The harder you push Left, the harder we'll pull Right.

    We as citizens know a universal truth that our elected representatives collectively seem to be willfully ignorant of; Budget bloat and uncontrolled spending are poison to our economy. The massive rate of the confiscation and redistribution of the earnings of our citizens coupled with unrestrained borrowing has become the catalyst for fraud, waste and abuse at the hands of those that have been elected to protect us. Politicians are awash in cash used mainly to curry favor with the movers and shakers that can get them re-elected. Taxpayers are funding lavish vacations (GSA), useless and defective armaments (F-22 and Osprey among others) and overpaying for public education (LAUSD, among others) while also being bled dry by the costs of 11 million illegal immigrants medical care, education and incarceration. Our government has become a bureaucratic nightmare to rival that of the Roman Empire or the Cold War era Soviet Union with levels of graft and corruption to match. 

     The Keynesian concept of increasing the dosage of poison to cure the patient of poisoning is the antithesis of logic and will lead us down the path of Greece, Italy, and France. The left here in this nation, along with the self-serving right, have wasted vast sums of our nations collective wealth on empty promises of alleviating the suffering of the poor, increasing our safety, etc with little to show for the money spent. Bridges to Nowhere, porous borders, and entire divisions of our government that sponge off of us like leeches while serving little purpose other than self-perpetuation have eroded the trust of the populace in our government. Massive bailouts, and corporate tax evasion have highlighted the political malfeasance and infuriated the citizenry, giving rise to the T.E.A. Party (Taxed Enough Already) and the aptly named Patriots that patrol our Southern border in the absence of our federal governments intestinal fortitude to do so. The need for politicians to appeal to the voters has created a limp-wristed government hell bent on being inoffensive. Political correctness has made the business of governance impossible while the ever increasing entitlements sector of our economy and interest on our national debt will soon preclude spending on anything else.

     In Europe, Germany has led the Austerity Movement as a way to stabilize the currency and keep the nations that are awash in red ink from dragging the rest of the continent over the cliff of insolvency. Greece, Spain, Italy, France and Portugal are being strong-armed to toe the line or risk being ejected from the European Union and its economic protections, and rightly so. These countries are being bailed out of decades of nanny-state socialism at the cost of many billions and substantial risk to the economic health of the stronger members of the 17 member alliance. The failure of socialism is evident despite the rantings of the proletariat, and as the weening from the government teat has commenced, the babies are crying. There is now a backlash and a socialist has been elected to run France and the leftists in Greece are defying the austerity measures. They have become so dependent upon the government that even a reduction in the number of paid holidays or a two year increase in retirement age sparks riots in the streets. 

    The path that we are on is unsustainable. As the worlds economic engine, we cannot continue to deny economic certainties and expect to remain so. At the end of this path is a global depression that will reset currency valuations and eliminate two centuries of American dominance. Our congressional leaders have become the ruling class that our forefathers warned us of. They have made a living of governance and protect their positions of power and privilege with layers of bureaucracy, rules and legislation. Term limits and a recalibration of the balance of power are needed. The current denizen of the White House, his cabinet, teams of advisers and multitude of "tzars" have proven to be inept and ineffective and have worsened the economic crisis we are in. Social divisions have been deepened, racial tensions have worsened and the national debt and unemployment have increased. Through the manipulation of statistics, the sympathy of the mainstream media, the Hollywood elite and many in academia, he is trying to make a case for re-election. If he ever had a plan, it has failed and he must go. If there were never any plan, if he is truly the "empty suit" academic he was charged with being in '08, then "the jig is up" and he must go. Either way, we need the "change" that he has spoken of, beginning with his office.

Abuse under Color of Authority

    When the Constitution was proposed to our forefathers in 1787, many were concerned that it was not specific enough about the fundamental rights of the citizens. The response was that since the Constitution expressly restricted the government to specified, enumerated powers, and since those powers did not include the power to trample on the fundamental rights of the people, it was unnecessary to expressly prohibit infringements of those fundamental rights. Moreover, the enumeration of certain rights, the responders argued, could be construed as implicitly empowering the government to trample on rights that were not enumerated. People’s concerns however, were not assuaged by such arguments. They knew, not only from their study of history but also from personal experience, that the tendency of governments throughout history was to abuse their powers, especially in times of “emergency.” Thus, the American people demanded that the document be amended to include express provisions for the guarantee of fundamental rights.
     That’s how the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, came into existence. The fear was that the federal government would somehow break out of the original Constitution’s enumerated powers straitjacket and misuse its powers to violate the fundamental rights it was charged with protecting. The enumeration of those rights and the express restrictions on government power in the Bill of Rights were to ensure against that happening.
     Today, the federal government has done exactly as our ancestors feared and our Constitution is under attack by our own government. They our eroding our rights, accosting the citizenry and ignoring the will of the people.

