A Word On Federalism, For Those Who’ve Forgotten It

5 Comments

Someone at Students For Liberty, a group which I am a big fan of, has taken a whack at the “states’ rights movement”, as he calls it. He rightly points out that Ron Paul is a huge believer in states’ rights, but wrongly believes that diminishes Paul as  a candidate and champion of liberty. This concept, my young friend, is called FEDERALISM. Our republic was founded on it, and, the excesses of the federal leviathan notwithstanding, it remains the bedrock of American governance. It’s the legal manifestation of the fact that the states CREATED the federal government, not the reverse, hence the name “United States of America”. Also note that the nation is often referred to, and has been since the earliest days of the republic as “these United States”. Plural. The idea is that the Founding Fathers understood that the states were and are very, very different from one another culturally, economically and politically, and brought about a weak, limited federal government to reflect that and limit its ability to arrogate power and authority to itself. This left the states to handle their own internal affairs, for the most part. The federal government really has a very limited purview, as one may note by reading our federal Constitution.

It’s also worth remembering that it is easier to petition your local or state government than it is the federal government. This has always been the case throughout human history; the bigger the government and/or political unit, the harder it is to influence, and the more power it aggregates as a by-product. It’s really easy to sit upon the libertarian ivory tower and say “…advocates of liberty should abandon the “states’ rights” movement—which is, at best, a potential cork in the hull of a sinking ship—and instead direct their efforts toward a long-term, lasting cultural and philosophical shift in favor of individualism and rights-respecting government.” Okay, but in a pragmatic sense, what sorts of governmental arrangements are most conducive to that? And perhaps more importantly, how do we relate the philosophy of liberty to the vast, vast majority of citizens who are unfamiliar with it, using institutions and ideas they ARE familiar with? I know! How about we have a conversation about bringing government as close to the people as we can… and that old saw “That government governs best which governs least?” Some old chap with a powdered wig said that… Jefferson, I believe, was his name. Smart guy.

In a practical sense, the closer a government is to its people, the easier it is to influence, cajole, petition, or threaten. I can pick up the phone or send an email and actually reach the Arlington County Board, or even my state Delegate or Senator personally. Ever tried that with your U.S. Representative, to say nothing of U.S. Senators, or the denizens of the numerous unconstitutional federal departments and agencies we’re buried under? Right, that’s what I thought. States are merely smaller political units, and the author is correct in saying that they have no intrinsic rights as such. However, one look at the Constitution will tell you that they possess quite some number of enumerated rights. If you’re going to try and stand for liberty and against the massive federal leviathan state which is the REAL enemy of every libertarian, paleoconservative, objectivist and every other flavor of liberty activist, the states are the proper vessels for your ambitions. Let’s just agree that we want the local government to do only what we CANNOT do for ourselves, the state to do only what the local governments cannot, and leave the federal government to deliver the mail, provide for the common defense, handle foreign policy, resolve disputes between states, and sit down and shut up otherwise.

RIP, Major Bob Marchanti

10 Comments

If you crawled out from under your rock for at least a few minutes this past week, you probably heard that Frothing Fundamentalist Fruitcakes™ of the Perpetually Outraged Muslim persuasion have been rioting in Afghanistan after the US disposed of some books…

Yes, they were books. They were Islamic holy books which were defaced by insurgent pig humpers – books they used to send messages to one another – but they were books nonetheless.

And because of this… incident… rotting, ignorant, murderous sacks of swine excrement killed two innocent men. US Soldiers who volunteered to leave their loved ones in America and help that pestilential pit of opium and disease out of the Stone Age.

One of those Soldiers was Major Bob Marchanti. We deployed to Kosovo with more than 1000 others in 2007 as part of KFOR-8. Bob and I didn’t “hang out.” We weren’t buddies. We had a professional relationship. I knew him. He was a good man, an excellent leader and an exemplary Soldier.

But the fact that we weren’t close doesn’t make the loss any less real or painful. We hurt for all the Soldiers and their families who are hurt or killed in Afghanistan. We shake our heads as huge, opulent funerals are staged for celebrity crackheads, and we remember those with whom we spent months and years – those who perished without fanfare or flowery words from celebrity commentators. There is no 24-hour news cycle detailing the deaths of our fellow service members.  Perhaps because there are so many of them, that society has become too accustomed to them… too complacent.  We mourn our fellow service members and we remember their dedication, their love for their country, their skills, their leadership and their guidance. We know who we are. We have served with them, lived in the same barracks and tents with them, and worked with them.

There’s nothing much left to say about the fetid, loathsome pieces of dirt who go on killing rampages such as this. Misha was eloquent as usual in his mock “apology” to Hamid Karzai, even as our own President issued apologies about the accidental burning of the Korans.

His Imperial Majesty is sorry too. He’s sorry that we wasted untold billions of taxpayer funds and, what’s infinitely worse, American lives trying to bring your fucking miserable hell hole of a backwards heap of barbarian shit into, at the very least, the 12th century. His Imperial Majesty is sorry because a few ICBMs would have achieved more than that at a fraction of the cost and we would never, EVER have had to waste a moment of time on the sensibilities of your newly created field of glowing glass. We’re sorry that you’re still sucking air, and we’re enormously sorry that we, somehow, gave you the impression that we give a flying fuck at a rolling donut whether you live or die.

