Friday, June 29, 2012

SCOTUS Got it Wrong… Again

Yesterday the Supreme Court of the United States handed down a ruling which basically said that the government has unlimited powers in the area of taxation and that Obamacare, as it has come to be called, doesn’t violate the constitution.  The judges who sit on the highest court of the land are supposed to be the most educated and well versed legal minds dedicated to sorting out the fine points of legislation to determine the constitutionality merits of each.  Let me say this now and get it out of the way, “What a Crock!”

The black robed members of the court are too smart for their own good; looking into the complexities of each piece of legislation while ignoring the most basic aspects of them.  All anyone need do is look at the Preamble of the Constitution and use it as a litmus test of any bill before them to determine whether or not they need to look further.  America was designed to work under the premise that government is responsible to the people who created it, that its laws would reflect the driving forces which compelled our declaring independence and yet this most important aspect of self governance has been ignored so often as to make responsible citizens more concerned about the welfare of individual liberty with each passing day.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defenc(s)e, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

There it is; a simple and concise purpose for anything which involves the governments relationship with “We The People” and all that follows, the nuts and bolts or as recorded, “separation of powers”, need only satisfy this grand intent. 

“The Preamble to the United States Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the Constitution’s fundamental purposes and guiding principles. It states in general terms, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Father’s intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped the Constitution would achieve.”

Now before you get yourself all worked up, I’m well aware that the Preamble of the Constitution has never been used to determine the legitimacy of any piece of legislation; at least not according to what has been historically done. 

“The Preamble serves solely as an introduction, and does not assign powers to the federal government, nor does it provide specific limitations on government action. Due to the Preamble’s limited nature, no court has ever used it as a decisive factor in case adjudication, except as regards frivolous litigation.” (emphasis added)

“Ay, there’s the rub”, as Shakespeare might have put it.  Hamlet was at that moment considering death as a way out, contemplating perfection as found only on the other side of mortality’s veil.  If only life were closer to that which our Creator had intended, “Ay, there’s the rub”.

The Blessings of Liberty (Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness) are, after all, a Dream; but a dream worth striving for as we seek to achieve what no other people have had the opportunity to achieve due to imperfect and/or corrupted governments.  Those who took up the challenge to establish the foundations of America were men looking for a more perfect union than what they had experienced in Europe.  Isn’t that our Great Experiment in self governance and the purpose of our founding documents, “to insure domestic Tranquility”?

Then what in the hell have these robed wonders been doing with our government?  They sure as hell haven’t been insuring domestic Tranquility!  They haven’t thought about the consequences of legislation which attacks an individual’s life, liberty or pursuit of happiness; no, not by a long shot.  These black robed pontificators are too busy checking on the fine print and have missed reading the HEADLINES. 

The Preamble of the Constitution is the headline announcing the very purpose of government and how to accomplish the preservation of individual liberty as was intended from the beginning.  Those who founded this nation paid for their Dream in blood which cries out from the grave, “What have you done with that which has been given you?”  Thomas Jefferson had a pretty good idea when he wrote:

“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?” (Works 8:404; P.P.N.S., p.141)

This glimpse at the Proper Role of Government, as related to us by Ezra Taft Benson used terms which a person of average intelligence could understand.

“Starting at the foundation of the pyramid, let us first consider the origin of those freedoms we have come to know are human rights. There are only two possible sources. Rights are either God-given as part of the Divine Plan, or they are granted by government as part of the political plan. Reason, necessity, tradition and religious convictions all lead me to accept the divine origin of these rights. If we accept the premise that human rights are granted by government, then we must be willing to accept the corollary that they can be denied by government. I, for one, shall never accept that premise. As the French political economist, Frederick Bastiat, phrased it so succinctly, "Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place." (The Law, p.6)”


“Since God created man with certain unalienable rights, and man, in turn, created government to help secure and safeguard those rights, it follows that man is superior to the creature which he created. Man is superior to government and should remain master over it, not the other way around. Even the non-believer can appreciate the logic of this relationship.”

I’ll include one last foundational thought from Bastiat before explaining how the Supreme Court has been deaf, dumb and blind to their assigned task of preserving domestic tranquility.