     Take a flight on a commercial airline, domestic or international, you will be subject to an invasive search without provocation, you will be physically accosted in a manner that would be criminal sexual abuse if perpetrated by anyone other than a government (TSA) employee. The bureaucracy created in the wake of 9/11 has become a behemoth to rival the IRS in its power and abuse thereof. Its agents have police/military like power with none of the training or prerequisites required of either. These “agents” are low wage thugs who seemingly go through the motions of their job without the application of common sense required of a McDonald's fry cook. Charged with preventing terrorist attacks, they strip search children, “pat down” inside the undergarments of elderly women and stare at semi-nude scans like lecherous perverts. They needlessly delay millions of Americans daily while embarrassing countless travelers with ridiculous directives, unseemly physical contact and outrageous violations of basic human courtesy, all at the cost of so many billions of dollars that it could not be mistaken for anything besides yet another government boondoggle. 
     There are thousands of documented abuses by the TSA and many websites devoted to exposing this charade for what it truly is; an expansion of the federal governments power at the expense, both monetarily and of our rights. Google “TSA abuse” and be prepared to be disgusted by what you read and angry enough to write to your Congress Critter.

$120 million for what?

     The LAPD is being sued. Again. There were almost 1600 lawsuits against the LAPD between 1998 and 2008 for trespassing, civil rights violations, traffic accidents, false arrest/false imprisonment, among other things. While many of these suits were obvious ploys for settlement dollars, others were legitimate complaints. Now they have apparently so egregiously hurt another member of our community that they believe they are owed an astronomical sum for their loss. $120 million dollars, for what? Police brutality? Nope. Cop speeding with no lights and causing a death? Nope. This time it was Suicide by Cop, played out for all to see on TV. 

    

    Prior to stopping, Abdul Arian led police on a high speed chase while speaking to a 911 operator. He said that he had been previously arrested for possession of a destructive device and that he had a gun. He also said that if the police drew their guns he would be forced to do the same. After stopping, as he ran from his car he stopped, squared his stance and pointed at or gestured towards the phalanx of alert and irate officers surrounding him. Needless to say, they opened fire on him and hit him 90 times.

    The family is understandably grieving and looking for answers. Why did this young man die? Why did the police shoot him so many times? We the public would also like some answers; Why did your son threaten the police? Why did he not comply with their demands? Why is the LAPD and we a society responsible for the erratic/insane behavior of your son? While you cry “racism” I will yell back “stupidity”.

     If you're going to commit suicide, please have the courtesy to quietly hang yourself in your closet, swallow some pills, or cut your wrists in your own bathtub. Do not threaten the police and disrupt traffic.

Here's hoping the old folks in black robes get it right...

     Can the federal government tell the states that they must provide (pay for) services to all  residents, legal or not, while failing to control the border or allowing the states to do it themselves? President Obama thinks so, and for the second time in a month, the US Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a major election-year dispute that pits state officials against the Obama Administration over the balance of power between states and the national government. While the court is set to hear arguments tomorrow concerning SB 1070, the tough Arizona immigration law, Obama seems to be on the opposite side of the majority of Americans on yet another issue; Polls show that despite the Obama administration lawsuit to block Arizona’s immigration enforcement law, Americans favor the state’s tough provision 2 to 1. Additionally, five states passed similar immigration enforcement laws in 2011. They are Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah. Three of those states were sued by the Obama administration, and all five state laws have been temporarily blocked by federal judges. Sixteen states filed a friend of the court brief supporting Arizona in the Supreme Court case. Eleven states filed a brief supporting the administration. 

