Friday, July 31, 2009
So there it is. I won't win any prizes, but I had fun doing it. Hmm, maybe if I changed my name to Pablo Picasso?
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Monday, July 27, 2009
“My goal here is to shine light on the fact that the federal government is overstepping its bounds,” said State Sen. Tony Fulton of Lincoln. “We would be making a statement on behalf of Nebraska."However, an obviously liberal state senator impugned the integrity of those supporting the resolution, implying that it was "racist:"
State Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln said the proposals sound disturbingly similar to the states' rights arguments made in defense of racial segregation and laws blocking blacks from voting.“The history of this movement is rife with racism in the name of states' rights,” he said. “I'm not saying that the people making the case now are racist, but I don't think Nebraska needs to be getting in bed with these kinds of resolutions.”
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
- abortion (either for or against, notwithstanding the bad law of Roe v. Wade)
- medical marijuana
- right to carry
- age of consent
- legalized gambling
Friday, July 24, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Britain, Spain, France, Germany, Italy, the US, and Japan are in varying states of fiscal ruin, and those tipping into demographic decline (unlike young Ireland) have an underlying cancer that is even more deadly. The West cannot support its gold-plated state structures from an aging workforce and depleted tax base.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature hereby claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and be itFURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
I'm not exactly an expert on the whole states rights argument. Why would this guy want to repeal the 17th amendment? That doesn't make sense to me. He seems to be calling for less democracy if Senators are not elected by popular vote.
And, how is the NSA going to protect ports, bridges, roadways, etc., if the Federal government is supposed to cede all it's property to the states?
Are the states going to take over the ownership of Federal buildings and lands, and then lease them to the Federal government? Is that the idea?
Another problem I have with the FR post is that it is vague in that it does not explain the specifics of how the Federal government has usurped or overextended it's powers.
This is a lot of hot air if no one is willing to be specific.
As you probably know, I believe Obama is governing in a way which is outside the American Tradition. However, I believe he has generally been smart about not comitting impeachable offenses. I do believe that his firing of Inspectors General are probably impeachable offenses. His handling of Chrysler and GM is outside the American Tradition, but unless it can be proven in a court of law that dealerships were shut down for political reasons, that is going to go nowhere.
I am merely saying we have to have specifics around which people will rally. Otherwise, this is just b.s.
Check out this post:
Pastorius Homepage 07.20.09 - 1:51 pm #
Pas, originally U.S. Senators were selected by the legislatures of the individual states; they were appointed. Congressmen, however, were to be popularly elected. It was believed, with a great deal of common sense, that the Senate was to be a deliberative body unconcerned with political partisanship and petty politics. Since Senators were appointed, there was no need for this. Today we have really nasty politics, the politics of personal destruction and the stupid McCain-Feingold Act, which would be unnecessary if the 17th amendment were repealed. See arguments for repeal at this link: http://www.conservativefront.com/2009/05/13/rethinking-the-17th-amendment/
For your second question, ownership of land and property by the federal government now greatly exceeds its constitutional authority. Currently the federal government "owns" about one-third of all land in the United States; 98% of all land in Alaska, 86% of Nevada land and 65% of all Colorado land. How can the federal government "own" most of a state? That destroys the sovereignty of that state and trashes the "Equal Footing Doctrine" that the original founders wished to preserve, i.e. that all states in the Union are equal in sovereignty vis a vis the federal government.
Despite the intentions of the founders and the clear intent of the Equal Footing Doctrine, the states east of the 100th meridian are vastly "more equal" than the states to the west.
The Constitution is clear about what land the federal government is allowed to possess and the means for acquiring it: see Article 1, Section 8, which describes it thus:
"all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." That's all! The federal government has no legal right to own 98% of Alaska or any other state.
As far as the Dept of Homeland Security or the armed forces protecting the land of the United States, they are obligated to do so by the same Article I, Section 8, and there is no requirement or necessity for them to own the land that they defend; they are an arm of the states and carrying out duties specifically delegated to them by the Constitution, i.e. to raise armed forces for the common defense of the states.
So Jim Robinson is right about taking back the illegally seized lands from the feds and restoring the full sovereign rights of the states. The lands and natural resources of the individual states belong to the people of the states, not to the federal government. The federal government is currently greatly exceeding its Constitutional powers in this regard.