“Each of us has a natural right – from God – to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but and extension of our faculties?” (The Law, p.6)

Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled that our government had unlimited powers to tax, that Obamacare is nothing more than a necessary revenue tool to provide for the common needs of a nation’s stated goal of providing health care.  In so doing they ignored the most basic of rights, property rights.  Government has never had unlimited powers to confiscate an individual’s property and must justify at each step of the way a reasoned and lawful use for any money required of its citizens. 

Social Justice, isn’t that the term used today for latching onto one individual’s property or efforts to obtain property and then redistributing that property to someone who has not earned it? 

Property confiscation, by and individual or through the use of government by force or threat of force violates God’s commandment concerning theft as well as coveting that which your neighbor has and yet our nation was built upon these eternal principles.  Our government’s Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches have abandoned their charge to protect each individual citizen’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to such a degree as to make our current government nearly unrecognizable from that which our Founding Fathers established for domestic tranquility.

“The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision against Kelo (Kelo v New London) and her neighbors sparked a nation-wide backlash against eminent domain abuse, leading eight state supreme courts and 43 state legislatures to strengthen protections for property rights.” 

The Kelo ruling may have destroyed the reality of property ownership as our Founding Fathers had intended irrepealably as the Supreme Court found in favor of the “collective” over an individual’s rights.  Now include all other forms of confiscatory government action through regulatory mandates or taxes which enable entitlement programs, to include Obamacare, and the picture of a nation founded on sound principles of private property becomes nothing more than fragmented memories.

This my friend is an acknowledgement that we no longer live in a constitutional republic; rather, we are in transformative times paving the way to pure socialism; individual rights are only brought up when it’s convenient for the purposes of expanding the powers of government.  We now are being encouraged to move “Forward” to complete the transformation.

And so it is with Obamacare, the Supreme Court has ruled that government has an unlimited power to tax its citizens, as if they were subjects rather than citizens, to do with as the government pleased.  We now live in a collective socialistic society where government decides which individuals deserve the fruits of another’s labor.  Individual property rights have essentially been done away with.  

“The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part. The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause,” (Chief Justice) Roberts wrote. “That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage it. In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax.”

“Roberts stressed that the decision does not speak to the merits of the law. “We do not consider whether the act embodies sound policies. That judgment is entrusted to the nation's elected leaders,” he said.”

Justice Roberts may as easily have said, “We don’t need no stinkin’ Preamble to the Constitution to remind us of our stewardship to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.  Let the next election decide if we are going to be responsible; we’re doing the best we can with our blind folds on.”

We now live in a collective socialistic society where government decides which individuals deserve entitlements and equates such injustices with other common interests such as national defense.   Individual property rights have essentially been done away with.  Government can establish any program deemed appropriate and fund it through taxation regardless of the damage done to the nation’s ability to sustain such programs; passing excessive debt onto future generations and robbing even them of their right to private property.

Never mind our Founding Father’s thoughtfully constructed Preamble to the Constitution which instructs government representatives to, “Secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”; the Supreme Court doesn’t need to refer to these fundamental purposes when ruling on important cases.   History has proven the Preamble is simply a useless paragraph placed in front of some other words on an antique piece of parchment, a flexible document which has outlived its usefulness. 

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

A Career Vehicle

Every now and again certain vehicles make their way into my life; for lack of a better description they might be called “Career Vehicles” since the cash register never seems to stop ringing due to repeated “issues”.  Sometimes it involves an individual who misplaces his/her keys regularly, has a poor memory or too many irons in the fire and can’t keep up; what ever the reason I get to make second, third or even fourth time service calls to replace the same key.  I’ve learned to keep good notes so the second time around is much easier; just click my computer on.

A long time back I ran a lock out call for a fellow and used a fancy tool made just for that model; had his vehicle open in quick order.  I jotted down the key cuts and asked if he’d like a spare key to keep in his wallet to prevent his being locked out again; but he was in a hurry and declined.  An hour later the same fellow called, sheepishly he explained how he’d locked his only key in the car.  This time he was a mile further down the street.  I did cut him that spare key and used it to open the car.  Life supplies interesting moments, doesn’t it?

This morning had one of those interesting moments.  A small car lot that specializes in repossession sales called to have me make a door key to an Impala.  I’d made keys for an Impala at that same lot about a month or so earlier and recorded the information; a good thing since the door key was different than the ignition which had been changed out in a rather crude and unprofessional manner. 