 AZ Governor Brewer "scolding" Obama

    In what is beginning to look like the repetitive Ali vs. Frazier fights,  The same two lawyers who argued the health-care case are set to face off again in the Arizona dispute; Washington appellate lawyer Paul Clement and Solicitor General Verrilli.

    

     The question for the high court is whether Arizona and other states are entitled to pass state laws that mirror specific provisions in federal immigration statutes and strictly enforce those provisions even when the Obama administration has decided, as a matter of policy and budgetary constraint, not to enforce those same provisions. Obama’s attorneys will be fighting the usual uphill battle against the court’s conservative majority. Those five justices have already upheld another Arizona statute that revokes the business license of any employer who knowingly hires illegals. This had to be heard by The Supreme Court? Is it not common sense? WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DOES OBAMA NOT UNDERSTAND?

 

    Clement has proven to be a master wordsmith. “There is absolutely no conflict between these Arizona provisions and federal law because SB 1070 adopts the federal rule as its own," Mr. Clement writes in his brief on behalf of Arizona. He adds: "Unless and until Congress expressly forecloses such efforts, Arizona has the inherent authority to add its own resources to the enforcement of federal laws." He also has some powerful supporters. Michigan Solicitor General John Bursch points to the absurdity of the federal governments case in his brief on behalf of states supporting Arizona. "Congressional intent is furthered, not thwarted, when state law enforcement officers verify and communicate to the federal government their reasonable suspicion that an individual is in the country illegally. A contrary conclusion stands the whole notion of federal preemption on its head: a state enforcing congressional directives too well is an obstacle to congressional intent." 

    Compare federal immigration laws to other federal laws like the Clean Water Act. The antipollution regulation is designed to enforce a national environmental standard, but states are free to apply more stringent protections of water quality within their own jurisdictions without the government suing because it believes the states are usurping its powers. This makes Solicitor General Verrilli's argument in his brief on behalf of the administration that the Constitution assigns matters of immigration and border enforcement exclusively to the national government look like the political ploy it truly is. “SB 1070 is an attempt by Arizona to impose state priorities in place of the president's national priorities," Verrilli says. If SB 1070 mimics federal law, protects its citizens and saves the state money, how are those priorities contrary to those of the presidents national priorities?

The REAL reason Obama sued AZ

"It's not fair" and other childish memes

    "It's not fair", whined while stomping a foot, is often heard from preschoolers. The same phrase is shouted in playgrounds by kids angry at their disadvantage. By college age they are painting it on posters in protest of every perceived social injustice and once in the workforce they look for fairness under every desk.

    The truth is that fairness in not part of our universal construct, it is a manufactured concept that makes us feel better about the inequities inherent in our universe. There is a hierarchy to all things, both living and inanimate that cannot be wished or hoped away. In nature there are rules that cannot be broken simply because of the perception of unfairness. "Survival of the fittest" may seem fair to the lion, but the rabbit would feel otherwise. To handicap the lion may seem fair to the rabbit, but what of the lion's cubs waiting for food? 


    Therefore, fairness is subjective and is not the same as equality. Absolute equality exists only as an ideal. The formation of societal rules are an effort to organize and control our world while placating our apprehension about the lack of fairness. We humans are self aware, have empathy and "wish" and "hope" for everyone to have the same advantages. But rules cannot make strong those that are born weak or beautify he that was born ugly. Unfair? Absolutely, but unlike us and unaffected by the Human Condition, the rabbit being devoured by the lion does not waste his energy pondering how unfair his circumstances are, he is striving with every fiber of his being to survive.  We need to take a lesson from the rabbit.


   The concept of fairness is today being used as a weapon to cleave divisions within our society. To point to one group and denounce them as unfair roils up apprehension among the accused while serving as a battle cry for those with the perceived disadvantage. The weak being pitted against the strong, the haves against the have-nots, the producers against the consumers, the 99% against the 1%. President Obama would have you believe that we as a nation use more than our "fair share" of the planets resources, but fails to say that we as a nation protect and provide for a disproportionate number of people on the planet. Obama says that we need more rules to make our society fair, but doesn't acknowledge that the subjective nature of fairness means that to increase the advantage for some, he is handicapping others. He says that the wealthy need to "pay their fair share", but leaves out of the discussion that they are already paying not only their share, but the shares of half the nation that is not required to pay anything. 