Also see this article:
See Article I, Section 8 here:
Stogie Homepage 07.21.09 - 12:29 am #
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Jim Robinson, the founder of FreeRebublic.com, is not a friend of mine. I have had my issues with him and have stated categorically that I consider the man an asshole. However, on the topic of his post I would have to say that he is right. Right in assuming that the radical left administration now in power is beyond the scope of normal politics and normal solutions through normal channels.
I too have called for steps by the individual states to resist the tyrannies now being foisted upon us in the name of socialism and environmental extremism. Robinson is merely posing some possible alternatives to just sitting still and accepting the extreme hardships that Obama has in store for us. It is a discussion worth having. Yes, we can wait four years until a new election, but much damage will have been done by then, to the Republic and to future generations who will have to pay for the fiscal catastrophe that this neo-Marxist is busily implementing.
If we do nothing, the economic destruction will be devastating, creating a new depression similar to the 1930's, with poverty and misery our lot for many years to come. We have to decide whether "politics as usual" is worth that price.
I don't necessarily believe that Robinson's solution is the correct one or the only one, but it is a starting point for a discussion worth having. My own solution would include a convention of all willing states to form a pact or block that would actively resist socialist tyranny by a flat refusal to go along. Representatives of these states should state that they will not implement or allow implementation within their borders of socialized medicine, cap and trade taxation or the reckless creation of debt that is unprecedented in our history. Further, they will not honor as binding law any unconstitutional decrees by a dogmatically leftist and activist Supreme Court (such as, for example, any decrees stating that the 2nd Amendment does not apply to individuals, a position that Obama has long held).
How all of this could be accomplished is something that would have to be worked out by a conference of the willing states. Secession should not be ruled out as an option to be used only in an extreme situation. "Consent of the governed" is the foundation of our Republic and perhaps it is time to withdraw our consent. Such a movement would indeed create a lot of controversy but the implications of it might be enough to stop Obama's aggressive program. The Democratic Party might grow some gonads and join us in stopping him.
Yes, Obama won the election; however, the Constitution is supposed to create boundaries beyond which elected officials cannot go. Obama and his administration do not feel in any way obligated to respect those boundaries. Therefore, we are put into a position of accepting serfdom or finding new ways to peacefully resist.
Jim Robinson is right: we need a serious conversation about our alternatives.
This is not a post. Given some questions, just my quick, experienced-based thoughts on group blog projects.All groups should be opt in when started. This is common practice for Internet professionals and amateurs alike. It will win you friends and not create enemies, or cause trolled link emails to be ignored as a waste of time.Don't use mass CC. There's a BCC option for a reason. Use it, as I did here, or look inexperienced and risk aggravating people whose in boxes are aready much too cluttered, Blog project groups have proven in-effective and actually counter-productive over time. It's why the practice was abandoned. They are inside bogging posts for bloggers that do not grow readership over time unless you want to blog for a small circle of people across a small number of blogs over and over, again. That's fine. But don't think it will "grow" your blog in rankings, or traffic to an appreciable degree. It doesn't work.For many blog readers, most of whom never comment, nor want to be part of an Internet clique - they have lives, unlike we bloggers and have a beer with the neighbors when they want to talk - the posts are annoying. There are no short cuts to writing quality posts over a long period of time. Too many of such posts won't create new return readers, they will more likely give you a bad rap and cause people to stop bothering to look in, or follow links to you.Presumably you have a blog roll. Refer your readers to it if you want to refer a list of other blogs. A long mass of 100 blogs linked one after another offers nothing and accomplishes nothing. Nor does fifty links in one post I can't imagine anyone frittering away their time writing. But be my guest.Have fun. If this sort of thing floats your boat - go for it. I don't mean to judge anyone too harshly. But understand what it is you are actually accomplishing and for heaven's sake, please follow commonly accepted Internet ettiquette as the experienced hands you would purport to be, or become.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
I have been impressed with young Ellen Muth, whose role as grim reaper Georgia Lass was highly entertaining. She was born a couple of months after my youngest son's grand entry into the world and is now 28 years old. I'd like to see her back on television or in a movie. Here's a photo of her. She is quite lovely.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Barbara Boxer is a hot hair balloon of liberal arrogance and Alford a sharp pin. It's obvious that Harry Alford is a helluva man. He's not only got balls, he's got BUCKETS!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Tactics, Rule 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.In conflict tactics, there are certain rules that the organizer should always regard as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and "frozen."