Going back on the calendar to a week ago; the door key information came up on my computer and worked perfectly; but the ignition switch had been changed out yet again so the information I had wasn’t any good.  Their mechanic decided to take out the ignition switch and replace it one more time with one from the local auto parts store.  I offered to change the combination of the new ignition switch so that it would match with the door key; basically it would be the way it was when it came from the factory, one key fits all.

I didn’t charge them for the extra labor and handed the ignition switch to the car lot owner and explained how much simpler it would be having to keep up with only one key instead of two.  I’d already made keys for that unit a couple of times as it was and a little “good will” with a regular customer never hurts.  He would later give that ignition switch to his mechanic to put it all back together since the dashboard looked like a bomb had exploded.

That gets us back to the present when I got called out to make a door key for an Impala.  I asked a couple of questions before heading over thinking it must be the same car, it was; but they insisted the key they had didn’t work in the door.  I pulled up the information on my computer and cut the door key which worked perfectly; but was not only different than the ignition key which they handed me, it was also different than any “old” ignition keys I’d recorded.

It turns out the mechanic didn’t want to “waste” money on the new ignition switch which had already been purchased and matched to the door.  He decided to take that switch back for a refund; but he left the only key for that car in the returned ignition switch. 

He then took the beat up ignition switch, the one left over from the bomb detonation, and took it to some locksmith shop down the road where a key was fashioned for it.  That key worked; but didn’t spring back from the Start position the way it should and so I looked at the way the key had been cut hoping it might enlighten me as to why.

There’s a “maximum adjacent cut” rule for General Motor keys which states there are not supposed to be more than 2 cut differences on adjacent cuts because the shallow cut’s landing surface will be narrowed to a point where it becomes non-existent.  The key which had been fashioned for this ignition appeared to violate that rule in a couple of places.  In the middle of the key were a pair of One Cuts (same a No cuts) adjacent to a pair of Four Cuts on either side. 

One of two things had happened; either the key machine used to cut the key was way out of adjustment and the Four Cuts were actually Three’s or some interesting things were going on inside that ignition switch.  I cut a replacement key with my hand cutter, which cuts a near perfect factory key based on probabilities and it worked; but still did not spring back from the Start position.  My guess is the cuts to match the wafers had not been “read” properly and one or more of the cuts were off; but it did work, not great, so the ignition switch would not be removed from the dash board.

I handed the secretary my bill along with an explanation so she could justify one more locksmith expense to an already long list of repairs for that unit.  When the owner signed the check I gave him an explanation of what was going on as well.  This is when I found out the mechanic had returned the brand new ignition, the one I had matched to the door at no charge.  He just shook his head and accepted the fact that he had a minimum wage mechanic; you really can’t fix stupid.

I added the latest key information to my existing list of keys that have at one time worked on that vehicle.  After all, this Impala has become a career vehicle and will eventually find its way onto another work order. 

This will also appear as a feature article on Fiercely Independent Locksmiths of America’s  website where our motto is, “Refining our God given talents one lock at a time”.

Monday, June 25, 2012

Every Friday At The Pentagon

Every Friday At The Pentagon

I was not aware of this practice until now. I am pleased that it happens, and am astounded that it does happen, given the political situation that exists in our government today.

It really breaks my heart to know that we didn't know this goes on every Friday, well at least I didn't know. Instead, I guess the media feels it's more important to report on Hollywood stars as heroes. I hope this article gives you a sense of pride for what our men and women are doing for us, every day, as they serve in the armed forces here and abroad. (Reprinted as it was received)


Mornings at the Pentagon

McClatchy Newspapers

Over the last 12 months, 1,042 soldiers, Marines, sailors and Air Force personnel have given their lives in the terrible duty that is war. Thousands more have come home on stretchers, horribly wounded and facing months or years in military hospitals.

This week, I'm turning my space over to a good friend and former roommate, Army Lt. Col.. Robert Bateman, who recently completed a yearlong tour of duty and is now back at the Pentagon.

Here's Lt. Col. Bateman's account of a little-known ceremony that fills the halls of the Army corridor of the Pentagon with cheers, applause and many tears every Friday morning. It first appeared on May 17 on the Weblog of media critic and pundit Eric Alterman at the Media Matters for America Website.

"It is 110 yards from the "E" ring to the "A" ring of the Pentagon. This section of the Pentagon is newly renovated; the floors shine, the hallway is broad, and the lighting is bright. At this instant the entire length of the corridor is packed with officers, a few sergeants and some civilians, all crammed tightly three and four deep against the walls. There are thousands here.

