handles things is extremely fair and the format has advantages over all others because he conveys all the information he has been given without typical short attention span problems on TV, or limited column space in newspapers. It is people like Jason that are proving that news can be better found on-line than in the "Mainstream Media".

In particular, I am responding to Jason's posts about Steve Helms and Jim Lee, who are running for the Greene County Circuit Clerk position. Jason's questions were fair and informative. They also did fairly well to deal with recent issues and offer both candidates the opportunity to weigh in as much or as little as they desired.

I was going to respond in the comments section of Steve Helms post, but I became so long winded that I wanted to bring it to my blog and simply link to it from their comments section.

I am disgusted with both the Democrats and Republicans, but that is generally from the state-wide level up. Both parties are experts at gaming the system and using technicalities to their advantage. They have built up a system of rules and regulations that virtually eliminate anyone that isn't an expert at politics from winning. Notice I'm talking about the party establishment in general.

Bright Yellow Gun (Joseph Hughes) wrote:

Life of Jason, 8 October 2008:

“I spoke with Steve Helms this morning and he did not ask Mr. Trower to investigate this. However, Mr. Helms said that he was aware of the suspicion and that it’s possible he mentioned it in passing to Mr. Trower. Mr. Helms said that he had mentioned this to several people in the Republican party so this could have been the “tip” referred to by Mr. Trower.”

Italics mine. It’s obvious that Mr. Helms discussed his little “suspicion” with certain of his fellow Republicans in the hope that one of them might do his dirty work for him and get his opponent (per Mr. Tim Trower’s own words) “thrown off the ballot.” What other reason would Mr. Helms possibly have?

Greene County doesn’t need someone of Mr. Steve Helms’s “character” in the office of County Clerk, especially when we have a much better choice.

I have known Steve Helms from working with him as a board member of the Metro Republicans for the last year or so. He is not interested in unjustly eliminating his opponents, or using tricks to win. He was concerned that his opponent was raising money and not reporting that money. He expressed that concern to others around him as he stated, and one person ran with it. I believe Steve that he did not directly ask anyone to file a complaint. In politics, fund raising is a significant measure of support, though not the only one, but one that is required to be publicly available.

Generally speaking, there is a great deal of mistrust between the two parties. Often that is well placed mistrust because there have been people that have come before that have done disgusting things in the name of victory. I personally do not think that Steve Helms is such a man. He wants a clean campaign, and is an upstanding citizen.

Len Eagleburger said:

Mr. Helms, by his stated attitude, still disagrees with the highest Court in our Country and separation of “church and State”. I guess he has never heard of the concept of “tyranny of the majority over the minority”, or “for the greater good”. Is this the person we need to take care of our County’s business. He seems to believe that because he is a religious person, he is above the law.

Len Eagleburger is (or was) a central Committee Person for the Democrat party, though that is not mentioned in the post. What we see here are standard partisan attacks. Further, it appears from the link I provided that Mr. Eagleburger has been interested in this position for several years, but was not interested / available to run himself. In the last election cycle, he blamed the Republicans for eliminating the corrupt process of straight ticket voting, a process akin to reforms that I propose changing further.

As Steve said in his answers, he is not bringing party or politics into the operations of the office he is responsible for. The poster, which was a patriotic poster which heralded the values of the people that fought for our independence and freedom through our history, was not one which espoused a particular religion, or required anyone viewing it to do anything. In short, it was not tyranny, neither by the majority, nor by a minority. Steve may have bought into the "other party is bad" problem at times, but I do not see any evidence that it is affecting the operation of the Circuit Clerk's office.

I will be voting for Steve Helms because I think he is a man with integrity, as well as a person with the correct abilities needed to improve the operations at the Circuit Clerk's office. I will not be voting for Steve Helms the Republican, but simply Steve Helms the man. I am extremely frustrated with the Republican party, and am looking elsewhere for better representation, especially at the Federal level. At the local level, there are still honest people involved, even in the Democrat party. I do not believe that Jim Lee is anything but an honest man, but I know Steve Helms better.

Premature Pontification

2008-10-08T19:49:00.004-05:00

I have a few ideas for election reform. Some of these ideas will require state laws to be changed, others may only require county regulation changes.

Stop using Taxpayer money on partisan primaries.
1. I can't believe that the public thinks its OK to pay for the ballots that the parties use to settle internal party business
2. I doubt that most people consider this to be a subsidy for the major parties

Stop publishing the party membership of the candidates on the ballots
1. It's EXCELLENT that we no longer have straight party voting here.
2. We should take it a step further and require voters to know even the least amount about a candidate before voting for them.
3. If not this, then fusion ballots may be an alternative (a candidate can be the nominee for multiple parties and have them all listed on the ballot)

Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) or some other method that allows more expressive balloting
1. IRV allows you to vote in order for the top three candidates you like.
2. My top three in the president's race might be
  1. Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party)
  2. Bob Barr (Libertarian Party)
  3. John McCain (Republican Party)
3. This way, I could vote for the people that I identify with most. There would no longer be any negative consequences of voting your conscience.

With these kinds of reforms, we could level the playing field and allow more competition in the arena of politics.

Change? Only if it means PRINCIPLES.

2008-10-08T16:55:00.003-05:00

This is a response to a post on Chris Brewer's blog and the ensuing comments.

The primary reason Obama is popular is because he's touching on an amorphous word, "Change". Change means whatever the LISTENER wants change to mean. He's capitalizing on uncritical thought. He's also a very pleasant looking and charismatic man. He just makes people feel better when they're watching him. This is no basis for selecting a President.

Most of the national candidates from the two parties are just mealy mouthed wastes of breath. It doesn't matter what they say, not even to your own face in person, because they're saying something different tomorrow, or whenever someone else is listening.

I'm screaming out for someone to actually have PRINCIPLES and to stand for what this country was founded upon. The Constitution is a document which does everything it can to restrict the Federal Government, but we the people have let the politicians in Washington walk all over it. Some of them think it's good for toilet paper.

I'm not saying it's impossible for you to agree with Obama's stances on issues. I am saying that it's very difficult to pin down what those stances even are. If you think that you agree with Obama more than any of the other 5 candidates, then he is definitely who deserves your vote. If you expect, like I do, your elected representatives to have integrity and principles, then you have to express that same level of integrity and principle in your voting methods.

Communication to Excess

2008-10-01T17:29:00.003-05:00

Well, this may be excessive, but I wrote my Representative, Roy Blunt, and my Senators, Kit Bond and Claire McCaskill 6 times this afternoon. The bailout is a horrible and destructive grab for power that is completely unprecedented. I cannot believe that ANYONE is OK with giving Mr. Paulson the ability to write checks to an unlimited number of entities to purchase an unlimited number of "bad assets".

Why would the citizens of the United States want to purchase ANY bad assets?

Why is anyone OK with the fact that the bill has provisions to prevent oversight of any type over these purchases?

Who in their right mind thinks its OK to write a law that prevents everyone from bringing legal action against Mr. Paulson for any misdeeds that he may yet perform?

Does anyone that supports this bill have any clue that it allows Mr. Paulson to purchase assets held by anyone in the WORLD?

This legislation is ABSURD, DANGEROUS, and HORRIBLE. I cannot believe that anyone has been duped into thinking this legislation is good. Oh wait! Most people don't have any idea what is detailed in this plan, and that's because they don't have anywhere they can go to actually READ it!

Since the Senate is forced to cheat the system by appending the Bailout to a bill already passed by the house without the bailout I wrote this:

Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "One Subject at a Time Act" (OSTA). You can find the text of the legislation here: http://www.downsizedc.org/osta-legislation.shtml I'm writing to you today about the OSTA because the Senate is circumventing the checks and balances of the Constitution by inserting the bailout into another bill that has already been passed by the House WITHOUT the bailout present. This kind of shell game is unacceptable. I don't want the bailout under any terms, especially not by circumventing Constitutional checks and balances.

Since no-one in the public has access to this horribly important piece of legislation, I wrote this:

Congress needs to start reading the laws it passes. Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Read the Bills Act." I know you have the power to introduce this legislation on your own, without waiting for anyone else. I urge you to do so. This is a much-needed, common sense reform. I can see no justification for not introducing it. I'm telling my friends about it, and I look forward to hearing that you've introduced it. You can find the text of the legislation here: http://www.downsizedc.org/rtba_legislation.shtml I'm writing about the RTBA today because the bailout that failed in the House was voted upon against these theoretical rules. In particular I don't want anyone voting on anything that hasn't been made publicly available for 7 days. I don't want Congress voting on bills that they haven't read. I don't want your claims of emergency to justify attempts to circumvent these principles. Pass the RTBA tonight instead of the horrible bailout.

Since at least one member of Congress claimed they couldn't adjust the accounting rules that are contributing to this problem, I wrote this:

Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Write the Laws Act." You can find a summary and the full text of the bill here: http://www.downsizedc.org/wtla_legislation.shtml I'd rather you pass WTLA than the horrible bailout bill. I don't want you delegating more authority to unelected bureaucrats with the bailout bill, and I want you to revoke the power of the SEC, and the Department of the Treasury. Laws and regulations should only be written by Congress, and they should only pass excellently crafted laws. This means that you should be passing far far fewer and shorter laws. Don't pass the bailout. The American Public has spoken clearly about this.

Since there is absolutely no authority in the Constitution to grant the kinds of power that they are trying to grant with the bailout, I wrote this:

Please bring John Shadegg's 'Enumerated Powers Act' (HR 1359) to a vote as soon as possible, and please do all you can to support the passage of this bill. I'd rather you pass the Enumerated Powers Act instead of the Bailout. You can't cite the portion of the Constitution granting you the authority for the bailout bill because it doesn't exist. Congress does not have the authority to steal 700 Billion Dollars from the Citizens of the United States and spend it covering the collective failures of the global economic industry. If, after you've made this bill available online for 7 days, revoked any portion of the bill that allows bureaucrats the power as stated in the original bill, and cited clearly in the public version of this bill where the authority lies to do this, then I would be willing to review this bill and consider whether it was acceptable and beneficial to the United States of America.

Since Congress is so willing to spend our money, but still get their own fat paychecks, I wrote this:

Please co-sponsor H.R. 500, the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2007. Deficit spending is unacceptable. If you think the bankers need money, maybe you should pass the plate and get volunteer offerings of good will from the American people. The bailout is horribly backwards. HR 500 would be a great bit of good will towards the citizens of this country. Increase the budget of the Federal Government by forfeiting your pay. If things are so bad, and you're really doing all you can, I'm sure you'd be willing to put your money where your mouth is and contribute your salaries to the problem. Pass the Fiscal Responsibility Act instead of the disgusting immoral bailout.

Finally, as a capstone to show my complete disgust, I wrote this:

Please cut federal spending.

If you haven't gotten the point yet, I don't want the bailout passed. You are only showing your contempt for the people of this great nation by ignoring our outcry. You do so at your own peril. We will be organized against you in your next bid for re-election if you vote for this bailout.

Who'da Thunk?

2008-09-29T17:54:00.003-05:00

As I was standing out in my driveway this afternoon, a lady stops along the street and calls out from her window asking what "my business" is. She was I think referring to my brother-in-law's van that's clearly a commercial van. I looked confused, so she clarified a little, pointing to the political sign in my yard (which is currently an Eric Burlison sign) and asked whether I used to have a Ron Paul sign in my yard. She wanted to support whatever small business I was running or working for because I was a Ron Paul supporter.

I described what my brother-in-law's company does, which isn't a retail business, it supports only other businesses, and she looked disappointed. I told her that I work for O'Reilly Auto Parts, and she asked whether I would benefit directly from that. Since I don't work in the store, I had to answer honestly no that I didn't, but I told her I did get a bonus based on it.

