Dumb is a Lifestyle Choice

I'm tired and cranky. My blood pressure is probably up, and I can't seem to lose any weight. My job, while complex, is only difficult when the powers that be try to "improve" things. I have also discovered in recent months that I secrete a pheremone that attracts conversation with unintelligent people. This biochemical is apparently able to transmit over the phone or even the internet. Weird, isn't it?

Does this sound familiar? Probably.

While Jeff has been giving us insight into a less commercial but certainly more accurate version of our nation's history, I have been stressing about remodeling my house and getting ready to go back to Iraq. I have seen and heard several things lately that probably warrented a post or two, but I have very little energy left to spend once my workday is done and the kids are asleep. I usually spend this particular piece of my day hanging out with my wife, and bitching about my day or listening to her do the same. We both deal with other people's problems (more or less), and we have both come to the conclusion that most people are completely incapable of dealing with life without serious coaching. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that people are stupid, but I do think that people are definately lacking when it comes to certain life skills.

For instance, I had a woman call me the other day to complain about one of my Soldiers. He rents a house from her. She told me that she had called the police, and that they had referred her to me. It turns out that my young friend does not mow his yard as often as she would like. During the entire (long) conversation, I kept getting a mental picture of several cops chuckling together in a squad room.

This is only funny the first few times that it happens. At some point, I actually become willing to mow lawns for Soldiers in order to avoid extended conversations with people who can't cope with everyday issues.

I have an aquaintance who firmly believes that his girlfriend has murdered her last three boyfriends. Apparently, her boyfriends in Oregon, Maryland, and Arizona respectively all had heart-attacks under the age of thirty. He is worried that he will be next. I tried to explain to him that his heart-attack would probably be more about meth and less about her, at which time he decided that we couldn't be friends anymore (breaks my freaking heart). Before the conversation ended, he told me that while he feared for his life, he couldn't leave her because they had bought an RV together.

huh?

So, Faithful Reader, when you run across an idiot or two while going about your business tomorrow, remember that I am busy mowing lawns for extra cash to make RV payments, not because I care, but because I just really need the peace and quiet.

Useless employees, large and small Part 9

So then, the war was over, the Treaty of Paris was a done deal, and George Washington was back in Mount Vernon. But there was still a lot to be done.
Why, you ask? Well, silly, it was because nobody was at work finding a way to tax every result of every synaptic operation occurring in the heads of every person in the several states, of course. What are you, some kind of tax rebel?
And it is that one thing, my friends, which you will ever and always find as the unquestioned assumption on the part of those who rule, from legitimate representatives with genuinely high ideals to murdering despots that get a kick out of feeding their enemies to brush chippers: people must be taxed in order to pay for the necessary means to rule them. And implicit in the means to rule are the means to control, manipulate, punish, socially engineer, harass, and threaten with unanswerable deadly force the general population - and maybe fix the potholes.

Mr. Benjamin Franklin told us “ Certainty? In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.” I don’t know if Mr. Franklin realized that the latter could only be escaped by the former or that the former is often the result of the latter.
Why in the world he and a group of otherwise intelligent men chose to put the boot of taxation on the throat of their fellow countrymen the way they did way back in 1787 is something I will never understand…

1777 was winding down and the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union had been adopted. Article 2 of said document reads as follows:

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

Personally, I think is the best part of the whole document, and it reflects the real attitudes of the people of the several states at the time. While they had all been subject to the authority of the Crown throughout their existence, the colonies were separate entities, and until now, the idea of creating a union had never occurred to any of them. Folks in Virginia might have thought that the people of, say, Massachusetts were okay (George Washington not being among them), but as the old saying goes, “Good fences make good neighbors.” A union was not something to be entered into lightly, because it meant giving up some degree of autonomy, and that is something free people do with great reluctance. Ask any guy who's 4 drinks into his stag party…

It was this natural guardedness that proved to be one of the thornier issues to face the Founders. It is a common trait in humanity: once we get done fighting a common enemy, we usually start fighting each other. Oddly, though, there doesn’t seem to be any indication that the idea of remaining independent nations ever crossed the minds of the movers and shakers of the day. The closest thing I’ve found is the desire on the part of the Anti-Federalists to copy the type of government that Switzerland had had in place for about 700 years by the time all this was going on, and is still in place there today with a few modifications. (Not bad; I suppose if I ever start my own country, I might have to take a closer look at that outfit…) Certainly, the Prohibitory Act that created these 13 nations had no magic spell that created a union out of thin air. It was the thinking of the leaders of the day that put forth the idea of a joining together for the common benefit.
The other part I like about the Articles was its virtual impotence in forcing the states to pay taxes. And from 1783 to 1788, the states paid very little. The result was a wealthy population, stable politics, and poor politicians. That last part was no big deal to these guys; they actually worked for a living back then. Besides, Article V of document said they couldn’t get paid for being a delegate anyway. What a concept!
But before it sneaks away, let me grab that little fact by the neck that I just mentioned a bit ago and hold it up so you can get a good look at it. Article VIII says:
All charges of war, and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several States in proportion to the value of all land within each State, granted or surveyed for any person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated according to such mode as the United States in Congress assembled, shall from time to time direct and appoint.