"This hallway, more than any other, is the `Army' hallway. The G3 offices line one side, G2 the other, G8 is around the corner. All Army. Moderate conversations flow in a low buzz. Friends who may not have seen each other for a few weeks, or a few years, spot each other, cross the way and renew.

"Everyone shifts to ensure an open path remains down the center. The air conditioning system was not designed for this press of bodies in this area.

"The temperature is rising already. Nobody cares." 10:36 hours: The clapping starts at the E-Ring. That is the outermost of the five rings of the Pentagon and it is closest to the entrance to the building. This clapping is low, sustained, hearty. It is applause with a deep emotion behind it as it moves forward in a wave down the length of the hallway.

"A steady rolling wave of sound it is, moving at the pace of the soldier in the wheelchair who marks the forward edge with his presence. He is the first. He is missing the greater part of one leg, and some of his wounds are still suppurating. By his age I expect that he is a private, or perhaps a private first class.

"Captains, majors, lieutenant colonels and colonels meet his gaze and nod as they applaud, soldier to soldier. Three years ago when I described one of these events, those lining the hallways were somewhat different. The applause a little wilder, perhaps in private guilt for not having shared in the burden ... Yet.

"Now almost everyone lining the hallway is, like the man in the wheelchair, also a combat veteran. This steadies the applause, but I think deepens the sentiment. We have all been there now. The soldier's chair is pushed by, I believe, a full colonel.

"Behind him, and stretching the length from Rings E to A, come more of his peers, each private, corporal, or sergeant assisted as need be by a field grade officer.

"11:00 hours: Twenty-four minutes of steady applause. My hands hurt, and I laugh to myself at how stupid that sounds in my own head. My hands hurt. Please! Shut up and clap. For twenty-four minutes, soldier after soldier has come down this hallway - 20, 25, 30.. Fifty-three legs come with them, and perhaps only 52 hands or arms, but down this hall came 30 solid hearts.

"They pass down this corridor of officers and applause, and then meet for a private lunch, at which they are the guests of honor, hosted by the generals. Some are wheeled along. Some insist upon getting out of their chairs, to march as best they can with their chin held up, down this hallway, through this most unique audience. Some are catching handshakes and smiling like a politician at a Fourth of July parade. More than a couple of them seem amazed and are smiling shyly.

"There are families with them as well: the 18-year-old war-bride pushing her 19-year-old husband's wheelchair and not quite understanding why her husband is so affected by this, the boy she grew up with, now a man, who had never shed a tear is crying; the older immigrant Latino parents who have, perhaps more than their wounded mid-20s son, an appreciation for the emotion given on their son's behalf. No man in that hallway, walking or clapping, is ashamed by the silent tears on more than a few cheeks. An Airborne Ranger wipes his eyes only to better see. A couple of the officers in this crowd have themselves been a part of this parade in the past.

"These are our men, broken in body they may be, but they are our brothers, and we welcome them home. This parade has gone on, every single Friday, all year long, for more than four years.

Did you know that? I didn't. Don't send it back to me, just be a Patriot and send it on its way as you see fit.

Thursday, June 14, 2012

Old Style Police Work

I’m going to relate a story which I heard well over 30 years ago when I was a working cop.  Whether or not it’s fact based or just somebody’s idea of a good “yarn” really doesn’t matter; the reason for sharing this story has to do with how it was received 30 years ago and how it falls into “unacceptable” now.

It seems a burglary suspect was brought before the judge to have his official Miranda Warning read to him; but before the judge began reading the suspect interrupted and wanted to complain on the arresting officer for excessive force.  The judge observed that the fellow did indeed look like he’d been taken behind the woodshed; blood dripping from an open wound on his arms, nose and a cut over his right eye.

The judge got up from behind the bench and walked around to inspect the suspect’s injuries.  It was then that the judge commenced beating the living day lights out of the suspect.  He jumped on him, kicked him and put a knuckle sandwich in his mouth before stopping, walking back around the bench and sitting down to complete his duties as judge.

“Now young man, if that’s what the officer did to you then you might have a good case against him; but if you’re smart you’ll shut up and just go to prison and be glad I wasn’t the one who caught you first.”  (or something very close…remember, this story is from quite a while back.)

