Time Magazine to Hand Over Reporter Notes - Yahoo! News

First Amendment rights?  What First Amendment rights?

For those of you keeping score at home, here’s the latest tally of the Bill of Rights that are either dead or coughing up blood (I’ll not go through the whole Constitution at this time):

• 1st Amendment
  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.“
• 2nd Amendment
  “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
• 5th Amendment
  “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
• 9th Amendment
  “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
• 10th Amendment
  “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.”

Good thing military recruitment is down, or the 3rd Amendment would be next.

Time Magazine to Hand Over Reporter Notes - Yahoo! News

Property rights? What property rights?

OK, folks – how many fucking rights does the Supreme Court have to take away before we decide enough is en-fucking-nough?  This ruling enforces the feeling most libertarian property owners already have, that you don’t really own your land, but just rent it from the State – when they want it back, they can take it back.  I sense a Carl Drega moment coming to New London any day now…

Guardian Unlimited | World Latest | Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes

Reason #5: Why I Will Never Live in California

I will agree with the Supreme Court here - they had no jurisdiction - although in the wake of more recent rulings, that in and of itself comes as a shock.

Supreme Court Backs Government in Land Rights Case

Justice Thomas Dissent

If you’ve been living under a rock, maybe you don’t know that the Supreme Court ruled that the government can prosecute medical marijuana possession, even if it doesn’t involve interstate commerce.

The vote was 6–3 – the writer of the dissenting opinion was Justice Clarence Thomas, who has, in my mind, partially vindicated some of his earlier controversy.  Read his dissent here (PDF format).

Where do you go...

… when the people who are supposed to uphold the supreme law of the land don’t?  Simply put, the Supreme Court’s decision to allow federal medical marijuana prosecutions to move forward is in direct violation of the Interstate Commerce Clause, because the case in question did not cross a state boundary at all.  Instead, in a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court decided that current federal interests trump Constitutional limits – why bother having a Constitution if we’re going to ignore it?

At the risk of invoking a version of Godwin’s Law, I blame Lincoln for starting all of this.

Cato Daily Dispatch for June 6, 2005

Papiere Bitte by Doris Colmes

You know, when a Holocaust survivor compares the Real ID act to Nazi Germany, Godwin’s Law is trumped.

Papiere Bitte by Doris Colmes

U.S. & World - Supreme Court OKs Medical Pot Prosecutions

Fox News has the report that the Supreme Court has OK’d federal prosecutions for medical marijuana violations.  Score one for the bad guys.

FOXNews.com - U.S. & World - Supreme Court OKs Medical Pot Prosecutions

Nebraska Motorcycle Helmet Bill Dead For Year

Another state to avoid driving through this summer – IIRC, there are seven states west of the Mississippi that have helmet laws.  They are:  Washington, Oregon, Kalifornia (go figure there), Nevada, Missouri, Louisiana, and Nebraska.  That means for me that, if I want to visit my in-laws in Illinois, I can remove my helmet once I enter Idaho, and not have to put it back on until I return (my route, calculated a few years ago when I had a Sturgis trip planned, went through Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, Iowa, and into Illinois, deliberately skirting Missouri).  In fact, if you’re over 21, once you leave the Left Coast states, you can get all the way to the border of New York before have to put a helmet back on – New York, Vermont, and Massachusetts form a helmet-required block that prevents you from getting to the more libertarian minded New Hampshire and Maine.

Check out the helmet and other MC laws here or here.

TheOmahaChannel.com - Politics - Motorcycle Helmet Bill Dead For Year

Hope this doesn't catch on

A Miami news site is reporting on how one tribal school in Arizona is handling tardiness and absenteeism among it’s students.  They fine the parents.  One only hopes that this type of socialist thinking doesn’t catch on in normal public schools.

Can you imagine it?  Not only does the State rob you to pay for public schools (property taxes in my jurisdiction, despite the fact that I have no school age children), but now in at least one tribal jurisdiction, they’ll charge more if your kid doesn’t make to school on time, or decides to skip school completely.  What if the parent’s are home-schooling – do they get charged per day for every kid they don’t send to school?  How enforceable is this rule, anyway?  Why isn’t anyone else asking these questions, or not reporting on them if they do?

My advice to parents who have kids in the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation school system - get your kids out now.  If not, your kids who graduate under this level of oppression and control will never have the mental fortitude necessary to fight it when they’re confronted with the natural expansion of this power in the future.

Letter to John Stossel

One of the things I get in my e-mail inbox regularly is “A Note from John Stossel” – I signed up for it on the ABC website, as I admire John for his regular and consistent libertarian outlook on the “Give Me a Break!” segments on 20/20, and his specials that highlight libertarian viewpoints of current events issues.