The taxes for paying that proportion shall be laid and levied by the authority and direction of the legislatures of the several States within the time agreed upon by the United States in Congress assembled.

If you like, read it again and see if you get the idea. If not, here it is: the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union did not give the United States government the power to tax individuals. It could only require – actually, in reality, beg for – taxes from the States. The boys in Congress couldn’t tax a farmer in Virginia; they directed the Virginia legislature to tax him, with the caveat that the Feds could determine the actual value of the land and property in the states. (So what’s a little fascism among friends, hunh?)
At this juncture, I want to bring a couple of thoughts together so that we can get back to the point of this whole exercise and wrap it up in the next installment.
1. When anything happened of political import back then, it was carried out by delegates representing their entire state as a single entity.
2. The sates ceded an absolute minimum of sovereignty to the United States government, giving up only as much as necessary to accomplish the goals of common defense and general welfare.
3. As might be expected, given the previous two points, nothing in the initial formation of the United States of America indicated that the Founders ever envisioned or even thought of the idea of the citizens of the several states having any direct relationship with the government of the United States. That came much later, and has been perpetrated and perpetuated by an increasingly treasonous federal legislature.

I promise to do my best to wrap this up next time with some comments, and actually talk about what those guys did in Philly.

Useless employees, large and small Part 8

What a nice vacation! Too bad I had to work the whole time…

As I recall (after having reviewed my last post), I left off with a promise to talk about taxation and its application, so let’s start there.
Imagine living in a society that has 6 adult members, of which you are one.
Fortunately for everyone concerned, you and your fellow adults are both intelligent and realistic. You’d realize that in such a small group, having an occasional dinner together would provide the opportunity to work out issues like security, food and shelter concerns, relations with other societies, economics, emergency services, and so forth. You could get it all done yourselves without any need to farm it out. Over coffee and desert, you’d determine how much each would have to contribute in the forms of time and money for the sake of the commonweal. You would all go home with a clear understanding of what you were getting for what you were giving. You would be giving up some specific items of value in exchange for services that would benefit you both individually and collectively, and you would realize that the sacrifices you made would result in larger returns due to the benefits that come with combining forces. Does any of this sound familiar?
Although it should go without saying, I will say it anyway: Your involvement in any and all of these activities would be entirely voluntary. Being reasonable adults – admittedly something of a rarity in our day – no one in the group would hold a gun to the head of any other member and force them to be a part of the plans. And being reasonable adults, no one who decided not to participate would expect to reap any benefits that came from the arrangement. They’d be on their own as far as receiving any services that came from the operations to which all the rest contributed. House on fire? Well, I hope you’ve got a lot of water handy. Need a driver’s license? Sorry, you didn’t contribute to the fund that built the roads, so you can’t use ‘em.
Need protection from incursions by an enemy society? Hope you have lots of guns and people to pull the triggers, because you didn’t contribute to the arming of the militia, or volunteer for duty.
A reasonable person would easily see the benefit of participation; but a reasonable person would also see the folly of being forced to pay for benefits that he didn’t receive, or being forced to pay more for the same benefits than others, or being forced to pay for another member's benefits. If any of these conditions cropped up, a reasonable person would say “No” when told he must pay for their perpetuation, up to and including the use of deadly force to prevent the plunder of his property.
As the years pass, our little society would grow to the point where sitting around the dinner table to discuss matters of state would grow impractical. Instead of patrolling their land on their own, the citizens would establish a police force, and hire officers to perform this duty for them. And so it would go for emergency services, and public utilities, and so forth – and eventually, they would establish a governing body in which to vest these interests, which would – horrors! – include a legislature.

I have a question: at what point would this society be justified in violating the principles laid out when it consisted of only 6 adults? When would it become acceptable for the legislature to pass laws requiring the citizenry to do exactly those things they were previously willing to die to prevent from occurring?

I will close with a few pertinent quotations. The last one represents the only proper understanding of the issue of taxation…

A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. – Thomas Jefferson (1801)

There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him. – Robert Heinlein

The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. – H.L. Mencken


No man's life, liberty, or property (is) safe while the legislature is in session. – Mark Twain (1866)

It is not the business of government to make men virtuous or religious, or to preserve the fool from the consequences of his own folly. Government should be repressive no further than is necessary to secure liberty by protecting the equal rights of each from aggression on the part of others, and the moment governmental prohibitions extend beyond this line they are in danger of defeating the very ends they are intended to serve. – Henry George

All taxation that is not voluntary is theft. – Jeff Hoyt

Next: what they did in Philly…

Fish Don't Fry in the Kitchen...