As a young police officer sitting in Traffic Court one afternoon, I actually got to observe something similar.  An officer pushed open the doors of the courtroom while dragging a bloodied handcuffed prisoner towards the bench.  Everyone, and I mean everyone took notice as the courtroom became deafeningly quiet; all except an on going exchange between the suspect and the arresting officer who keep telling him to shut up. 

The judge, a little perturbed, asked what was going on.  The officer was about to speak when the suspect shouted, “He stabbed me with my own knife!”  Sure enough you could see where there were puncture marks on the suspect’s arms and some blood seeping on the sides of his shirt just above his belt line.

The officer was calm and collected as he explained how during the course of arresting this fellow for his particular crime (*) the suspect pulled a knife on him and that, yes, he did have to wrestle the knife away from the suspect.  He never denied stabbing the suspect; simply explained that any damage done was part defending himself and completing the arrest.  (I couldn’t say what that crime (*) was as this happened back in the early to mid seventies; but it was either Robbery or Burglary). 

There was a time when there were 2 levels of justice.  Most of us, if/when we got in trouble at school got a swat with the paddle; but the real punishment came later when we got home and our parents read the note we were required to show them.  Our parents reinforced a level of expected social performance.  As children we knew what those levels were and learned to act accordingly or suffer the consequences of our actions.

That same kind of process used to exist without much public furor if a criminal happened to get his butt whipped during the process of being arrested.  If the suspect resisted in any way, shape or form cops had every reason to believe that doing what was necessary to affect an arrest would be okay with the Department as well as the general public.  Sure there were cops who went over the top and beat folks just because they enjoyed hurting people.  Bad apples have existed in the past and will continue to be rooted out and dealt with; but there has been a shift in public attitude which goes in a direction that reeks of hypocrisy.  The noisiest portion of our society would rather defend the actions of our criminals over those of law enforcement officers.

We expect cops to be robotic, lacking any trace of emotion during those few brief moments of an arrest when their adrenaline is running at peak levels.  We expect them to turn off that rush of energy within half a second of containing the situation and to somehow recognize that moment as if they too had instant replay, slow motion and the benefit of watching their own arrest as a third party observer.  Now we point our fingers, reprimand, demand removal and file criminal charges on police officers who’ve scuffled with a suspect during an arrest for what we considered a few seconds too long.

I’m sorry if this old time cop mentality offends your delicate senses; but that old judge had it right, “Now young man, if that’s what the officer did to you then you might have a good case against him; but if you’re smart you’ll shut up and just go to prison and be glad I wasn’t the one who caught you first.” 

This article (will be) cross posted (once the site is back up) to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Monday, June 11, 2012

Freeways and Freeloaders

Freeways are not free; they are very expensive to build and maintain.  For that matter, neighborhood streets, connecting roads and all of what we now take for granted to get us from point A to B have come at a staggering cost and the up-keep requires considerable resolve. 

Many states are coming to the realization they don’t have sufficient funding, or as we say around our house, “there isn’t enough money at the end of the month”, as they try to scrounge through the sofa looking for spare change.  According to an article by Dan X. McGraw, some states are considering a “Tax by the Mile” levy on drivers.

“Politicians are struggling to figure out a way to adequately fund state and federal road and bridge repairs for the future. The federal gasoline tax of 18.4 cents hasn’t been increased in nearly two decades, and few politicians seem eager to increase it.”


“As the (national vehicle) fleet becomes more fuel efficient…we’re going to lose a lot of revenue from the gas tax,” he (Josh Schank, president of the non-partisan ENO Center for Transportation) told the newspaper. “If it’s not replaced, we’re going to see our transportation infrastructure deteriorate.”


“Some states are exploring using the car’s onboard technology to remotely send the data to officials or using a pre-pay or unlimited mileage system. James Whitty, a manager at the Oregon Department of Transportation, said wrote in a Bloomberg column that officials must do something to fund future infrastructure.”

Before I jump on board of any new fuel tax or increased levy system on drivers to pay for road building and repair, wouldn’t it be better to find out how much is being brought in and then find out where that money is being spent?  There’s more information supplied by Zahira Torres from the El Paso Times, Austin Bureau, explaining how Texas legislatures are coming up short in their transportation budget.