One of the letters this week is as follows:

"Dear John Stossel, I enjoyed reading your book ["Give Me a Break" ORDER HERE] so much that I bought a dozen copies and sent them out to friends and family. I am writing to let you know about one of the few negative responses I received...I almost always sent out your book accompanied by another; 'Black and White World' which is a collection of editorial cartoons by John Cox and Allen Forkum... When my brother received his copies of the books, he sent me... 'John Stossel seems like a good guy, just at the wrong time. I don't think the Republicans need defending... This response caught me completely off guard...I had a similar response from a Right-wing friend of mine -- only he accused me of being too liberal. I sent him the SAME two books!" Troy Omelchuk, Scottsdale, Ariz.

It think this illustrates the point I’ve always made about libertarians – we’re neither left nor right, liberal nor conservative, but a mix of both.  Libertarians tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative, fighting for more civil liberties in the way we run our lives, and less government intrusion in the form of taxes and fees.  I just thought this letter was very telling – the liberal brother thinks Stossel defends the right, while the conservative friend thinks he’s too liberal.  In fact, libertarians rise above both.

How Your Government Wastes Your Money

Read down this story , and when you get to the fourth paragraph, you’ll be asking yourself the same question I did: Are you fucking kidding me?  They can’t account for how much?  You know, I had to actually cut a check to the IRS this year for the first time in my 38 years as an American citizen, and survive a small investigation of my return from the year previous – I thought I handled it well and professionally, but now I wonder if I shouldn’t have put up a bigger fight.

In a slightly related story, I was reading an old copy of Wired magazine from December 2003 – there was a story about a guy who was a tech support expert for a Mafia-run betting operation.  He doesn’t make much considering what he does (an entire IT department’s worth of work for him and a second guy), but since it’s all illegal money, he has zero income and files no income tax.  Wonder how I get a job like that?

How Your Government Wastes Your Money

The Top 10 filibuster falsehoods

Interesting take on the judicial filibuster talk filling everyone’s minds with FUD.  The one thing the author forgot:

Filibusters are a child screaming to get it’s way.

In short, Democrats now (as well as Republicans and Democrats in the past) have used the filibuster as a kind of ad hominem against the other side.  Instead of debating the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate and putting forth logical objective arguments on both sides of the coin, Democrats are resorting to parliamentary procedures to simply dismiss judicial candidates.

Think of it this way – you’re a pre-teen age child and you want to stay up an extra hour.  Your parent’s say no, go to bed.  You then launch into a meaningless argument about why you should stay up, ask your parents when they go to bed, drink 3–4 glasses of water, come back downstairs to get something, ask them some philosophical question, hang around until you get noticed, and try like hell to get that extra hour out of them.  That’s what these Senators are doing – the President says, here are my candidates, and rather than accept them and vote on them, the Senate filibuster crew badgers everyone, makes a big stink, and refuses to do anything meaningful.  The difference is they don’t have parent’s around to smack them on their skinny little asses and send them to bed.

Ask me again why I think we should hit the reset button on government…

The Top 10 filibuster falsehoods ... [Media Matters for America]

Good news, Bad news

The bad news – a national ID card passed the Senate 100–0.  We all voted for these fuckers…

The good news – governors of several state aren’t taking this lightly.  They may have the wrong reasons for it (money issues, unfunded mandates and all that), but at least they’re complaining.

For me, I plan on simply not renewing my driver’s license when the time comes to nationalise.

Read about it in Wired News.

Man arrested for giving a manicure without a license

In the Concord Monitor Online, New Hampshire, a report from Monday talks about a man who was arrested for not being a licensed cosmetologist, and yet giving a manicure.  It was a protest – he’s not trying to be a manicurist in New Hampshire, but trying to expose useless licensing laws.

To be a manicurist in NH, you need around 300 hours of training, and take and pass numerous written and practical tests.  My wife was a licensed cosmetologist in the state of Illinois – the training requirements are comparable there to be a hairdresser.  IL even has a continuing education requirement – you need to take courses throughout your career to renew your license.

My big question is this – let’s assume I don’t have a license, but want to work in a barber shop.  I know nothing about cutting hair – how long will I last in the business?  If it’s my shop, I’ll fold in a month when people stop coming in – if I’m working for someone else, I’d give it a day or less.  Now let’s say I know how to cut hair, but don’t know about sanitary practices.  If I cause injury to someone because I don’t know how to properly sanitise things, I’d be liable for medical expenses and damages, and the bad PR and money I’d have to pay out would close my shop.  Now let’s say I figure that out and re-open, but I’m just not very good – people want styles I can’t reproduce, or procedures I don’t know how to do.  In order to expand my business, I’ll need to learn new skills – to be successful, I’ll need to keep up on the latest styles and techniques.

In other words, in order to run a successful business, I’ll need training on how to cut hair, how to do it safely, and keep up to date on the latest in my industry.  Everything I need to have a successful growing business I would do without a license, so why do I need one again?  Oh, right, so the government knows what I’m doing for a living.