Now obviously I didn't start supporting Ron Paul based upon what I would receive in return, but it's encouraging to see other people so supportive of an idea that they would change their business habits based upon it.

If somehow you're reading this and don't know about Ron Paul's idea, well you can read up on it at the Campaign For Liberty.

Busy, Busy, Busy

2008-09-29T17:00:00.003-05:00

I've been frustrated lately by all of the hoopla about rewarding the companies that have systematically made bad decisions and either purchased or initiated bad loans to people for homes. Now that the Housing Bubble (which was generally just a transfer of the Telecomm bubble of the late 90's) is bursting, people are running around screaming "DO SOMETHING". Today alone I've written my congresspeople 3 times.

Firstly, I chastised our Representative (copying our Senators of course) for his vote on the failed bailout.

Please cut federal spending.

Representative Blunt's vote for the bailout today is unacceptable. Voting for the authorization of the deliberate transfer of power to unelected central bankers is unacceptable. If you had been paying attention, we've been writing, calling, and faxing you our views on the matter. It has been clear that Representative Blunt no longer deserves the title, and I encourage Mr. Blunt and our Missouri Senators to vote against any future versions of this monstrosity. Next election (2008, 2010, 2012), we may have to be anti-incumbent if you don't do anything to actually restore this nation.

Next, I wanted to provide them some feedback about what a real solution to our money problems would be.

Please co-sponsor HR 2756, "Honest Money Act," and HR 4683, the "Free Competition in Currency Act." News today tells us that the Federal Reserve doesn't care about laws, or regulation, or anyone other than itself. Today the Federal Reserve is increasing the rate at which it is destroying our currency. By injecting BILLIONS of new money into virtual circulation, the Federal Reserve is stealing wealth from every single person in the world that currently has an account with US Dollars deposited. The creation of new money is inflation. It's not just tending towards inflation, it is intentional and deliberate inflation. By inflating in this manner, only the people that receive this new money (loans) are able to capitalize on the increase in wealth. Give us REAL money! Give us the FREEDOM that was intended in the Constitution. We deserve to have a currency that retains its value! End The Federal Reserve.

Finally, I wanted to make it really quite clear how I feel about the Federal Reserve and the corporations that have been working these deals with our country's supposed leaders.

Please reduce regulation.

We don't need more regulation on our books to prosecute those that commit fraud against the public. I want more aggressive legal action against companies (including the Federal Reserve) that publish documents that mislead the public as to the health of the United States Economy, or of their company's health. I am tired of hearing the Federal Reserve in effect telling us to "TRUST THEM" when it comes to our economy. Every number that the Federal Reserve uses to do its job needs to be made public. Every meeting that the Federal Reserve holds must be made public. If they are to continue to be involved in the control and manipulation of the money supply, everything they do must be before the eyes of the public. If they will not make this information public, then the Federal Reserve must have it's exclusive privilege (controlling the U.S. Dollar) revoked! The people are not willing to sit and be told to stay quiet any longer. We want a government run by the People, not the money masters.

I'm not certain I could say much more about it at this point, but I am constantly surprised at how problematic the United States' relationship with the Federal Reserve is, and how little the general public knows about that relationship.

Too Much and Not Enough

2008-09-15T22:02:00.005-05:00

I have too many things that I'm passionate about, and not enough drive to do anything about them. I'm too perfectionist to let most thoughts appear in written form for anyone to peruse, and not enough to say.

I'm struggling these days with work, church, community, politics, service, technology, and more. I don't know what direction I want to go, and I don't even know how to get myself to do anything more than get up and go to work five days a week.

In the interest of actually having a post on this useless blog, I'll stop before I re-evaluate everything and save it as a draft.

Read The Bills Act!

2008-06-17T12:29:00.003-05:00

Today I get to focus completely on the RTBA. This acronym actually reminds me of RTFM (Read The Fine Manual), which presents itself in technical circles, especially open source. RTBA is the Read The Bills Act, which, if passed, would require all legislation to be read aloud in Congress with a quorum present. We do not elect, nor pay for people to go to Washington and shirk their legislative responsibilities. If there is a person in Washington who believes that this act would place too much burden upon them, then I feel that should be a pleading case for us to remove them from office post-haste. Congress is already in session on such a light schedule (compared to the 40 hour work weeks that are a minimum for the majority of Americans), that actually requiring them to read, understand, and debate the legislation that they vote to pass doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

This matter is significant enough to me that I have joined the Read The Bills Act Coalition (as you can see at the bottom of my sidebar). I am also fortunate enough to have been mentioned in todays Dispatch. Welcome to anyone that decided to follow that link. I encourage everyone to put pressure on their congresspeople to hold themselves accountable and buck the common wisdom that politicians aren't interested in honesty, accountability, and transparency.

Here's the Dispatch for June 17th (Intellectual Splatter got linked!) --

SUBJECT: Is the "Read the Bills Act" Practical?

As we noted in our June 5 Dispatch, the "Climate Security Act" was actually read in the Senate chamber -- 500+ pages in ten hours. Also, on one April day, the Florida House of Representatives had 398 pages pages of legislation read aloud.

Both times, the minority party insisted the bills be read as a form of protest. But there's something revealing here about the practicality of the "Read the Bills Act" (RTBA).

Imagine if RTBA was in force, and stipulate the following . . .
It normally takes one hour to read a forty-page bill.
Each member of Congress has a copy of the bill, a high-lighter, a pen, and a notebook to jot down their questions and objections.
And let's also grant four hours for debate and votes on amendments for every one hour of reading. That's five hours to finalize a forty-page bill.

This would leave plenty of time for meetings, final votes on bills from the previous week, and other business. That evening, Congressional clerks could post the bill on the Internet. Interested citizens could read it and contact their representatives with feedback. Seven days later, Congress could vote.

Assuming Congress meets for 200 days a year, the above scenario would allow them to pass 8,000 pages of legislation quite easily.

Keep in mind, we at Downsize DC don't want Congress to pass this much legislation. But, contrary to what some in Congress claim, they could still pass a lot of laws under the "Read the Bills Act." Indeed, the changes to the process would be all for the better . . .

There would be increased pressure on Congressional committees to write short, understandable bills. For instance, large Cabinet Departments wouldn't need to be funded in one bill; separate agencies could be funded in separate bills
Many bills are uncontroversial and wouldn't need much debate; even so, reading them aloud would allow Congress to spot errors
Peer pressure would limit the addition of amendments on unrelated subjects
Members of Congress (and the public) would have the chance to expose and remove wasteful and unwanted earmarks
And the same could be done with other hidden, dangerous, and harmful provisions
Urgent, high-priority bills would come first

Please tell your Representative and Senators to introduce the Read the Bills Act.

In your personal comments, tell them that the RTBA gives Congress plenty of time to pass needed legislation -- perhaps as much as 8,000 pages a year, plus the bills would be simpler, cleaner, and better than they are now. You send your message here.

In addition, we invite you to help spread the word about RTBA by joining the "Read the Bills Act Coalition." You help spread the word about the RTBA, and we'll spread the word about you, linking to your site on our blog. Details are here.

This week, we welcome four new members to the Coalition.

Intellectual Splatter
Debt Sucks
Call of God
Spotlight Radio

Over the past two weeks the House passed 35 bills totaling 503 pages, and the Senate passed 7 bills amounting to 1863 pages. A list of their bills, and their length, can be found in the blog version of this Dispatch.

Here's the text of my note to Senator Bond, Senator McCaskill, and Representative Blunt --

Congress needs to start reading the laws it passes. Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Read the Bills Act." I know you have the power to introduce this legislation on your own, without waiting for anyone else. I urge you to do so. This is a much-needed, common sense reform. I can see no justification for not introducing it. I'm telling my friends about it, and I look forward to hearing that you've introduced it. You can find the text of the legislation here: http://www.downsizedc.org/rtba_legislation.shtml

My personal comment to you:

As a member of the Read the Bills Act Coalition, I urge you to consider this legislation on its merits of accountability, transparency, and honesty. As a member of Congress, you should be more than willing to bring these principles to bear upon the legislation that you participate in passing. You should not be willing to vote for bills that you have not read, nor should you be willing to vote for bills that have not been available to be read by the public. This is a direct non-partisan call for you to stand for clean policies that encourage citizen participation. Please support the Read The Bills Act today.

Habeas Corpus -- Not just for Liberal Whiners

2008-06-17T11:28:00.003-05:00

I have trouble understanding how anyone could be opposed to habeas corpus for any human being. If the case for detaining someone is so weak that a judge would refuse the imprisonment, then that person should not be allowed to be held. If the evidence against a person is of such a secret and sensitive nature that the media cannot have access to it, then so be it. A court appearance can still be made with only the judge, the prosecution, the defense, and the detainee. Everyone should have this right. Holding people without evidence, or without charges is unacceptable by a free nation, no matter where the detainees are held, or from what nation they come.

Freedom has a price, and I'm willing to stand in the face of terrorists and tell them that they may kill me or my family, but they cannot take my freedom from me. The United States Government is not protecting us from terrorism by eroding freedom, they are perpetuating the terrorists' goals. I cannot condone the destruction of freedom in return for a slave's life.

This should not be confused with sympathy for terrorists, or agreement with anyone's cause. Abuse of liberty by the government must be opposed by all who expect to be free tomorrow. I'm not fighting for any individual person here, because there are certainly people that deserve to have their freedom taken away. I'm standing up and demanding that the court have the opportunity to review the evidence. We cannot stand for perpetual war, and we must demand that our nation holds liberty and justice as the high standard when dealing with all peoples.

Freedom is a high and lofty standard, and it comes with hard decisions. Granting the Government the ability to take away someone else's rights without due process inherently erodes your own rights. You may be the minority that is unjustly accused of the same crime tomorrow.

Here's the Downsizer Dispatch for June 16th --

Subject: Good news sparks more fear mongering

On Thursday, June 12, the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling restoring the writ of habeas corpus. Those being held as suspected terrorists should now be able to challenge their detentions in a court of law, as our Constitution requires.

This is good news! The Judicial Branch has moved to block the overreaching power of the Executive Branch. This means America's system of "checks and balances" still has some life! But more must be done to restore and preserve the rule of law. We must . . .
Continue to use our right to "petition Congress for a redress of grievances"
Compel the Legislative Branch to deny the Executive Branch the power to spy on Americans without a warrant
Ensure that both the Executive and Judicial branches execute the laws of the land
This means . . .
The lawsuits against the telecom companies that aided the President's warrantless spying must have their day in court -- no immunity for the telecoms!

Congress must block the President's relentless drive for "legalized" warrantless spying powers -- the existing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) must NOT be replaced.
To accomplish these goals we must overcome the fear-mongering propaganda of those who favor unchecked presidential power.
On last Friday's Bill O'Reilly show Laura Ingraham claimed that the habeas decision would result in the release of vast numbers of terrorists

The Bush administration is claiming that a failure to replace FISA will cause existing surveillance on terrorists to end when old warrants lapse in August.
Both of these claims are dishonest. Here's the truth . . .
The right of habeas corpus is the right to challenge a detention in court, not a guarantee that anyone accused of terrorist actions will actually be released -- no one will be released if the government has solid legal grounds for detaining them.

Back in February, before the Protect America Act expired, the Executive Branch had the power to renew surveillance warrants for 12 months. If any surveillance actually lapses in August (and we have no way of knowing if that's true), it will be because the Bush administration failed to renew their so-called warrants for 12 months -- perhaps so that they could make this a campaign issue.
We must continue to resist this kind of fear mongering, and give Congress the courage to do the same. We must maintain our drumbeat of opposition to replacing FISA with so-called compromise legislation that grants telecom immunity and legalizes warrantless spying. Send Congress a message opposing immunity and any replacement for FISA.