    Marx was preoccupied with this concept as well. Socialism was born to remedy social inequities and was, in his mind, a necessary stop on the transition to the holy grail of communism where everyone in society would be equal. But Marx, like Obama, was unable to account for the inequality of human individuals. Some are more beautiful than others, some are more intelligent. Some work harder, or are fortunate enough to have had ancestors that amassed large enough fortunes that their families would be able to live in privilege and leisure for many generations. 

    Is it fair that some have more than others? Apparently not if your a child, a liberal or a communist.

    

    

Media Bias

    Whether it's political propaganda or an effort to elicit a social response, when mainstream news outlets slant their stories in an obvious effort to distort public perception, we as a society lose. 
    In the dark days before the internet we were at the mercy of the power brokers and the political elite. Unless one directly compared a printed news story to that of a foreign outlet or listened to international news on short-wave radio, you took for granted that because we live in a "free" society you were getting information free of political slant and free of a writers prejudices. We Americans hold the moral high ground and the editorial staffs are dedicated to this principal, right? RIGHT?
     Today we have the ability, the duty to sift through the information presented as facts and form opinions based on a preponderance of evidence. The dependence upon a single source or even a limited number of sources for news is lazy and inexcusable and results in a myopic view of not only the news but of the world. And yet, despite the incredible number of sources available to the average American, we seem to be woefully uninformed and pigheadedly stubborn in our ignorance. 

    Case in point: George Zimmerman vs. Trayvon Martin. 

    The spin started with the traditional race baiters trying to paint the incident as a white security guard with a chip on his shoulder gunning down an innocent black youth on his way home from purchasing candy at the neighborhood 7-Eleven. All of the usual talking heads crawled out of their holes to wag their fingers at society in general. Rev. Al Sharpton trotted out the family for photo ops crying "foul" that the "shooter" wasn't in jail.  Rev. Jesse Jackson mumbled his way through a dozen interviews in which he denounced the police, the district attorney, and society as a whole for the death of the poor, innocent black child who was in his words "profiled, stalked, callously targeted and murdered solely because of his race". The New Black Panthers put a bounty on Zimmerman's head!! 
    Each and every public statement, candlelight vigil or announcement by law enforcement was covered ad nauseum  by the mainstream media accompanied by a picture of Zimmerman and a picture of Martin. The picture of Zimmerman was a mugshot from years before in which he looks surly and disheveled, admittedly not his best moment. While Martins picture is also of an earlier time; he is pictured as a happy 12 year old. It was not disclosed initially that the "innocent boy" did not live in the gated community, was on suspension from school for drugs and violence, and fancied himself on social websites as a "thug". He was in Zimmerman's  neighborhood where there had been a rash of break-ins by a black youth matching his description. Furthermore, there was a witness that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman on the ground and Zimmerman's head and nose were bloodied when Police arrived on the scene. 
    While I can dismiss the rantings of the Crybaby Reverends because that is their schtick and we all know that they are not to be taken seriously, the suppression of information and the twisting of facts by the media are another matter. This is disinformation on the level of Soviet era apparatchiks disseminating propaganda. With no shame they have begun to slowly leak the complete circumstances, but the damage has been done and the sheep that refuse to look for the truth are already bleating the "Justice for Trayvon" meme. 
    It is now a political issue. President Obama has once again inserted himself into a news story and once again it is on the wrong side of an issue. This follows a pattern of his using the bully pulpit to cause division rather than being a calming, unifying force. We are now divided as a nation over yet another issue. An issue in which the outcome, whatever that may be, will have no winners. Another faux issue with a phantom antagonist manufactured solely to cause dissension and set up the final confrontation between the oppressed and the oppressors played out once again in a deeply flawed legal system.

 Originally released photos vs. Current Photos

Photo of Zimmerman's injuries

    Did the Rev.'s That Cried Wolf know the facts before stirring up the hatred? Would Obama have said that "Trayvon could have been my son" if he had known the facts? Is is possible that Zimmerman is telling the truth, that he acted in self defense? It's a damn shame that I think the answer to all three of those questions is probably yes. 

    

In the Begining

The excitement of my first post have elicited visions of grandeur in which I become famous and wealthy through the universal love of my witty prose...

Is that a paparazzi stalking me?