Pahrump Valley Times - Nye County's Largest Newspaper Circulation

Thank You, Dennis Myers, for an objective look at the filibuster, for removing the ideological arguments for or against it from either party, and for giving me the word in your final paragraph I’ve been looking for to describe the Republicrats and Democans.  The word “dogma” connotes so much in the way of religious overtones and obstinate closed-mindedness – it fits the current political climate well, and also helps explain my own failing interest in politics lately.

http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2005/05/04/opinion/myers.html

Oh, and I notice I forgot to include the link for my previous post – sorry.  I added it back.

Boston.com / News / Local / N.H. / Police charge illegal immigrant with criminal trespassing

You know, I’m not sure how I feel about this story – for starters, I do think it’s a novel approach for the states to deal with illegal immigration (and a great way for states to start exercising their sovereign power over the federal government that Lincoln usurped in the 19th century).  On the other hand, I think the person they chose to use for their test case was bad – while he might have been an illegal alien, he was a working productive individual.  Perhaps NH could go after the illegals getting welfare or unemployment, rather than someone who came here to make a better life for himself and seemed to be doing it.

 http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/05/03/police_charge_illegal_immigrant_with_criminal_trespassing/

Reason: In Defense of "Judicial Tyranny": The religious right's court-unpacking scheme

Brilliant commentary on the recent spate of comments coming from religious conservatives about “activist judiciary”.  The term “activist” has never been satisfactorily defined in this context, and from my POV, they’re merely engaging in some rhetorical, vocal, and very public “sour grapes”.  Reason helps put this into some ironic perspective (FDR, the Great Socialist, had the same views and used similar language as the New Fascists do) – unfortunately, it’s been my experience that you can show a fundamentalist the blue sky above, and he’ll still condemn you to Hell for denying that it’s raining.

Reason: In Defense of "Judicial Tyranny": The religious right's court-unpacking scheme

Counterbias: The End of Personal Responsibility

In Counterbias: The End of Personal Responsibility, the author, one Susan Shafer, makes a very nice, and somewhat satirical, plea for the restoration of personal responsibility.  I agree, fully and whole heartedly, with her viewpoints here, although I’m not on her side of the political spectrum.

I also think she missed the boat on one thing concerning public schools, although I concede that, as elementary school librarian, she’s much closer to the problem than I.  Her statements around government controlling what is taught make it seem as if this is some future possibility, rather than a present fact.  Ask any kid in high school history class what the cause of the War Between the States was, and he’ll say, “What?” until you explain to him that you mean the “Civil War”, then he’ll say, “Oh, OK.  Slavery, dude.”  Ask him who the 15th or the 17th President was, and he’ll answer “Who?  Uh, Kennedy?”, but he’ll be able to name the Great Emancipator and recite anecdotes ad nauseum.  Ask him what the 9th or 10th Amendments to the Constitution are, and he’ll look puzzled, but he’ll know tha the 1st gives you freedom of speech at least (maybe religion and the press as well, but it’s doubtful he’ll know about assembly or redress of greivances).  Now I ask you, if the government isn’t running the government-run schools and controlling the curriculum, who is?

Correction to previous story

I received a comment on one of my entries (I’m not sure what I’m more happy about - the new information, or the fact that someone other than me reads this bloody thing), correcting my presumption that the Founding Fathers were all Christian.  In point of fact, not of all them were – the commenter was good enough to forward a link from the Quartz Hill School of Theology that explains and supports the religious thinkings of our Founding Fathers.  While it appears the School is very Christian in it’s doctrine and offerings, the article above is refreshingly open and forthright.  I also appreciated the section about the separation of Church and State with supporting quotes from various founding fathers.

My thanks to Colin J. who took the time to correct me and provide supporting documentation.

Be afraid - be very VERY afraid

In a recent story in the Pacific Northwest Medical Journal, titled Curing Obesity through Sterility: California 's Controversial Program Under the Microscope, I discovered a program implemented by the State of California (also called the Republic of California, which I refer to as the People’s Republic of California) which, in one sweep of a pen, could become this countries first mandatory eugenics program.  (I was unable to find a corroborating link for the San Francisco or the California program, or any web references to the state’s Committee for Exploratory Medicine).

While the current program is voluntary, it is scary – begun in San Francisco, this program offers state funded vasectomies to men diagnosed as being clinically obese.  The reason is rather simply stated in the second paragraph above – to eliminate the genetics of people deemed inferior to the defined norm.

Get that?  California is saying that if you are genetically inferior to some defined norm, they’ll pay for you to remove yourself from the available gene pool.  Other countries have enacted state funded sterilization in order to prevent overpopulation

Knowing the fact that California is anecdotally the most progressive state in the union, how long will it be before “voluntary” becomes “highly recommended” to “required” for certain cases?  How many other genetic differences will California add to the list?  Anti-social?  Homosexual?  Brown eyes?  I see this as the first step in a eugenics program funded by taxpayers to weed out undesirable elements – the next step would be to add incentives for people with desirable genetics to breed like bunnies.  Ever see “Gattaca”?  This is where California is headed.

This is now reason number one why I will never, ever, live in California, and another reason to never ever visit either.