The forces for change must keep this in mind and pin that target down securely. If an organization permits responsibility to be diffused and distributed in a number of areas, attack becomes impossible...you disregard... for the moment all others to blame.Why pick a target at all? Whom do you pick? Alinsky explains:
Obviously there is no point to tactics unless one has a target on which to center the attacks.
One of the criteria in picking your target is the target's vulnerability--where do you have the power to start? [In Palin's case anyone has the power to file frivolous ethics complaints with no cost or penalty to themselves.]
The other important point in the choosing of a target is that it must be a personification, not something general and abstract such as segregation or a major corporation or City Hall.
With this focus comes a polarization. As we have indicated before, all issues must be polarized if action is to follow...One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.
This is probably over the top. But then again, Sonia Sotomayor is over the top.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Monday, July 13, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
Update: I used Photoshop to make the hair more realistic.
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
So posting may be light this week.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Not only were we offended at the sheer effrontery of McCain’s pick: How dare the Republicans proffer this déclassée piece of Wasilla trailer trash whose only claim to fame was that she didn’t exercise her right to choose?And so the word went out, from that time and place: Eviscerate Sarah Palin like one of her field-dressed moose. Turn her life upside down. Attack her politics, her background, her educational history. Attack her family. Make fun of her husband, her children.
For the first time in US history, we have a president who hates his own country. A president who is on the side of America's enemies, not on the side of America.We have a media who reveres and worships as a demi-god a president who hates his, and their, country.We have a government spending trillions of dollars it does not have in a seemingly determined effort to destroy everyone's life savings via inflation.We have a Congress that passes the largest tax increase in the history of the world (literally) via a 1,300 page Climate Bill that no one has read and based on utterly fraudulent science.
Read it all.
Monday, July 06, 2009
...greens don't really want to increase our energy supply--whether with fossil fuels or renewable energy--because that would undermine virtually all of the greens' ultimate goals: zero population growth, limiting the development of physical infrastructure, impeding economic growth, and redistributing wealth.
The federal picture is so bleak because the Obama administration is the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of the U.S. I would imagine that he would be the intergalactic champion as well, if we could gather the data on deficits on other worlds. Obama has taken George W. Bush’s inattention to deficits and elevated it to an art form.
The Obama administration has no shame, and is willing to abandon reason altogether to achieve its short-term political goals. Ronald Reagan ran up big deficits in part because he believed that his tax cuts would produce economic growth, and ultimately pay for themselves. He may well have been excessively optimistic about the merits of tax cuts, but at least he had a story.
Sunday, July 05, 2009
I will have to write an essay on the efficacy of secession or more importantly, the threat of secession in light of tyrannical policies designed to change our constitutional republic into something else. If a number of red states coordinated their efforts, they could threaten to secede as a block unless Obama ceases his march towards socialism: no nationalizing health care, no cap and trade, no restrictions on energy production, no nationalizing of the banking and auto industries, and no exorbitant taxes or pork project spending.
I don't want to live under tyranny, even with the American flag flying overhead. Secession may be considered by some to be an extreme solution, but no doubt they thought the same thing in 1776 and 1861. Those secessions, however, are safely ensconced in the dusty pages of history; it's easy to cheer the secessionists of 1776, since they are safely in the past and unlikely to draw British minie balls fired in our direction.
Our constitutional republic has been eroded over time by the constant undermining of the statists, our rights slowly sloughed away, almost imperceptibly. Barack Obama has only increased the pace. The complete control of Congress and the White House by the statists has effectively destroyed our system of checks and balances. The barbarians have breached the gate and are ransacking Reagan's "Shining City on a Hill."
The question is, when is enough enough? At what point do we, the heirs of freedom, say to the statists, "thus far but no farther" ? (Actually, I would say, "too far, you need to back up.") In your own mind, there must exist an imaginary line in the sand, beyond which the statists may not advance. Where is that line? What does it involve? We need to be asking ourselves this.
We also need to be asking ourselves this question: is it time for a new installment of the American Revolution? If not now, when? And if it is time, how do we go about it?
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Holy Christ people! Are you saying that you don’t have the same will to succeed as the guys who leveled mountains, bridged mighty rivers, and threw thousands of miles of steel across a continent to connect us by rail? Do you seriously believe that the spirit that animated personalities like Washington, Lincoln, King, and Reagan is lost, that Obama killed it?