Use your personal comments to tell Congress that you know the Bush administration is using fraudulent scare tactics to win immunity for the telecom companies and to "legalize" warrantless spying.

Because of this dispatch I sent the following to my congresspeople --

I'm suspicious about the need for a restored or revised Protect America Act, and completely opposed to Telecom Immunity.

My personal comment to you:

The compromise legislation proposed by Senator Bond is unacceptable. I've written on this matter fairly frequently because we cannot allow the Executive Branch to bypass Constitutional Checks and Balances on any issue, no matter which party holds the office. Please oppose any version of the Protect America Act or any legislation that grants the President warrantless surveillance.

The Revolution Continues

2008-06-13T00:35:00.003-05:00

Today (Thursday, June 12) the Ron Paul Presidential campaign ended. That, is the bad news. The good news is that the Revolution Continues as the Campaign For Liberty! This new phase in the Revolution frees up the organization to work with the volunteers to elect City, County, State, and U.S. Congressional candidates that support our platform.

Someone that is by all counts a Ron Paul Republican is Jeremy Cady. The Campaign for Liberty will be capable of identifying, spreading the word, and hopefully helping fill the campaign coffers for these bona fide Revolutionaries.

One of the things that is in the works is a sort of scorecard system so that we can educate the voters about the various candidates that will be up for votes in the primaries that are coming up on August 5th. There is plenty more to talk about, but I'm headed to bed.

There is much to be excited about! The Revolution Continues, even if Ron Paul isn't going to be our President.

Iraqi Citizens - Do they get a say?

2008-06-11T12:19:00.003-05:00

This week has been all about foreign policy in the Downsizer world. This is absolutely the most contentious subject that I have any difference with my fellow conservatives and Republicans. I happen to agree with Ron Paul on this issue though. There are two overarching concerns that drive me on Foreign Policy.

Economic Stability - We cannot continue to spend our grandchildren's money propping up the economies around the world. We are going to have to maintain a very strong military without the foreign bases and the stationing of troops all over the world. With our Air Force and Navy (which should remain VERY strong) we can mobilize our forces anywhere on the globe in rapid enough fashion to have overwhelming force deployed faster than any nation would risk. We don't need troops living in foreign countries. This isn't just about military spending, it's also about Foreign Aid.

Executive Power - The balance of power issue has been building since the Civil War, and especially since the second World War. I mentioned this in a comment on my previous post, but it's a very significant issue. The President should not have the power to enter our nation into military conflict with any nation ever. This power is reserved to Congress. The Constitution was structured to prevent King-like powers from being used by the President. The Judicial branch is trying to legislate from the bench and using who knows what definition of the Constitution to rule. The Legislative branch is too busy spending money we don't have to buy votes and win elections. We cannot allow the office of the President to continue to wield such great power.

With that, we come to today's Dispatch. I agree particularly with the article from Reason Magazine that we should be supportive of the effort to take a vote by the Iraqi people on whether occupation forces should remain. Any clear message from that type of vote would assist our country in knowing what we should do. Here's what the Downsizer Dispatch has to say -

Subject: Support an Iraqi referendum on the occupation

Headlines across America screamed the news this week. The U.S. government is seeking 58 permanent military bases in Iraq.

Is this what you want? It certainly seems to NOT be what the Iraqi people want, given the violent protests it has provoked.

President Bush thinks U.S. military personnel should stay in Iraq for decades, the way they have in Korea. John McCain says he's willing for U.S. troops to stay in Iraq for one hundred years, assuming, he says, that there's no violence. But if Iraq becomes peaceful, why would U.S. forces even be needed?

Shouldn't we finally, at long last, ask the Iraqi people what they want?

ABC News polled Iraqis in September of 2007. It found that 79% oppose the occupation, including 80% of Shiites, and 95% of Sunnis.

Another poll conducted in February, 2008, shows that 77% of Iraqis remain opposed to the U.S. occupation, including 77% of Shiites and 95% percent of Sunnis.

We are continually told that we must stay in Iraq to prevent a sectarian blood bath. But the Iraqi people don't seem to share this fear, and perhaps with good reason. A study of violent attacks in Iraq indicates that the sectarian violence has largely subsided, and that most of the remaining violence is directed at the occupation, and at government officials who are perceived to be collaborating with US. forces.

This would seem to indicate that violence in Iraq could dwindle away to nothing, if only we would leave.

Of course, no one can guarantee what will happen if U.S. forces depart. But the same is true for the opposite position. It's possible the violence will continue precisely because the occupation continues.

It's time to cut through the pointless, circular debate. It's time to ask the Iraqi people what they want, NOT what U.S. politicians want, and NOT even what the Iraqi government wants. Instead, we should request that the Iraqi people be allowed to decide for themselves. Didn't President Bush say he wanted democracy for Iraq?

If you agree with this idea, please send Congress a message. Tell Congress to pass a resolution asking the Iraqi government to hold a public referendum on whether or not the U.S. occupation should continue. You can send that message here.

I contacted my congresspeople as follows -

Please pass a resolution asking the Iraqi government to hold a public
referendum on whether or not the U.S. occupation should continue.
My personal comment to you:

The concept of a vote by the Iraqi people to determine whether we stay
or go has great merit. Please support or propose a resolution that
asks the Iraqi government to hold such a vote.

Iran -- Is Diplomacy an Option?

2008-06-09T21:08:00.003-05:00

I happen to agree with Ron Paul on the issue of Foreign Policy. The biggest issue we face is the decay of the Balance of Power in Washington DC. The Executive Branch is wielding new powers against foreign nations, foreign citizens, and unfortunately, United States Citizens as well. Since the nation frequently swings left and right, I feel that we should determine the limits of the Executive branch as if the most heinous President imaginable was sitting in the office. On that footing, I object to the Executive Branch being capable of enlarging or initiating any military conflict anywhere in the world ever. For me at least, this isn't particularly about how the current President has handled Foreign Policy, it's about the precedents it sets. I don't think that if we secured our borders and took a more benevolent, free trading stance, that Iran could do much other than blow smoke.

Subject: Tell Congress You Want Direct Dialogue -- Not War with Iran

DownsizeDC.org is one of about 35 organizations participating in a "National Call-In Day on Iran" that will take place tomorrow, Tuesday, June 10th.

This is a major national campaign, with press events and photo ops. Details about tomorrow's events are available at the coalition website NewIranPolicy.org.

The same people who called for attacking Iraq, based on faulty intelligence, are now raising the drumbeat for military action against Iran. Despite the November 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate concluding that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program, the Bush administration is, once again, making a case for war.

As with Iraq they are claiming that Iran is a huge threat to American security.

We believe bombing Iran would bring disastrous consequences.

Such an attack will increase the chance of terrorist blow-back on U.S. territory
The entire Middle East could descend into further violence putting the well-being of innumerable civilians at risk
U.S. standing in the world would plummet once again, and oil prices would likely soar
A U.S. attack would strengthen hardliners in Iran, and turn the Iranian people, who are now pro-American, against us

Current U.S. foreign policy is not working. Threats of military attacks and regime change, and a refusal to talk with Iran until they stop enriching uranium -- something Iran is allowed to do for peaceful purposes under international agreements -- is a prescription for heightened tensions, and worse. Such a policy could lead to full-scale war, and as we know, "War is the health of the State" -- the ultimate Big Government program.

We want you to take two actions - one today; one tomorrow . . .

First, go to DownsizeDC.org and send a message asking for Congressional action to prevent an un-authorized attack on Iran by President Bush.

Then, join thousands of individuals from our coalition partners and call your Congressional Representatives on Tuesday, June 10th. Our coalition has created a telephone number specifically for this purpose -- 1-800-788-9372

Tomorrow, when you make your phone call, tell members of Congress that . . .

We need direct, comprehensive talks, without preconditions, between the U.S. and Iran
The U.S. and Iran share common interests in a stable Iraq and Afghanistan
The U.S. pursued successful negotiations with North Korea and Libya, and it's time to talk with Iran too

Tell your Congressional leaders that you want dialogue -- not war!

So, please send a message today using our online system.

Then, please participate in the "National Call-In Day for Dialogue with Iran" tomorrow, Tuesday, June 10th. This campaign will be sponsored by a coalition group of which DownsizeDC.org is a member: The Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran.

This is a huge coalition, so you won't be alone when sending your message and making your phone call. Numbers Matter. God tends to be on the side of the bigger battalions. This is your chance to be on the side of a bigger battalion. And we thank you for being a part of our growing Downsize DC army.

So here's what I told my Congresspeople --

Please pass legislation denying President Bush the authority to attack Iran.

My personal comment to you:

Use the proper Constitutional Checks and Balances to prevent the Executive Branch from leading this country further into war. If there is a nation that is a clear and present danger to this nation and to the world, then declare war Constitutionally so that we may take the full force of our nation into the conflict.

It is not acceptable to allow the Executive branch to take this nation's armed forces into conflict under any other context, including United Nations resolutions.

Sunday Dispatch (June 8, 2008)

2008-06-08T10:13:00.003-05:00

Not sure if I'll post these regularly, but today's broadcast sounds like a fairly good one.

On today's Downsize DC Conference Call (2-hour radio show), which starts at 3:06 PM Eastern (2:06 PM Central, 1:06 PM Mountain, and 12:06 PM Pacific) I'll be joined by a candidate for Congress who pledges to sponsor (or co-sponsor, as the case may require) . . .

* The Read the Bills Act
* The One Subject at a Time Act
* The Write the Laws Act
* The Enumerated Powers Act

His name is B.J. Lawson and he's running in the 4th district in North Carolina. Yeah, a candidate. So what's special about B.J.?

* He's an MD and built a very successful, medical software business.
* He won the Republican primary with 71% of the vote.
* His campaign has already raised and received more than $120,000.
* He's a DC Downsizer.

Those are the first steps to victory. And though I'm anti-partisan and I believe a movement to really Downsize DC is still too young to think about electoral campaigns -- we are, after all, in the early stages of building an army -- I found B.J.'s campaign story and progress compelling. I believe you're going to want to hear it.

Also, I'll be joined by Carah Ong, Iran Policy Analyst at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, who is coordinating a broad coalition of notable individuals and organizations that includes show sponsor DownsizeDC.org. Carah will tell us about the National Call-In Day for Diplomacy with Iran.

Of course, I'll also have an update from my other show sponsor, Gun Owners of America.

Here's how you can participate . . .

Toll-free 1-800-259-9231, or type this address to email me, "CALL at DOWNSIZEDC dot ORG" (we don't provide a link to this address to keep spam harvesters from easily acquiring it; emails to other addresses, including just hitting Reply to this Dispatch, won't make it to me by show time).

You can HEAR THE SHOW LIVE ONLINE at gcnlive.com/Listen_Live.html

Or you can TUNE IN to one of these stations . . .

* WCER 900-AM Canton, Ohio
* WBCR 1470-AM Maryville, Tennessee
* KLID 1340-AM, Poplar Bluff, Missouri
* KGEZ 600-AM, Great Falls, Montana

And if for some reason you can't catch the live show, my network, Genesis Communications provides a podcast of the show, available a couple of hours after it goes off air, up through the next broadcast.

If you have technical issues with the podcast, please contact the webmaster at GCNLive.com, directly.

From the perspective of this Ron Paul Republican, B.J. Lawson needs our support to win in North Carolina's 4th district.