Well, the website should be up in a day or two (I hired a really smart guy to work all the bells and whistles), so I may be preoccupied with that for awhile. I'm gonna try to class it up a bit, mostly so little old ladies won't get hurt feelings and such. Don't worry, this blog is still my baby. It turns out that I'm "Insensitive to Muslim Culture" and "unfriendly to Hispanic immigrants".

Let me clear that up a bit. I am disconcerted by the level of illegal immigration that his been allowed by our government and even encouraged by Mexico. I am no less insensitive to Muslim Culture than I should be, as I am an Infidel, an American, and a Christian, thus thrice sentenced to death by any true and faithful Muslim.

I am a Citizen-Soldier, a middle-class American, and a patriot. I believe that our country is sinking quickly into a cesspool, and that partisan party politics and a general apathy are the two leading causes of the current trouble in these United States.

The blog, and now the website, are all about touching off that spark, getting people talking not about the problems, but the solutions. Sometimes I rant and rave, sometimes I'm just bitching, but always I am thinking that there IS a better way.

Here is that better way: Get involved, raise hell, and take action. We don't have rant and scream in the streets (that's for hippies and young rubber people who don't shave yet). All we have to do is remind our elected government that we still vote, we still produce, we still own this country.

The website will be less opinion and more fact. There will be times when I get aggravated, I'm sure, but I'm going to try (and try, and try) to be intelligent and adult about it all...come to think of it, that might get boring.

I guess we'll just see what happens...

Double Standards in Religious Freedom

Warren Jeffs is an asshole.

I just wanted to be clear on that right up front. I'm watching Anderson Cooper 360, and they are going on and on about how evil the FLDS is. Don't get me wrong, I agree whole heartedly. For those of you who don't know, let me describe the FLDS to you:

1. They are polygamists.

2. They bear no allegiance to the United States, only their prophet.

3. They treat women like cattle, forcing servitude and even under-age marriages.

4. They recognize only the Law of the Prophet, and do not suffer the law of the land (unless they get caught, I guess).

5. They are rife with corruption and justification of heinous behavior.

Does this sound familiar?

If we can persecute these people (and I believe that we should), then why is it wrong to treat Muslims like ass?

Just a little food for thought...

Useless employees, large and small, Part 7

Yeah, I know; I'm early. Sue me.
Okay, then. Having begun to lay some marvelous plans to attend the Blackmore’s Night concert in Charlotte, North Carolina, I’m feeling inspired. Let’s see if it helps any…
(Yeah, I know; I wish I could tell you more about the plans, too. Sorry.
Tell you what, though, if you make it to the show, look for us 3rd row, center stage. You’ve all looked at my profile; do you think you could miss that face? I don’t think so, either…)

So we ended up last time by mentioning something most of you have never heard before – perhaps inciting a fresh desire to write demeaning emails to your history teachers. But there it is. Those marvelous men that met in Pennsylvania back in 1787 didn’t do what the people - those who gave them their positions, their pay, and their marching orders - told them to do. And you thought it was a contemporary phenomenon.
But a little history within the history lesson is in order here.
Remember the illustration of the BB rolling down the highway? The allegory finds its justification in the fact that the total tax burden imposed on the colonies by the British Empire was approximately 1% in the North and 2 ½ % in the South. Zoundz! Against this “tax tyranny”, the fledgling nations fought a war that lasted about 6 years and, for whatever reason you want to credit it to, won.
When the French fleet gained the attention of the British warships in a surprise attack on September 5th, 1781, and proceeded to spend the next 4 days ventilating their gunwales, Cornwallis knew the jig was up. No more crumpets – or bullets, powder, and stuff like that - would be forthcoming from ol’ Mother England. Maybe because of a lack of proper tea times due to the fog of war, General Cornwallis didn’t attend the surrender ceremony; said he wasn’t feeling well. That much was probably true. He sent his guy Friday, General O’Hara, with the sword. O’Hara, evidently in a fit of pique, tried to give it to Comte de Rochambeau, who in turn gave him the tenir a l’ecart and pointed him to General Washington. In the background, not missing the chance to add their own Bronx cheer to the proceedings, the British band played “The World Turned Upside Down”. The nerve! 2 years later, FedEx and Boeing being a few years off yet, the Treaty of Paris was signed. Those 13 newly-born countries had rid themselves of their oppressors. You know, the ones who had burdened them with that staggering 1% tax rate.
I think they did the right thing. I think it was right because the propriety of a thing is not determined by the impact it has on your pocketbook. If a thief breaks into my place and only steals one CD, it is still stealing – especially if he makes off with my new copy of Beyond the Sunset. He doesn’t have to take 34 of them to qualify for a free trip to the pokey.
Likewise, a 1% tax burden is just as wrong as 60% burden - which is what the average, middle-class American is now paying when the total effect of federal, state, and local taxation is added up - if that taxation is improperly applied…
…the definition of which I’ll offer next time, as well as a different look at what happened at Independence Hall in 1787.

Oh, and just ‘cause I’m such a swell guy, I’ll save you the trouble; it means “cold shoulder”.