Speak for yourselves. Don’t count me in with those who throw up their hands in despair and whine about Obama being a communist (he’s not) or even a socialist (he’s not - he’s a liberal) and that he wants to use illegal aliens to build a permanent Democratic majority. The challenges posed by an Obama presidency are normal political challenges, not a reason to start a war or revolution except in our own minds.
Obama cannot alter the America that lives in our minds and hearts. In the end, each of us defines America in our own way and we imbue that vision with our own experiences, our own worldview. Try as he might, that America is safe as long as we keep it alive with our words and deeds.
Interfering with the free market will not destroy America. Cutting defense spending will not destroy America. Cap and trade may grievously hurt the economy but it won’t destroy America. National Health Insurance may change our relationship with government but it will not destroy America.
The internet is full of Trig Palin conspiracy theories, name-calling and Photoshopping. No matter what month, event, or excuse, Palin haters find a reason to attack Trig.If Sarah Palin had aborted Trig, the left would have been okay with it. If she hid Trig offstage and out of sight, all would be good. But treat the child as you would any other child, and that cannot be tolerated.There is something about a Down syndrome child in plain view which has exposed the moral and emotional bankruptcy of the left-wing of the Democratic party. And they hate Sarah Palin because deep down, they hate themselves for being who they are.
William is close, but not quite there. The reason why they hate Trig and Sarah is because the two of them force people who believe in abortion to confront their actions.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen my country so divided and depressed on the Fourth of July in my lifetime and - no matter what Bob Dylan dreamed up - I’m not young, or otherwise. That includes the Vietnam War period when both sides at least had some conviction and excitement for the future, even if wrong. Not so now. The current situation is grim.
Obama is already over. In six short months the now-spattered bumper stickers with “Hope and Change” seem like pathetic remnants from the days of “23 Skidoo,” the echoes of “Yes, we can” more nauseating than ever in their cliché-ridden evasiveness. Although they may pretend otherwise, even Obama’s choir in the mainstream media seems to know he’s finished, their defenses of his wildly over-priced medical and cap-and-trade schemes perfunctory at best. Everyone knows we can’t afford them. His stimulus plan - if you could call it his, maybe it’s Geithner’s, maybe it’s someone else’s, maybe it’s not a plan at all - has produced absolutely nothing. In fact, I have met not one person of any ideology who evinces genuine confidence in it.
Friday, July 03, 2009
Via Conservatives 4 Palin
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
– Quoted by Ronald Reagan (from Rev. William J. H. Boetcker , commonly misattributed to Abraham Lincoln)
Via Tammy Bruce
See also Left Coast Rebel's discussion of the above points here.
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Sometimes, the whole world prefers a lie to the truth. The White House, the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and much of the media have condemned the ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya this past weekend as a coup d'état.Octavio Sanchez, a lawyer and former minister of culture in Honduras, gives the facts in this article in the Christian Science Monitor. Read the whole thing.
That is nonsense.
In fact, what happened here is nothing short of the triumph of the rule of law.
The president called randomly on three audience members. All turned out to be membersof groups with close ties to his administration: the Service Employees International Union, Health Care for America Now, and Organizing for America, which is a part of the Democratic National Committee. White House officials said that was a coincidence.
The most dramatic moment came from Debby Smith, 53, of Appalachia, Va., who was near tears as she described for Obama her fragile health, including a recently discovered tumor for which she cannot get treatment.
Obama waved her over and hugged her, saying, "I don't want you to feel like you're all alone." He promised to "find out what we can do within existing law" and called Smith the "perfect example" of the kind of person his health plan is intended to help.
“I’m not saying there has never been managed news before, but this is carried to fare-thee-well--for the town halls, for the press conferences,” she said. “It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not. They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”
Thomas told CNSNews.com that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.
“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try."
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
This is now the second time Republicans have been beaten in this kind of legal street fight. In 2004, Dino Rossi was ahead in the election-night count for Washington Governor against Democrat Christine Gregoire. Ms. Gregoire's team demanded the right to rifle through a list of provisional votes that hadn't been counted, setting off a hunt for "new" Gregoire votes. By the third recount, she'd discovered enough to win. This was the model for the Franken team.
Mr. Franken now goes to the Senate having effectively stolen an election. If the GOP hopes to avoid repeats, it should learn from Minnesota that modern elections don't end when voters cast their ballots. They only end after the lawyers count them.