Bill Titles and Reality

2008-06-08T10:02:00.003-05:00

Hopefully my one reader already knew this, but Congress constantly plays the misleading game of having pleasantly titled bills that make people want them passed, but hiding deep within excessive pages of bureaucracy the snakes that bite us as citizens. Not only do they misleadingly name horrible bills to get them to pass (The PATRIOT Act, Protect America Act, Climate Security Act), they also cram in completely unrelated legislation that clearly couldn't pass on its own merits. REAL ID didn't pass under its own bill, and in fact it was defeated when proposed on its own merits. It only passed when slammed into a must pass bill.

The Downsizer Dispatch for June 6th has more -

Subject: Unrelated bills rolled into one

H.R. 2642 was introduced in June, 2007 to finance military construction and Veterans Affairs. Since then, Congress has added 230 pages of amendments to what was once a 50-page bill. Among the additions is the "Iraq Supplemental" to fund the the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

H.R. 2642 is bad, but it could have been worse . . .

Two weeks ago, the Senate Appropriations Committee voted to add a 100-page amendment granting amnesty to over a million illegal immigrant farm workers. However, Democrat Sen. Robert Menendez raised a point of order against the amendment, and Majority Leader Harry Reid agreed to remove it.

Perhaps they remembered the backlash when Congress added the REAL ID Act to the Iraq Supplemental in 2005. Perhaps they're feeling pressure to pass the One Subject At A Time Act (OSTA) and know that adding an unpopular amnesty bill into the Iraq Supplemental would only intensify calls to pass OSTA.

In any case, H.R. 2642 still contains numerous unrelated provisions:

"Emergency" funds for the FBI, BAFTE, DEA, Bureau of Prisons, and many other federal agencies
Additional funds for Katrina recovery and other disaster relief
A waiver of certain sanctions against North Korea
A study on the effect of the minimum wage on the Northern Mariana Islands
A law against unemployment insurance fraud
A requirement for states to implement an "asset verification program" for individuals seeking medical assistance
And dozens of other provisions unrelated to Defense or Veterans Affairs.

Congress normally passes several short, one-subject bills every week, so why couldn't they have voted on the above provisions as separate bills too? Possible answers include . . .

1. The provisions couldn't pass if voted on separately
2. Congress didn't want to give them due consideration

Sadly, all these unrelated provisions add up. According to Washington Watch, H.R. 2642 is going to cost the average American family almost $1,700.

Tell Congress they were right to pull amnesty out of the Iraq Supplemental. But tell them they shouldn't throw so many unrelated laws and spending programs into one bill. Tell them this undermines America's faith in Congress and is costly to taxpayers. Tell them to strip H.R. 2642 down to one subject, or vote against it. And tell them to pass Downsize DC's One Subject At A Time Act. You can do so here.

I wouldn't blog about it if I hadn't harassed my Congresspeople, and here's what I said -

Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "One Subject at a Time Act" (OSTA). You can find the text of the legislation here:
http://www.downsizedc.org/osta-legislation.shtml

My personal comment to you:

Having no law at all is better than having bad laws. We encourage you to have the fortitude to let legislation fail, or to improve through the process and not tack unrelated bills on as amendments to things that will pass.

Please stand strong and fight against this duplicitous practice of sneaking bills that cannot pass on their own into other more popular bills.

We want legislation from legislators that don't try to pull a fast one on the American Public. That's exactly what is happening routinely in the halls of Congress. HR 2642 is currently being loaded up. I'll be watching for you to propose the striking of amendments from that bill and calling the bill to a vote with only one purpose left on the bill.

Powerful Entertainment

2008-06-06T22:57:00.003-05:00

OK, my subject is sarcasm. I couldn't leave that one hanging even for a moment. The Senate rang out with the voice of boredom. The legislation that they are trying to foist upon we the people was read aloud while very few Senators bothered to grace the chamber with their presence.

If you are an unfortunate reader of my blog, you've been seeing that I'm taking the approach of sharing with you the Downsizer Dispatch. This organization (Downsize DC) has been doing the hard work of watching Congress like a hawk and has been coordinating its members to send messages to their Representative and Senators on given days. I invite you to become a member of the Downsize DC army, and barrage our congress people with messages about the reduction of the size of the Federal Government. One of the things that is excellent about Downsize DC is that they don't presume to speak for you on anything. They provide you the facility to take action, but they do not take the action for you. They merely suggest what you should talk about on a given day, and you have the choice to participate in each day's campaign or not.

One of the things that Springfield area Ron Paul Revolution members are talking about is bringing the Downsize DC concept to Missouri. It has been proposed that we create a Downsize Jeff City organization that seeks to coordinate in the same way by watching our Jefferson City representatives like hawks and encouraging them to reduce the size of our State government. I'll definitely keep my one reader posted on how this progresses (yes, that means I'm talking to myself here, please prove me wrong if you feel that my information is worth anything).

For now, here's the text of the June 5th Downsizer Dispatch -

Subject: The Senate read the bill!

Something incredible happened last night. The U.S. Senate actually read the so-called "Climate Security Act" and a substitute amendment -- out loud, word for word.

500+ pages. 10 hours to read!

This legislation, which would impose a huge tax and regulatory system on all carbon emissions, is about 300 pages long. Congress constantly passes bills this large, or larger, without reading them. If it took 10 hours to read this one bill, just imagine what would happen if they had to read ALL their bills.

The pace of legislation, and the growth of government, would slow down. It might even be possible for a citizen group (like DownsizeDC.org), or a reporter, or a talk-show host, or even just an ordinary citizen, to keep up with all the things Congress is doing.

For the very few people who oppose DownsizeDC.org's "Read the Bills Act" (in our experience, that's not even one out of every ten people who hear about it) this would be a bad thing. These people think we need more government, even if it must come at the cost of passing legislation that the members of Congress haven't read, let alone understood.

We think this is irresponsible. Remember, Congress may not have to read a bill, or really understand it. But YOU will have to bear the burden of obeying every word of it!

In the case of the "cap and trade" bill, U.S. companies will have to hire thousands of lawyers to do their own 100-hour (or more) readings of this legislation (because unlike Congress, they will actually have to understand how to obey it). Compliance will cost billions of dollars. That cost will be passed on to you, the consumer, as will the tax that companies must pay to buy their carbon emission permits.

But it doesn't end there.

The way the government works today legislation is just the starting point for the creation of rules. Once something like the "cap and trade" bill is passed the federal bureaucracy then goes to work creating specific regulations to execute the legislation.

This means billions more will be spent on more lawyers to read, understand, and comply with these regulations. And you will pay for all of this too. Unelected bureaucrats shouldn't be able to burden the public with more laws. That's why we also need to pass the Write the Laws Act.

Some people say it's unreasonable to expect Congress to read all of its legislation, but . . .

Could YOU get away with violating a law because you felt it was unreasonable for the government to expect you to read, understand, and comply with all their huge legislation and bureaucratic rules?

Of course not. If you must bear the burden (in time and higher prices and worry that you're not running afoul of some crazy rule) THEN SO SHOULD THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS!

One Congressman has called the "Read the Bills Act" a gimmick. But the real gimmick was what happened in the Senate last night. The "cap and trade" bill was read out loud NOT so that the members of Congress could know what they were being asked to pass, but because the Republicans wanted to slow things down to make a point about how judicial nominations are being handled by the Democrats.

ALMOST NO SENATORS WERE IN THE ROOM TO HEAR THE BILL BEING READ!

For us, the "Read the Bills Act" is NOT a gimmick. It's an essential requirement for responsible representative government. For us, the very most important feature of the "Read the Bills Act" is NOT . . .

* The 7-day waiting period before a vote can be held. Yes, it's a great idea. It gives citizen-action groups time to organize opposition at the moment of highest public interest in a bill. But the "cap and trade" bill will be just as bad if they pass it 7 days from now.
* The requirement that members of Congress sign an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, that they have read a bill. That is also important, but secondary.

Both of these features are valuable and helpful. They make the bill complete. But they are not the true key to bringing about responsible government. Instead, the most important aspect of the "Read the Bills Act" is forcing the members of each chamber of Congress to SIT through and LISTEN to a full reading of each bill before a vote can be held.

This, and only this, can bring about real change in how our government operates, because this is the ONLY feature of the "Read the Bills Act" that compels the politicians to pay a PERSONAL PRICE for the burdens they seek to impose on the American people. This feature, and only this feature, will . . .

* Make sure that most members of Congress have an informed idea of what it is they are passing.
* Make Congress prioritize, instead of simply enacting every wild idea that strikes their collective fancy (and that's what they do now because they don't have to pause and read the bill out loud, word for word, on the floor, before voting).
* Make bills shorter, and more understandable, so that Congress can endure the fatigue of hearing them read.

The "Read the Bills Act," as we have constructed it, would bring about real, meaningful reform. It would go a long way toward protecting us from 300-page monstrosities like the so-called "Climate Security Act." But . . .

Until the "Read the Bills Act" passes the only protection we have is YOU, and the work you do through DownsizeDC.org. DC Downsizers have bombarded Congress with more than 5,000 messages opposing the "Climate Security Act." But more is needed. If you haven't yet sent a message on this issue, please do so now. You can do so here.

Or, if you have sent a message, please send another one in support of the "Read the Bills Act." Use your personal comments to take note of the 10-hour reading that took place last night. Tell them you oppose the "Climate Security Act," and support the "Read the Bills Act" as a way to protect the American people against irresponsible legislation. You can send that message here.

Since I had already spoken to the "Climate Security Act", I wrote my Congresspeople about the "Read The Bills Act" (please click the banner on the far right if you want to read more about it) -

Congress needs to start reading the laws it passes. Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Read the Bills Act." I know you have the power to introduce this legislation on your own, without waiting for anyone else. I urge you to do so. This is a much-needed, common sense reform. I can see no justification for not introducing it. I'm telling my friends about it, and I look forward to hearing that you've introduced it. You can find the text of the legislation here:
http://www.downsizedc.org/rtba_legislation.shtml

My personal comment to you:

It is good news in my opinion that the Senate read aloud the Climate Security Act. Were you present? Did you have a staff member present? The Read the Bills Act would require accountability on your part so that you cannot be asked to take votes on legislation that you haven't read and understood. We need you to take your responsibilities seriously, and consider the burdens you are placing upon the American public. Every law has to be read and understood so that we can comply with it. Obscure and voluminous legislation and bureaucracy does nothing but ensure that there are no law abiding citizens left because we cannot live without falling prey to the massive encroachment of these laws.

Please work to reduce the size and scope of the Federal Government. Start by bringing forward or cosponsoring the Read The Bills Act.

Thank you for your service to our country and our state.

Thank you to my one reader for reading this important information. I hope that I have provided it in a way that is helpful in making us all more capable of being self governing.

Regulation Excess

2008-06-06T22:46:00.004-05:00

Why does the government continue to believe that it has the right to control the ins and outs of our economy or our lives? During the previous Downsizer Dispatch we learned that the Senate was marching towards our destruction by trying to pass a Cap and Trade bill that would allow IRS like control over every business and every individual in the entire nation. How can we possibly allow this type of an invasion to occur?

Here's the text from the June 4th Downsizer Dispatch -

Subject: Regulating your gas stove

Notice the last words in our quote of the day: "gas stove." This gives you a good idea of how far-reaching and intrusive the so-called "Climate Security Act" could be. In the short run it may only regulate fossil fuels at their source. In the long-run the regulations are likely to extend to every aspect of life, from the large to the small.

Notice also the name of the bill, and its use of the word "security." This name reflects the politician's standard operating procedure. First they incite fear, and then they promise security. It would have been more honest to call it something straightforward, like the "Anti-Global Warming Act."

More honest still would be something like the "Total Control Act." If the government must sell, and you must buy, an emission permit for your gas stove, or your lawn mower, and perhaps your fireplace too, then we are very close to a state of total government control over the economy.