“Since 1991, Texans have paid a 20-cent state tax per gallon every time they fill up their cars. Five cents goes to help pay for public education and the remainder, about $2.2 billion annually, helps finance the state’s transportation system. An increase of a penny would provide $115 million a year toward transportation and $38 million for public education. If the increase goes solely to transportation, it would provide $153 million annually.” 


“Another suggestion is to increase vehicle registration fees.
Drivers in the state pay different registration fees based on a vehicle’s age. Registering a new car costs about $59, excluding county, road and bridge fees. Drivers of cars that are at least 7 years old pay about $41.”

States are looking for ways to match spending with income.  Actually, since we’re talking about government, they’re looking for ways to bring in additional taxes so they can figure out ways to spend it all and then some; but that’s just how government works.  Why not figure out how to spend less on some budget items that are less productive and divert that money towards the infrastructure which we all depend upon?

The next part made my head hurt trying to make the figures work; but my math skills have always been a bit lacking.  That said here’s what State Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso said regarding Texas roads.

“An estimated $487 billion would be needed to continue meeting the state’s highway needs for the next 20 years, according to a report by the 2030 Transportation Committee.”

Okay, I’m with him so far; that means we’ll be spending $24.35 Billion each year for the next 20 years if my calculator can be trusted.

“Texas’ two-year budget for transportation is about $16 billion but will go down by about $2 billion in the state's proposed 2012-13 budget.” 

Hold on there, Partner; that doesn’t add up.  I thought he said it would cost around $24.35 Billion per year; then how come the two-year budget for transportation is listed at only $16 Billion?  Then it will go down by $2 Billion for the following 2 years; how can that be?  Folks in government would call this “fuzzy math”; but when I was in school they circled the answer with a red pencil and told me to improve.

Let’s put funding for our transportation infrastructure on hold and venture off on a tangent and see if it is related.  Joel Nagel wrote an article explaining how the government can now restrict your ability to travel if you happen to owe them back taxes.  I’ll keep this short so go read his article; basically his last line summed it up:

“The Government beginning with the Passport Act of 1926 considers travel a “privilege” not a right.” 
All that money you’ve been paying at the gas pump in taxes along with your vehicle registration fees which are intended to help pay for road building and maintenance; all that money you paid does not “automatically” entitle you to use those roads, provided you have a driver’s license.  Travel is a privilege, not a right.

While we’re talking about money that should go toward transportation, how about we consider Food Stamps?  Nobody is “entitled to” or has a “right” to Food Stamps, just like Travel is not a right.  Nicholas Ballasy’s article, Sessions: Food stamp spending up 100 percent since Obama tookoffice, happens to bring up a comparison of spending tax money on Transportation with Food Stamps.

“The vast majority of federal spending in the Senate farm bill, which is estimated to cost over $100 billion annually, is going toward food stamps, representing a 100 percent increase since President Barack Obama took office, according to Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions.

“The legislation will spend $82 billion on food stamps next year…we will spend next year $40 billion on the federal highway program,” said Sessions, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee.

“Food stamp spending has more than quadrupled, four times, it’s increased fourfold since the year 2001. It has increased 100 percent since President Obama took office,” he said.”

You mean to tell me we’re spending more on Freeloaders than on Freeways?  We just increased spending on Food Stamps in the past three years by 100 percent; how much more good could that money have been used on restoring, upgrading and improving our transportation infrastructure.  The government has more than enough tax revenue if they’d quit wasting it.  We could forget about increasing the gasoline tax, forget about raising vehicle registration fees and toss that Draconian idea of taxing motorists by the number of miles they drive if we changed the direction of spending.  Get rid of the freeloaders first and we could take care of the freeways in short order.

This article (will be) cross posted (once the site is back up) to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Saturday, June 02, 2012

Texas Mandate Tuition Set Asides

If you weren’t aware, students attending institutions of higher learning in the State of Texas have a portion of their tuition fees set aside in order to comply with federal student aid (FAFSA) requirements.  This is enumerated under the Texas Education Code, Section 56.011, 56.012, 56.095 and 56.465 and applies to all students.

My daughter received her notification explaining how her $ 351.65 “donation” is helping provide money to some poor student via mandated wealth redistribution.  I find that remarkable since my daughter had to take out a student loan in order to complete her senior year; the poorest among us are digging deeper into debt in order to finance an entitlement program; only America!