Is this hyperbole? Possibly, but probably not. The bill is 344 pages long, and you can bet that almost no one in the Senate has actually read it. Later, unelected bureaucrats will craft many hundreds or thousands of additional pages to establish specific regulations.

Still more trees will be killed to add even more pages in the years to come, as exceptions and new restrictions are added to completely unrelated bills, and passed without deliberation. The pages of regulations will grow to keep pace with this.

At every step of the way lobbyists will be meeting with Congressional staffs, seeking special provisions that will benefit them, and/or hurt their competitors. Many politicians will work to provide these favors with an eye toward future positions on boards of directors, or million dollar lobbying contracts with this or that carbon emitting industry. This could explain part of why so many politicians favor the complexity of "cap and trade" over the relative simplicity of a carbon tax (combined with tax cuts in other areas).

Are we saying that a carbon tax wouldn't be subject to the buying and selling of exceptions? No, it would be. But the complexity of "cap and trade" makes it far, far more suitable to the purpose of selling favors -- in large part because it would be much harder to detect favoritism in a complex, bureaucratic "cap and trade" scheme, then it would be in a simpler carbon tax plan.

Sadly, this issue isn't going to go away any time soon. All of the major party presidential candidates favor "cap and trade," so we're going to have to fight this for a long time. We took a big step in that direction yesterday, sending nearly 4,000 messages to Congress.

If you haven't yet sent a message against "cap and trade," you can do so here.

If you did send a message yesterday, we still need to keep reminding Congress that we do NOT want a bill permitting warrantless spying, and granting immunity to the telecoms that participated in previous warrantless spying. It would be very helpful if you would send a message on that subject today. You can do so here.

Since I had already sent a message about the Cap and Trade horror, I took action on the warrantless spying initiative -

I'm suspicious about the need for a restored or revised Protect America Act, and completely opposed to Telecom Immunity.

My personal comment to you:

The citizens of Missouri do not want warrant-less spying on anyone, especially not if citizens are coincidentally spied upon. FISA is already strong enough. Keep the Executive Branch going to the secret courts and getting the rubber stamp.

Furthermore, it is completely unacceptable that the companies that allowed the Executive Branch to bully them in to breaking the law should be given immunity. The Executive Branch is NOT ABOVE THE LAW. Consider that in the light of some other administration, not the current one. Would you have proposed laws in the Clinton administration that offered this kind of protection?

If you put party above the Constitutional Separation of Powers, we the Citizens will put the Constitution above you.

Well, I hope that doesn't sound like a threat to the persons that serve us in the U.S. Congress. I would never dream of being associated with anything that really threatened anyone with physical or emotional harm. However, I am strongly against supporting the continuation in office of our representatives that do not take their oath to the Constitution seriously. We have plenty of people ready to step up and take a faithful approach to the Constitutional service that our Congress is called to perform. If the ones in office won't live up to it, we will find and vote for someone that will.

Cap and Trade

2008-06-05T23:10:00.004-05:00

Pollution alone is an issue that is difficult to solve, and it's only a subset of the whole Environment issue. As Americans, we don't like to be told how to live, what cars to drive, what temperature to keep our house, etc. However, Congress is trying to tell us anyway...

The Downsizer Dispatch for June 3rd -

Subject: Urgent danger from "cap and trade" bill in the Senate

The U.S. Senate is debating a bill to impose a "cap and trade" system on the U.S. economy. This bill, S. 3036, the "Climate Security Act" would . . .
Place a cap on the level of CO2 emissions
Sell permits to businesses that would allow them to emit CO2 in amounts equal to the cap
Allow businesses to trade and/or sell these permits to each other -- allegedly creating a market to encourage innovations that would reduce CO2 emissions
Use the proceeds from the sale of these permits to create a vast new research bureaucracy designed to help corporations cope with the cap
As a practical matter, S. 3036 will . . .
Raise your electricity and gasoline bills
Provide politicians with new tools to control the economy, hand out favors, and punish enemies
Be as ineffective in doing "research" as the Energy Department has been
Probably (if the example of Europe is a reliable guide) have little impact on the over-all level of CO2 emissions
Even if you accept that human CO2 emissions are causing problematic global warming, a government run "cap and trade" system is not the way to deal with this problem. There is a better way. Here are some points to consider . . .
Fossil fuels create massive amounts of air pollution, quite apart from CO2.
This pollution causes massive health problems, none of which are reflected in the price of fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels enjoy a "free ride" in terms of pollution costs that make it hard for alternative sources of energy to compete.
Air pollution is a form of trespass, and a case can certainly be made that dealing with such trespasses is a legitimate function of government.
The federal government could do this by . . .
Taxing fossil fuels
Cutting other taxes so that your overall financial burden would remain unchanged
Your energy costs would rise, but your taxes would fall by an equal amount. Doing this would . . .
Eliminate the justification for a "cap and trade" boondoggle
Make fossil fuels reflect more of their true costs
Provide an incentive for everyone to reduce their use of fossil fuels
Make other sources of energy cost competitive
Limit the financial impact on you and the economy
Help reduce air pollution, including CO2 emissions
We know that most Americans are concerned about pollution and the environment, and for those who feel this way, a carbon tax combined with tax cuts in other areas would be a better approach. But THIS CAMPAIGN is about stopping the "cap and trade" boondoggle, because if you really care about the environment, this proposal has only symbolic value.

Please send Congress a message opposing the so-called "Climate Security Act," and all other "cap and trade" schemes.

So I told Roy Blunt, Kit Bond, and Claire McCaskill what I thought about it -

I oppose S. 2191, the "Climate Security Act."

My personal comment to you:

There are far better ways for the Government to encourage reduction in pollution. I don't want the Government to manage pollution.

I do not oppose on grounds that I feel that pollution is good, or that we should go around polluting to our hearts content and everyone else be damned. I oppose the government creating a system by which they can play favorites and entangle us all deeper into the corruption that is rampant in Washington D.C.

Renewal

2008-06-05T22:46:00.003-05:00

One of the things that hinders people like me from the capacity to blog regularly is perfectionism. I feel that I have to perfect every phrase, or rework every thought so that they carry the maximum effect to the reader.

Fortunately, I am also eased at mind by the fact that I haven't drawn any real readers to this blog and don't deserve to have any. I'll just work on posting what I want to post about and worry about whether my reader(s) like it when I have one(or two).

I've added to the sidebar a banner and link to an organization that has inspired me to contact my Senators and Representatives very regularly this year. DownsizeDC.org is that organization which has researched and distributed information that is compelling enough to me that I harassed Congress 45 times so far this year.

In fact, I am going to start harassing my readers with the information that I get from the Downsizer Dispatch, and my responses to Congress.

The first one that I'm posting was from June 2nd -

Subject: Real Regulation

In a true free market (something we've never had) businesses have a clear incentive to provide safety, so they won't lose customers and employees to their competitors. More importantly . . .

In a true free market businesses are legally liable for the safety of their products, services, and work-places. To limit this liability businesses seek insurance. The insurance providers then do oversight to limit their own risk of loss by making sure that products, services, and work-places, are in fact safe.

This free-market approach to safety regulation is what funds the existence -- even in our current un-free market -- of something like Underwriter's Laboratory (UL). UL tests product safety in order to protect insurers from losses. The result is increased safety for you.

The other approach to safety is one driven by top-down regulations and inspections provided by unaccountable bureaucrats and paid for with tax dollars. The problem with this system is that it greatly muddies the water as to whom is actually liable for safety failures.

If Underwriter's Laboratory makes a mistake, it pays a big price, out of its own pocket. But if, for instance, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) makes a mistake, it doesn't pay any price at all.

In the year 2000 it was discovered that . . .
Between 1,800 and 2,000 mechanics were falsely certified by St. George Aviation in the late 1990's.
Eight years later, the FAA has found and re-tested only 700 of these mechanics, and most of these received only partial tests.
The failure rate was 36% among those re-tested.
This rate suggests there may be 400 or more unqualified mechanics still working in the airline industry, and the FAA is doing almost nothing about it. Source: Cybercast News Service

When will the FAA pay a price for this failure? Probably never. As a coercion-enforced monopoly the government rarely has to pay any price for failure. Instead, the FAA may get a larger budget so, supposedly, it can do better in the future. Worse still . . .

If an airline wants to protect itself against FAA incompetence it will have to pay extra for insurance and underwriting oversight, while still submitting to the FAA's regulations and inspectors. This is a cost most airline's can't afford, so we end up with only the FAA's incompetent and unaccountable "protections."

Meanwhile, businesses have an incentive to game the system, using their political clout to gain favorable treatment from government regulators and government-imposed limits on their liability.

So-called government regulation is a fraud. We need less fake regulation by government, and more Real Regulation by the free market. DownsizeDC.org has a proposal that will give you exactly that. It's called the "Write the Laws Act" (WTLA).

WTLA would reduce the burden of incompetent government regulations while making businesses more accountable to their customers.
The WTLA strips unelected bureaucracies such as the FAA of their law-making powers, and restores to Congress the full responsibility for all rule making, in keeping with the Constitution's separation of powers.
Congress won't have the time or knowledge to create complicated regulations, so there will be fewer of them, and those that do exist may work better. Instead, businesses will be legally liable for their failures, and regulated by insurance underwriting.
This would reduce the cost you pay for ineffective government regulations, while also making you safer.

To learn more about the Write the Laws Act, click here.

And please tell Congress to introduce and pass the Write the Laws Act.

Use your personal comments to tell Congress that the FAA's mishandling of the flight mechanics testing scandal is evidence that bureaucrats are incapable of keeping the people safe. Tell them that only a free market, legal liability, and insurance underwriting, can hold businesses accountable and keep consumers safe. Tell them you have more faith in groups like Underwriters Laboratory than you do in government regulators like the FAA.

You can send your message here.

I did send my message -

Please introduce DownsizeDC.org's "Write the Laws Act." You can find a summary and the full text of the bill here: http://www.downsizedc.org/wtla_legislation.shtml

My personal comment to you:

We The People send you as representatives for ourselves and our State in Washington DC. We want you to do your job and to craft the laws of our country. Please bring this legislation forward and sponsor it so that it can reach committee.

The bill proposes that we stop allowing non-elected bureaucrats to write all the rules that are enforced selectively by the Federal government.

A body of laws that citizens CANNOT follow leads to a deterioration of the nation into lawlessness.

My main hope is that I can keep these flowing as well as provide additional posts that are at least worth skimming.

Marriage and the Government

2008-03-09T20:52:00.006-05:00

I've been responding to various people's posts in regards to homosexuality, Judaism, Marriage, and more over the last few days and felt that I could consolidate my thoughts on the matters here.

The common thread among all of these discussions is the Government assuming powers and roles that it cannot fulfill in a free society. The Government doesn't have the right to define sin, to set any particular group above other groups, or to define what parents should teach their children. The Government has the responsibility of retaining the life, liberty, and property of individuals against enemies foreign and domestic.

There are far too many actions that qualify as sin to try to pick any particular one and crusade against it. Trying to identify all the ways in which a person could sin and creating laws to govern these things is exactly where Israel was when Christ came to this earth. I'll try not to preach here, but the basic resolution is that Christ is the atonement for sin, and that the law is now a testament for any that claim that they do not need Christ's work to get into heaven. Government cannot redeem mankind through law.

Unfortunately, Marriage and licenses allowing it, are very complicated matters. It is my opinion that Marriage should not be defined by the state, and all the various laws should be migrated over time to be represented by contracts between individuals. I appreciate Larry over at Simple Thoughts of a Complex Mind responding to my comments with a post on this topic. Government cannot protect the institution of marriage against immoral uses. Government has institutionalized discrimination in the United States history, and is not innocent here either.

Finally, there is a need to strengthen both the rights and responsibilities of parents. The correct way to do this is not to more accurately define what makes good parents or what makes bad parents, but to restore liberty in a parent's job. Parents should define what their children learn, and be free to facilitate their education in whatever location they see aligning with their world view. Conversely, parents should have their responsibilities over their children strengthened. I could probably go on about this far too long, but in short, we should investigate:
Who is responsible when a woman gets pregnant?
Who is responsible when a teenager causes damage to someone's life, liberty, or property?

In summary, government should be fought so that we can regain our liberties. Governments do not offer solutions to moral problems.

Citizen Vetting

2008-02-14T19:22:00.003-06:00

I feel that the election process should be open to all people who care enough to devote the time and energy to be knowledgeable about the issues and the candidates. I am in no way suggesting as Fat Jack mentioned in my comments that someone should go through and try to exclude any group of people from the process. I feel that the level of effort required should be made higher, but not in such a way that there are arbitrary hoops to jump through. I feel that the Caucus process that everyone has so much difficulty understanding is actually a good process, and that since primaries are so often tacked on top of the actual caucuses that haven't been done away with, we should just remove the primaries and help everyone understand how the caucus works.
Honestly, as it is now, some people feel that getting to a polling location that's open 13 hours is a trial for them, and I'm glad that they don't vote. I think that if we actually went back to a process where everyone has to be in a room with their neighbors and discuss the candidates and their issues before deciding who they select as a representative, we would have a much higher likelihood of leaders with sound character being selected. Fewer people would feel that their duty as citizens is worth several hours of their time on one night every four years, and I feel that would be a very fair selection process as to who decides for themselves will participate.

I don't feel that setting the bar low for participation is the same as ensuring that everyone has the same opportunity to participate. It is not the same as poll taxes or other things that exclude poor people to raise standards of participation. For access issues, there could be laws that allow everyone that wishes to participate to get out of work without any penalties whatsoever, including the ability to slide their shift, or simply have paid time off.

Our freedom and our citizenship is worth dying for. We should reward people that are willing to put forth effort into this process with more say than those that do not have the desire to be involved.

Democracy vs Republic

2008-02-13T10:25:00.002-06:00

Below is the comment that I left as a response to some other comments on Jason's blog. I felt that it was coherent enough to make sure anyone that reads my blatherings saw it as well.

You honestly believe that the mobs are better at determining our President? We have millions of people that pick a president based on how their hair looks and you’re fighting to make their votes count more? The founders of this nation warned us against the dangers of a Democracy. This nation is a Republic, and it should remain so.

In a Democracy the populace is led around by the nose by whomever can make the prettiest speeches and can promise them the tastiest bread. Charisma is no basis to select a leader of a country by!

If you happen to watch TV, ask yourself, when was the last time you saw a news report that compared substantive issue positions of even two candidates? It’s all “He said the other guy’s a liberal” and “He might have pissed off group x today”. Or it’s “She has an obnoxious laugh”.

Do you REALLY want what you’re saying you want? The outcome of this Presidential Primary is completely constructed by the TV. They’ve taken the group think mentality that is so pervasive in our nation and convinced people that they need to be voting for who will WIN, not who lines up with them on the issues. It’s all over every site and every graphic! They call it a horse race! What do you do in a Horse Race?? You bet on who will WIN. That’s not what voting is about! Voting is expressing what you believe to be true and correct in how this nation should enact its laws. It’s about the Issues, not about the candidates.

However, this is already lost in our nation. I have a few honest friends that say they will not vote because they don’t know about the issues, and I respect that far more than I respect the ignorant people that have to check each ballot to find out if they recognize the names on them before they pick between a Republican or a Democrat ballot (I mean certainly they’ve never heard of any of the Libertarians because no one EVER talks about them).

Don’t get me wrong, citizens must vote to elect their representatives. It wasn’t originally in the Constitution to allow citizens to vote for U.S. Senators or the President though. I think there was wisdom in that. People can’t know personally the character of someone running for the State Wide offices, or especially not of someone wanting to be President of the United States. It was originally designed so that people of exceptional character were selected by the people to make the best choice for them at the state level. They didn’t have any of this winner take all non-sense. Each person selected as an Elector weighed the choices heavily and made a selection based upon the issues.

Democracy is dangerous because the masses are so easily fooled. We live in a Republic, and we have been a great nation because of that fact. Just ask the vast majority of people ANY question about the government, and then decide whether they should be picking our President.

Ron Paul Stigma

2008-02-10T14:03:00.000-06:00

Of all the things that have happened during this Presidential Primary season, the worst is that everyone that supports Ron Paul has now been subjected to the stigma that we're all crazy. It happened today on Strannix's blog. I decided to infect his comments section with my opinion as well.

What exactly is it about the Constitution of the United States of America that makes people jump into wild accusations about the sanity of people who think we should actually have a Federal government that is limited by the law of this land? What is so marvelous about this concept of "mainstream"? It's like your mother always used to say... "If all your friends are jumping off a cliff, does that make it a good idea?" Just because everyone is doing something, or is in agreement on an issue doesn't make everyone RIGHT. There are a great number of measurable ways in which this Nation either is, or recently was the greatest Nation on this Earth. Freedom of the Citizens is always at the top of the list of why this is so.

The Federal Government has been systematically taking over our lives for the last one hundred years. In 1913, the Government declared that your income really belonged to them, and they determined what percentage of it you were allowed to keep. During the Great Depression, on April 5th, 1933, the President outlawed possession of Gold. The New Deal, Great Society, program after program that tells people that "It's OK, big powerful Federal Government knows how to take care of you, don't worry." The biggest problem with these programs is that the Government cannot raise taxes enough to even begin to pay for them. Current promised entitlements are underfunded by over 50 TRILLION dollars. Government is incompetent, or at least inefficient at best. We must rise up and refuse to have our lives run by the Government. The best part of the Constitution is that it's given us a peaceful way to make that happen. We don't have to try to form a new Revolutionary army and bleed to restore our freedoms, we can resist peacefully. Stand up today for your rights, join the Ron Paul Revolution. This is not crazy, it's every Citizens' Duty!

Opinions

2008-02-09T19:05:00.000-06:00

I've been infecting the comments sections of various local blogs lately.

We talked about Christian generosity over on Jason's site.

A touch about Ron Paul with the Libertarian Guy.

Tragedy and Mental Illness with Fat Jack.

Democracy vs Republic with Jason.

Educational Philosophies with Fat Jack.

In addition to my invasions of their blogs, I added a bunch more links to local bloggers and other things that I keep up with in my links section. I doubt that I'll be driving any traffic to their sites, but I feel it's only respectful to link over to them.

My wife's blog is frequently quite humorous, but maybe that's limited to friends and family in it's appeal.

Sometimes I think I probably have too many opinions, but I suppose I should blog about them and find out what everyone else thinks.

Purpose of Federal Government

2007-11-10T20:26:00.000-06:00

The Constitution has a very well defined argument when it comes to how the federal government should be allowed to operate. The extent to which laws exist should be to ensure that the individual citizens retain their freedom to life, liberty, and property as is described in the Declaration of Independence.

It would seem that the protection of life would be a simple matter, but it has not proven to be so. The federal government has an obligation to protect the citizens right to live. This means that no individual or entity has the right to end a human life. There is precedent however that if an individual has been found guilty of ending the lives of others that it would be just for them to forfeit this right, even though there is disagreement on whether a court is capable of coming to that conclusion fairly. To my knowledge, there is no scientific evidence of a transition from being not human to becoming human after the event of conception. This leads me to stand firm in my position that the protection of life must extend to the unborn. Medical progress is being made every year that allows doctors to protect and keep babies alive earlier and earlier in the pregnancy. Government should also use extreme caution in the event that a person's desire to keep living is unknown, such as when they are injured in such a way that renders them incapable of communication. You still have the right to choose not to live as well, it's just that others can't make that choice for you.

Liberty is an arena that the United States has made the most waves about throughout history. The constitution effectively states that you as a citizen have the right to choose for yourself all the things that you will do with your life, whether they are good or bad, as long as you do not infringe upon other citizens' rights. This means that you have the right to live how you want, even if it damages you mentally, physically, morally, ethically, or even kills you. This is what makes America so different. We as citizens have to fight for not only our own rights, but for our neighbors' rights as well. If the rights of any group of people are taken away, even by the majority, it sets dangerous precedents that when the majority changes, you may be the next target of reduced liberty. Don't treat people as groups, all humans are created equally, and should be treated equally under the law.

Property was replaced with "the Pursuit of Happiness" in the Declaration. Property rights are very important as well. If we have obtained property through legal means, we also should have the legal rights to keep our property. No one, not even the government at any level has the right to acquire your property from you, without your consent. If taxes exist, they should give most of the control to the citizens on whether they participate in such taxes. The best way to accomplish this is through taxes upon goods and services. This gives citizens the right and opportunity to control when and where their taxes are collected, as well as gives many the opportunity to avoid taxes altogether if they chose to live in a self sufficient way. The government doesn't have the right to encourage certain behaviors by lower taxes, nor discourage other behaviors by excessive taxes. Obviously tobacco and alcohol fall into the excessive taxes category.

These ideas of freedom for all, even your enemies, and those that behave in ways that are reprehensible to you, are what this country was built upon.

To Vince: An Invitation Accepted

2007-11-08T07:46:00.000-06:00

I sent this email (and am including his response to me) this morning. Very exciting.

Edit -- He has confirmed a date and time: Wednesday, November 14th at 7 AM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Any time starting next Monday. Wouldn't want to miss out due to a
scheduling conflict.

I would be very pleased to talk with you in studio (because it would be
the most comfortable talking face to face), or if you insist, I can call
in from my home line.

Since foreign policy is basically your and most people's hottest point
of contention, I will be prepared to speak most extensively about this.
I have a copy of Ron Paul's book "A Foreign Policy of Freedom", and
would hope you get a chance to peruse it. Ron Paul's positions are not
vague, nor are they hard to pinpoint. He's been speaking consistently
on this issue for the last 30 years.

Thank you for this opportunity,
Jeremy D. Young

Vince Jericho wrote:
> > Dates available and times?
> >
> > Best of ALL things,
> > Vincent David Jericho
> > Program Director/Talk Host Newstalk KSGF
> > America's Best Local Broadcast Company,
> > Journal Broadcast Group
> >
> > Phone: 417-447-1826
> > Fax: 417-865-9643
> >
> > Email: vjericho@ksgf.com
> > Snail: 2330 Grand, Springfield, MO 65802
> >
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHMxNMKi9fJ6/lTsARAnc3AKCbNaP1fKhhSNQN57ohjqqF+2hOtQCgq/cD
G+jS1oYkeQNbtiG8W8zKky0=
=+zRt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To Vince: Ron Paul and Air-Time

2007-11-07T23:53:00.001-06:00

This is the email that I sent to Vincent David Jericho of KSGF --

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Vince,

Firstly, I want to apologize for sending you an email today without
knowing how much time you had given to the topic of Ron Paul this
morning. I was able to catch up with the podcast this evening.

However, having listened to all of the podcasts which included
discussion of Ron Paul, I can honestly say that I am very frustrated
with the misrepresentations of his very clearly stated policies from his
platform.

Firstly, you have without fail called him an isolationist. According to
the American Heritage Dictionary, the following is the definition of
isolationist: "A national policy of abstaining from political or
economic relations with other countries." I want to call two things to
your attention. Ron Paul advocates ending the policies of preemptive
war and the sanctions that provoke them, and he advocates trade and
diplomacy with all nations. None of Ron Paul's policies really even
hints at isolationism. Dictionary.com defines interventionism as "the
policy or doctrine of intervening, esp. government interference in the
affairs of another state or in domestic economic affairs". Those very
succinctly summarize what he is against, thus he is a non interventionist.