This serves as a wake up call, “Welcome to the system”, as she is now taxed simply because the government can get away with it; gouged like roughly 50% of America’s responsible tax payers while letting the other 50% skate. 

My daughter graduates this year, having completed the requirements of a “four year” Mechanical Engineering degree with its accompanied two and a half years of “co-ops” working at NASA and applying what she’d learned.  She’s well prepared to jump into the deep end of the pool and be a full fledged tax payer with a long list of responsibilities. Paying for her own tuition and this “included” mandated expense, she can lay claim to having lent a helping hand to an illegal alien who gets attend our universities at a greatly reduced price.  Don’t you know how proud and thrilled my daughter is to have helped a needy fellow student?

This reminds me of the fellow who lost a ten dollar bill and was physically sick about it.  One of his friends tried to console him, “Just think, some needy person probably found it”.  After hearing this, the fellow replied, “Yea, but I’m the needy person who needs to find ten dollars!”

Students are being asked, scratch that, students are forced to pay for their fellow student’s education while many of them are trying to keep their own heads above the water line; what does that say for the folks who wrote such a mandate?   I’m proud of my daughter’s accomplishments and determination to achieve her goals.  Let’s hope she makes enough as a mechanical engineer to support many more undeserving individuals, just like the rest of us.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Friday, June 01, 2012

Florida was Settled by Criminals

In American History they taught that Florida was a depository for European criminals; but how long does it take to purge them from the voter rolls?  It would appear Republican Gov. Rick Scott has been doing his part to make voter rolls match up with eligible voters; even asking Janet Napolitano’s Homeland Security Department to assist in this effort.  So why are the feds, specifically Eric Holder’s Justice Department, telling Florida to cease and desist cleaning up the mess?

“In a move that comes just months before the state could play a pivotal role in the 2012 presidential election, the U.S. Department of Justice contends that the state is violating federal law in its effort to identify and remove ineligible voters.”

You’d think the Justice Department would be in favor of removing ineligible voters; but you’d be wrong considering how corrupt these top law enforcement officers appear to be based on their recent past, failing to do anything about the New Black Panthers harassment of voters in Philadelphia, and let’s not forget the Fast & Furious gun running fiasco in which our own federal agents placed automatic weapons in the hands of Mexico’s drug cartels and got at least one Boarder Guard killed with one of those weapons. 

“Federal officials said that the procedures the state is using to identify non-U.S. citizens has not been reviewed to make sure they are not discriminatory. Florida must get approval for changes in voting procedures because five counties are still covered by the Voting Rights Act of 1965.”

So, why haven’t the procedures been reviewed?  This would be like a gas station owner watching a fresh delivery of fuels being directed to the wrong storage tank, say thousands of gallons of Diesel fuel being poured into the Regular gasoline underground tanks.  Rather than stop the delivery and clean out the Diesel fuel prior to customers filling up and damaging their fuel systems; according to the way the Feds operate it would be safer to wait until they knew for sure that Diesel fuel actually damaged gasoline engines; insanity or criminal negligence, either way the damage is done.

“A Department of Homeland Security official said Thursday that the federal agency is aware of Florida's request but that there a "number of legal and operational challenges" to granting the state access.”

Let me get this straight, Homeland Security can’t help validate or cooperate with the State of Florida’s request to eliminate ineligible voters, primarily illegal aliens living in the State of Florida because of “legal and operational challenges”.  Is that the same as saying the Department of Homeland Security would be unable to help because our current administration is so corrupt that it would be in our best interests to have illegal aliens continue to vote and cancel out actual American voters who want to cleanse the State of Florida and the United States of America and set things right?

Why hasn’t Eric Holder been thrown out on the street; better yet, why hasn’t he been indicted and sent off to prison?  I’ll tell you why; spineless members of the “old guard” GOP, that’s why.  They are so afraid of doing what is necessary that they’d rather just “get along” with the devil himself.   Why isn’t Speaker of the House John Boehner demanding investigations; oh, I forgot, he’s out playing golf with Obama.  These nasty pieces of business are better left to unimportant folks, expendable members of the GOP less likely to have support like California Rep. Darrell Issa. 

When the government fails to represent “We The People” bad things eventually happen.  Tyranny is a poor substitute for our constitutional republic and yet that is what we have when the rule of law is exchanged for corrupted politicians who’d rather remain in office than do their jobs.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.