Secondly, the caller that accused Ron Paul of claiming that the borders
being open, coupled with the lack of a successful terrorist attack were
reason to support keeping them open is unfair to put it nicely. Ron
Paul has a very clear stance on immigration. He believes that the
primary cause of illegal immigration is the welfare state in which we
basically encourage foreigners to come leech off the taxes of our
nation. He wants to bring home the border guards that have been
stationed in Iraq to guard their border. Our border and our nation
should be secured. Finally, he supports legal immigration.

Thirdly, the two separate callers that posed the unchallenged question
of whether George Soros was pumping money into Ron Paul's campaign is so
extremely frustrating, and frankly, it is irresponsible on your part not
to challenge such wild and unfounded claims. Ron Paul's campaign is
probably the most financially transparent in all of history. The
campaign puts out a live feed of the names and amounts of every on-line
donation within seconds of receiving them. The 4 million plus dollars
of donations came from over 37,000 donors with an average donation
around 100 per person.

Finally, Ron Paul has stated very clearly that he has absolutely no
plans to run as a Third Party candidate. While he has not committed to
backing a Republican candidate that opposes his platform (the one he's
had for the last 30 years), he also knows that he would not win as a
third party candidate, and doesn't plan to leave the Republican party.
He is still running as a Republican for re-election in his congressional
seat from Texas if he does not get the nomination.

As you said on the air, you have no interest in being convinced that Ron
Paul is the right candidate for the Republican nomination. I can
respect and understand that. However, there are many of your listeners
that have not been given a fair representation of Ron Paul, that may in
fact choose to back him. Your statements about the uncertainty of this
primary season are very accurate. Everything is up in the air, and the
truth of the matter is that Ron Paul's money totals are only going to
keep increasing. There is going to be a Boston Tea Party event to raise
even more money than Monday's total. Mark your calendar, December 16th.

I am now going to plead with you to have me on the air and grill me.
Challenge my knowledge of Ron Paul's positions, and in that vein,
challenge Ron Paul himself. I am not trying to imply that I officially
represent Ron Paul, but I am familiar with his positions and agree on
nearly 100% of them. There are positions that the majority of your
listeners will be very interested to hear about. I am also not afraid
of your questioning, because I feel Ron Paul's positions are coherent,
unified, and consistent. Ron Paul is a man with the integrity that we
need to restore this Republic to the people.

I am in no way trying to be combative. I have been emailing you
somewhat frequently over the last several months on several issues. Let
me also add that I am becoming more involved in the Republican
organization locally. Eric Burlison, Steve Helms, and Chris Donegan,
the active leadership of the Metro Republicans which hosted the Straw
Poll on the 1st have asked me to be on the board, and probably share in
the Vice Presidential role of the club. I have taken it upon myself, as
someone that is trying to support the Republican Party, as well as being
a dedicated Ron Paul supporter, to bring together this large group of
people that has been disenfranchised with politics in the past but has
gotten off the couch to fight hard for our rights with the mainstream
Republican Party.

Sincerely,
Jeremy D. Young
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHMqOJKi9fJ6/lTsARApy9AKCpx4Qs32pUiPOHtYb+Hde9GBLkhwCeJB/f
pri3uU7iNFCkpah7JVRKKh8=
=S1gx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Yes, I am such a nerd that I use PGP signatures in my emails. Sorry!

Journalistic Hubris

2007-11-06T21:30:00.000-06:00

Sometimes I wonder how people even keep their jobs when they are supposedly journalists reporting on events, but they act like this guy. Kevin Drum is his name, and I'd have to say he is exactly what's wrong with the Mainstream Media these days. Of course I'm frustrated first hand by his comments about Ron Paul, but he's also been extremely anti-conversational about other candidates as well.

This country needs MORE dialog, not less. People need to throw off the bonds that tie them down. Why do people accept this forced feeding from the TV? Do people really just accept whatever major networks say because they are.. major? CBS has consistently acted as though Ron Paul doesn't exist. Katie Couric when dumbfounded in her report about Ron Paul's money bomb yesterday acted like no-one should know who Ron Paul is, stating that he's showed up at zero percent in a recent poll, and even fewer should care. I mean how dare a Presidential Candidate that is not anointed by the media earn this much money from small donors? In another video they said that 5 candidates could win the nomination for the Republican party, listing Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Fred Thompson, and Mike Huckabee.

I must reiterate. Ron Paul has an exciting movement behind him. Do yourself a favor and see if you don't get excited after watching him speak. Try out his interview @Google. If you have an attention span that can't handle the 65 minute interview, try out these shorter videos. OK, if you have NO attention span whatsoever, would you at least watch a TV ad?

Ron Paul Millions

2007-11-06T15:45:00.000-06:00

I don't have as much to say about this as many other people do, but I think it's just absolutely amazing that Ron Paul's supporters organized an event that generated $4.34 million on a single day. This was not an event driven by the official campaign, but an idea concocted by volunteer supporters.

Official Campaign

Remember November 5th

See a graph of how it progressed.

If you're not excited about your Presidential Candidate, you should check out Ron Paul. This movement is exciting! Freedom is contagious.

OTC Property Taxes

2007-11-06T15:29:00.000-06:00

Well, I am going to vote against the OTC property taxes today. I gave a few reasons over on Jason's post on the matter. The bottom line is that I do not think a property tax is a fair or reasonable method for funding any educational endeavor. I also feel that any tax must be opposed by the citizens until the proposal convinces a sufficient number of people to pass. These obscure ballot measures really do allow a very tiny minority to impose taxes on the entire populace, and that seems inherently wrong. I would actually amend Missouri laws to require either a larger majority of ballots cast (say two thirds), or a real majority of registered voters to add to the tax burden, or to amend the State Constitution.

Metro Republicans: A Tie That Binds Us?

2007-11-03T17:22:00.000-05:00

Over the last several months I have been encouraged by the leadership of the Metro Republicans club to serve as a member of their board. After prayerful deliberation with my family, I have chosen to accept this nomination. I hope to use this position as leverage to bring together people in the area in support of American ideals.

The first and largest opportunity is to encourage the energetic and enthusiastic supporters of Ron Paul to do as he has done, and work within the existing framework to affect change. I hope to use this position to bring people that have been disenfranchised over the years back into the fold and allow them to have a voice in the body politic here in Springfield, MO. This event, as a return for some, is also a new endeavor for myself as I have not been active politically before this election season.

I do have an amount of fear when it comes to this process though. I fear that people are not prepared or possibly even interested in working with each other. I fear that I will overestimate my own abilities, or set goals for myself that are too high. I want to set high goals though. I want to challenge the people around me to better things. I want to see more people inspired and excited to be a part of returning America back to it's Constitutional roots.

I've never been a person that lacked ideas, or lacked the desire to see things as they should be. Hopefully though, I can go out as an ambitious naive ambassador to all the various groups of Republicans in the area and sow seeds of peace and reconciliation.

When I survey the Republican landscape in the area, we have so many different clubs and organizations. We have far too many out of date websites that have a very difficult time acknowledging one another. The Metro Republicans rightfully prides itself in being willing to link to all the other clubs and organizations in the area. I want to extend that, and hopefully cause more and more cooperation through the various clubs.

In the end, don't we all want many of the same things?

A bit about Foreign Policy

2007-10-28T22:44:00.000-05:00

There are of course a myriad of desired goals when it comes to foreign policy. Here are a few of the goals that various groups have in no particular order:

1) Protect the US investments around the world
2) Eliminate war
3) Eliminate hunger
4) Eliminate poverty
5) Prevent nuclear proliferation
6) Secure sources of oil
7) Rescue oppressed people
8) Stand up for national sovereignty
9) Protect our Allies
10) Defeat terrorists
11) Generate wealth and profit
12) Stimulate the economy
13) Destroy evil regimes
14) Maintain super power status

So which of these are the official reasons for invading Iraq? 5, 7, 10, 13. Let's take a little closer look at each of these.

5 - OK, everyone wants nukes. They don't want to be seen as helpless nations that cannot defend themselves. We're the only nation in all of human history that has used a nuclear weapon. It's reasonable for nations to want nuclear weapons. They see it as a chance to get real bargaining power at the table with the big boys. Let's try to avoid the whole argument of what really should be done about nuclear weapons, and point out the fact that the proponents of invading Iraq claimed that nuclear weapons had been present, or were currently present in Iraq. This has at best, not been confirmed, and at worst was a complete lie.

7 - Yes, I think it is factual that Saddam was a horrible and cruel dictator that killed in the neighborhood of a million of his own citizens over the time of his regime. This is clearly a problem. The questions that have to be answered here are:

A) What authority do we have to save these people from their own government?
B) How should we accomplish this, assuming we have that authority?

A - I'm not sure that we have any authority over this matter, and we sure wouldn't accept it if a radical sect of some religion came and declared war on us because of our rates of abortions (in the neighborhood of 850,000 per year) in this country. I think we lack clear moral authority.

B - Even if we did, however, I would definitely argue that we have failed to execute this rescue of the Iraqi people. According to one study(I apologize for not being able to locate the primary source), over 650,000 Iraqis have died that wouldn't have died if pre-war fatality rates had continued.

10 - "Terrorists are bad!" OK, sure.
A) Who are the terrorists?
B) Where can we defeat them?
C) Why are they attacking us?
D) How many terrorist attacks were there on US interests before World War II?
E) How many terrorists were in Iraq before we invaded?

OK, I may have asked too many questions here, but I'll try to talk about each one.

A - Well, part of the problem here is that there is no single definition. Most people at least focus on Fundamentalist Muslims. Particularly the Wahhabi Sect that has sprung up since the 18th century, and is in power in Saudi Arabia. Some say that we didn't even have very good evidence that Osama Bin Laden was actually behind the 9/11 attacks.

B - We started in Afghanistan, a location that Osama was supposed to reside. They convinced us he escaped to Pakistan, but we still haven't found him, and aren't attacking Pakistan.

C - Suicide bombers attack occupiers. We had military bases in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and we openly supported Israel.

D - This is a question that I'd like answered. My suspicion is that there weren't any.

E - I would love to see some evidence to suggest that we had knowledge of terrorists in Iraq. I don't think there is any.

13- OK, on with the reasons for invading Iraq. Saddam was a bad man. However, we created him. I think our government's hands were already stained here. Nothing justified here.

Real, however unstated reasons for going into Iraq? 1, 6, 11, 12, 14. I'll attempt to back those up if anyone thinks that they're invalid accusations, they're mostly off the top of my head.

Ron Paul speaks of this matter rather excitedly in this debate:

Ron Paul Opening Comments

Ron Paul Rebuttal

My point in all of this is to support Ron Paul's position for leaving Iraq. I feel that the entire premise of using 9/11 as a reason to go to Iraq is flawed, we've failed to accomplish what we claimed we set out to do, and it doesn't appear that there's any likelihood that we will ever accomplish it. We should safely and in an orderly fashion pack up and leave Iraq. We shouldn't have been there in the first place. It's not about terrorists. It's not about 9/11. It's a mistake and a lie. We should stop fueling the hatred. Support the troops, bring them home.

How I learned about Ron Paul

2007-10-28T19:10:00.000-05:00

I first heard about Ron Paul on a Free State Project yahoo mailing list. They were first talking about how Ron Paul had answered the question "What's the most pressing moral issue in the United States right now?". He responded "I think it is the acceptance just recently, that we now promote preemptive war...". Most of the other candidates pointed to abortion. These gentlemen on the list were excited about Ron Paul. They felt that he had rightly taken a stand on an issue that helped him stand out from the pack. This stand didn't particularly set well with me, and in fact, they had linked to sites that were filled with conspiracy theories and strange positions on all kinds of issues. Those links caused me to seriously question the sanity of anyone that would support Ron Paul.

The key to gaining interest in Ron Paul was deciding to watch the entirety of the September 5th Republican debate (not to say that any other debate would not be sufficient for this purpose). I entered the debate unsure of what candidate could be worthy of my vote in the primary, but having a history of disgust with politicians in general. My very first impression of Ron Paul was that he is not your ordinary politician. He doesn't seem to be unsure of his policies. He doesn't seem to test the wind before he speaks. He has a certainty to him that is extremely admirable. The next thing I noticed is that I agree with everything he says about domestic policy. When someone I agree with on nearly every position comes along, I want to look closer on the issues we disagree about. I will detail my thoughts on each of Ron Paul's positions in separate posts.

When I did go about learning more in depth what Ron Paul was really saying (mostly by listening to the man talk on You Tube), I was impressed and also persuaded.

There have been a great deal of thorough and fair interviews with Ron Paul.

My favorite interview:
Candidates@Google (over an hour)

A very good speech:
C-SPAN - Iowa Straw Poll Speech

For a very brief overview (admittedly somewhat emotional):
Ron Paul: A New Hope

And if you wonder whether he's a smooth talking flip flopping politician, check this out:
Ron Paul Interview 1988

Just go to youtube and search for Ron Paul. You'll find a wealth of information.

The bottom line is that you've got to stop letting other people tell you what to think. Don't even let Ron Paul tell you what to think. These issues are too important to take lightly. I think that if you do dive deeper, you'll also be very impressed with this man Ron Paul. I hope that you agree with him enough to vote for him.

Finally, please don't be afraid to vote FOR someone this time around. Don't vote against someone, or believe the media when it says that candidate X is the front runner and can win against the Democrats. Vote for the candidate that you want to be president!

Linux is not a happy Time Traveller

2007-05-05T10:44:00.000-05:00

Have you ever brought up a computer and noticed that the time is incorrect? Maybe it was a new computer, or just one that had been off for a long time. Possibly someone had changed the time while you weren't looking. Generally, we set the correct time and think nothing about it, in fact, we had been doing that without consequence on our 14k+ thin clients for years now using the NTP protocol and a program called ntpdate.

Somehow, however, we (by we I suppose I mean *I*) created an image that had a time adjustment on it that thrust the computer 44 hours into the future upon its first boot. Unfortunately, no-one discovered this.

To give a little perspective on why this was actually a problem, and not a thing to forget about 44 hours later, I have to share that this image that I created was already in IBM's facilities being copied to almost 1800 new x3200 servers, and that modifying the image would have cost us a significant amount of money.

OK, back to the point at which we "fixed" the time on one of these x3200 boxes at a live store. I received a phone call from my boss stating that the time was incorrect at this store, and that it needed to be corrected. I nonchalantly ssh'd over to the box and ran "ntpdate tic" (tic happens to be the name of our NTP server). After grumbling that the uselessly configured ntp service on the SLES 10 server was blocking my update, and stopping that service, I ran the command again which successfully updated the time. I thought nothing more of it, and myself and my two other co-workers (the only three in the company that can deal with a problem like the one that came next) went to an extended lunch.

Before we had even driven half way to the lunch, one of our team members at the store called about a problem that they were having. We had them try to open an xterm window, but the thin client froze. Hmmm, weird, I guess we should reboot it... It won't reboot, NFS is not allowing it to mount its file system properly. The brave dedicated co-worker makes his way over to the store, and cannot manage to figure out what is going wrong. All of our DHCP, NFS, LTSP, and network settings are correct, but the thin clients will *NOT* boot. The brave one drives off to grab an image from another store, returning only moments after I get back to the office and notice an oddity in the process list. The nfsd processes are using up some of the processor (say 5-20%), which is quite odd since these boxes rarely register process usage for nfs. I ask them to shut down all the thin clients and then reboot the server. They shut down the server and stick in the drive from a working store.

Unfortunately this step left doubt in my mind. I hadn't yet connected the time change and the problems at this store. I thought maybe a thin client had caused these run away nfs processes, and shutting them all down may have been the solution we needed. After the drive transplant, and quickly (and easily due to scripts we had written) reconfiguring the data to be correct for this store, they were up and running. We brought the drives back into the office and attempted to reproduce the problem. No signs of the problem. We decided to take the drives back to the store and see if rebooting with those drives would reproduce the problem. (We still hadn't made the time connection, and that image had been off for 40+ hours) The problem did not occur at that store so we decided to go forward with another store install. We had not tackled the problem, but it had gone away, so we were hopeful that it would not resurface.

It did in fact resurface, but we were able to recall the next morning that both times the problem began shortly after a time change. NFS goes nuts if you change the server's time backwards! We thought it was because we had brought up thin clients via NFS and then changed the time, so we had further failures by trying to change the time before thin clients had mounted NFS drives. Eventually, we discovered that uninstalling the NFS server, changing the time backwards, and then reinstalling NFS was a sufficient solution to the problem.

To this point we don't know if changing the time backwards broke anything else on the server, but we've worked around our NFS issues.

Summary:

Starting the NFS server, then changing the date backwards causes NFS to be inoperable (in fact quite stuck into some sort of loop) until the time passes that future date, or you uninstall and reinstall.

Groovy on Grails

2007-04-06T01:59:00.000-05:00

It's amazing how things can change when you're given new information and tipped off to things that get you excited. I'm quite excited about Groovy on Grails. This technology is just as exciting as Ruby on Rails, but has the advantage for me of being in more familiar territory. Groovy is a functional / dynamically typed language that compiles to the JVM. Groovy also happens to be very similar to Java syntactically. This makes the transition between Java and Groovy so much easier than say Java to Ruby.

Another big exciting part of groovy and grails is that you can create a WAR and deploy it to the existing server that you already have running. (Sure this isn't worth anything if you've never used Java / Tomcat / JBoss / whatever.. In that case, maybe you should be excited about Ruby on Rails instead). This is one of those things that maybe lets an enterprising employee effectively sneak groovy into development at first, then maybe something in groovy runs on the test server for a while... Next thing you know, you have something sitting in CVS that they need in production that just happens to be written in groovy.. Ooops, now you're running groovy on the production server, and the boss may not even know about it.

It's late, so hopefully I'll have more to say about this another time.

Ruby on Rails with RadRails

2006-10-05T19:21:00.000-05:00

Well, I've officially expanded my horizons just the slightest bit. Since I plan to develop a website for my Citizen's Brigade project, I downloaded and installed the following:

Ruby-1.8.4
Rubygems-0.9.0
Rails-1.1.6
RadRails-0.7.1

I already had Eclipse 3.2.0 installed, and Java 1.5.0.something.

I only ended up playing with it a little, and my impressions do deserve some expansion, but the brief version is that this is probably what I'm going to use to do the project site because it makes so many things easier to get going. I would *NOT* reccomend trying to use this technology over legacy data in a corporate environment. This technology is very good for new standalone development.

Jug-O Website!

2006-05-09T14:24:00.000-05:00

The JUG of the Ozarks now has a website!

Thanks so much to Meghann for getting everything going.

The pages are preliminary, but it looks good. I don't know whether I should bother with much more explanation because everyone that knows about this blog, probably already knew about the Jug-O...

Hibernate Evictions

2006-04-26T10:28:00.000-05:00

[Preface: We use Hibernate 2.1.8, Java 5, Tomcat 5.5.x]

Yesterday, Dusty and I were working on doing some new things (for us) with hibernate. Our objective was to take a subset of order objects, "clean" them up using code that had a bug fixed in it, and then persist them back.

The main "new" thing we were doing is trying to do this whole operation with a single session. The problem however, is we were using a thread local construct that we'd learned in the basic hibernate tutorials, but some of the code we were calling grabbed the thread local hibernate session and then closed it. It turned out there were quite a few places that this could potentially happen, so we had to go through and temporarily break the code (for normal operation) by making it not close (I have an idea for this that I'll post about later). So once we "fixed" all the session closing code, we got an error that basically told us there were two copies of our object we were trying to save in the session. This error occurred when it attempted to flush.

So we started looking through the code and tried to figure out where we were getting this duplication (the duplication actually told us that there were two copies of a Map relationship within our object). I had attended the Advanced Hibernate session at NFJS by Justin Gehtland, and I remembered a little bit about the eviction concept, and the level 1 cache that is in the session. I started trying to investigate whether there was a way to iterate through all the objects in the session just for debugging purposes. This led us to the iterate() method, which we didn't know how to use, so we tried to look this up in the API, and we found that it worked basically like find(), but returned an iterator instead of a list. Somehow I got it into my head that it would only go and get the stuff already in the session, but after a good 4 minutes of the code running and doing nothing, I inserted some debugging and learned that we were just uselessly pulling all the order objects up from the table only to immediately evict them from the session.

Finally, we figured out the real problem. Somewhere in our bug fixed code, we were loading all the orders that were placed by the same person to check some information. This secondary query was happening after the original object had been "dirtied" by other changes, so there had to be two different copies of the object in the session.

One solution to this problem was as follows:

long id = ...
Order dirty = session.get(Order.class, id);
session.evict(dirty);
dirty.codeThatMakesItDirtyAndGetsAnotherCleanCopy();
Order clean = session.get(Order.class, id);
session.evict(clean);
session.update(dirty);
session.flush();

I doubt this is the best or most efficient way to do this, but it did in fact work for our problem. Another option is to modify the code so that it doesn't get a separate clean copy of itself in the same session. This probably would have been possible, but we didn't want to modify "production" code just for this cleanup operation.

Blogger Education

2006-04-21T00:00:00.000-05:00

So, of course everyone that has a blog knows all the intricacies of running it right? Right?

Surely not. Like if you don't republish your whole blog when you make changes to the layout, you can, in effect, keep a running history of what your blog looked like. Alas, I have chosen not to do that.

I dived into the concept of web color schemes, and I know that at the very least I have a more unique looking blog than I used to. I'm not so certain that there's anything at ALL impressive about it, but hey, I'm a programmer, not a designer right? My wife happens to be the designer type, but she's still in school, and hasn't really set herself to learning the details of CSS or any technology for that matter.

I figure that some activity on this blessed space is better than none.

Ozarks JUG

2006-04-19T18:51:00.000-05:00

So my co-workers (and I) have come up with the desire and motivation to begin a Java User's Group(JUG) in the Springfield, MO area. The primary inspiration for this came during the No Fluff Just Stuff - Gateway Software Symposium in St. Louis this year. The Gateway JUG was the primary sponsor of this event, and that got us (Duane first) to thinking about how we could benefit from such an organization, plus how we could help others in the area.

So, we've come up with the name "JUG of the Ozarks" or JUG-O for short. It seems that we are already gaining momentum by the possibility of having a server co-located at one of the companies here in Springfield (I'll reveal the details if this becomes official). They've expressed interest in sponsoring us, and this would be their provision.

Generally the whole proposition becomes very exciting as we move closer and closer to making it a reality. We're going to need to investigate further what it means to be an official JUG from Sun's perspective, and whether we want that. We are also needing to gather other supporters from companies and organizations. I don't suppose that they all need to be local, but obviously, the local ones have both more direct influence over the JUG, and more to gain from the cooperation.

I see the primary draw of this effort in the ability to both learn from and teach the people around me. The more people that I know that have already developed skills in areas that I could potentially be using in my professional career, the better off I could be both in my current position, and in any other positions I may be in down the road.

Introduction

2006-03-08T19:18:00.000-06:00

So, here's a place that I'll contribute my understandings and learnings about all things in my professional life back to the Internet community at large. I hope it's worth your effort to read it.