You have already seen the potent “apology” of Kira Davis.

And many of you might want to check out the advice of Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere about what a REAL President would have written to Hamid Karzai.

I know you don’t really understand this, but trust us, it beats the hell out of being a splodeydope for 72 raisins. However, if you can’t get your rock-worshipping savages under control, the gloves WILL come off, because there is a new sheriff in town here, and we don’t really give two shits about “world opinion” until the world starts policing their own shit.

I will add my own words of love and adoration to Hamid Karzai.

Listen, you festering yambag. We know you’re a morally corrupt, ungrateful bag of rancid effluvia, who sleeps ass-deep in Iranian cash, and who condemns the West at every turn, even though without us you’d still be humping your goat for entertainment and drinking sheep piss to stay alive. We understand that you don’t give a flying rat’s fuck about the people of Afghanistan, their plight or the fact that we’re there to help and train them.

But enough is enough!

What do you suppose would happen if we began rioting and killing off your people every time you burned the American flag? What do you think would happen to you and your swine-fellating brethren if Americans went on murdering rampages every time we saw images such as this?

Or these?

Or this?

Or even this?

Because I guarantee you that we, Americans, feel just as strongly about our flag as you do about your book. I guarantee you we understand what it stands for, and we love it just as much as you love that holy text of yours. Even more so, because we understand the meaning of it. We understand what it symbolizes. We appreciate the freedoms for which it stands. Meanwhile, you and your cattle sodomizers can’t even READ that book, since the vast majority of you cockslurpers are illiterate, and the only thing you know about that book is what your pedophile imams tell you is in it!

So trust me when I tell you that if we ever started rioting and killing you bastards every time you burned an American flag, there wouldn’t be a whole lot of you left.

You killed a good man the other day. You left his family fatherless and husbandless, and you left his friends and fellow Soldiers wondering why, after the roads we built, the kids we befriended, the infrastructure we erected, the troops we trained and the rights-destroying Taliban we booted out, you would kill innocent men because someone burned a book that you cannot even read!

Rest in peace, Maj. Marchanti. They can’t harm you any longer.

My new future wife

5 Comments

It’s Friday, and I don’t feel like blogging much, but I feel I need to share this.

I have found my future wife. I’m totally in love with this chick. Her name is Kira Davis She is awesome in every way. So instead of blogging why I love her, I encourage you to listen to her.

Oh… and if she’s already spoken for, I nominate her for President. I don’t care which party.

Allowing idiots to be idiots

21 Comments

The Virginia General Assembly passed a bill that will allow private adoption agencies to discriminate against gay couples based on moral and religious grounds.

Supporters of the “conscience clause” measure said it protects the religious rights of private agencies, many of them faith-based, that contract with the state to provide adoption and foster care services. The legislation is based on regulations adopted by the Virginia Board of Social Services in December. Converting those regulations into law would ensure that a future administration could not change them without legislative approval.

The legislature’s Democratic minority vehemently opposed the legislation, saying the intent is clearly to make it tougher for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered Virginians to form families.

That is exactly what the bill is intended to do. There’s no denying that. It makes it legal for private agencies to discriminate against same-sex couples based on their religious and moral beliefs, and frankly as ridiculous as I find said beliefs vis-a-vis stable, loving, gay couples adopting children, I do agree that compelling these organizations to go against said beliefs by government force is wrong. If a private agency honestly believes that disqualifying a stable gay couple from placement through their agency, (especially since these couples are apparently more likely to take in an older disabled child, who is ostensibly more difficult to place) is morally correct, so be it. It’s private. As long as my tax dollars don’t go to support stupidity, private organizations can be as stupid as they want to be.

If said prejudice results in a child being placed in a substandard “straight” home over a more appropriate, more stable “same-sex” home, the government should stop dealing with said agency and shouldn’t allow the adoption until the best home can be found. Period. The welfare of the child should be first and foremost. But let ignorants be ignorant. Let them act based on their beliefs and prejudices.  Just don’t let them avoid the logical consequences should their actions prevent the best outcome for the child involved.

As far as I know, the legislation still prohibits government discrimination against gay couples, and any court, as a government agency, would be prohibited from preventing a gay couple from adopting a child based on this standard.

So let them act on their prejudices. It will be their loss in the long run.

Oh, how they change!

1 Comment

It amuses (and pisses me off at the same time) me to see how pathetic politicians change their essence for political expediency.

Rick the Frothy Mixture™ Santorum in 1990: I don’t want to return to Reagan-Bush.

Rick the Hypocritical Dildo™ Santorum in 2012 (trying to compare himself to Ronald Reagan):   Ronald Reagan told the truth. He didn’t sugarcoat it. He went out and called it the way it was. He went out and promoted the values of our country.

 

Joe Newby is an Idiot (with amusing update)

34 Comments

Let me preface this post by saying that I’m not a fan of Ron Paul. Much like Michelle Malkin, I think he’s solid on core economic issues, but his foreign policy and defense views make him a no-go in my book.  I have said this several times on this blog and other fora.  I think much like Obama supporters, a good majority of Ron Paul supporters are frothing zealots who worship the cult of personality that is Ron Paul, instead of objectively looking at the candidate.

Having said that, let me proceed to the core message of this blog post.

One of the things I really hate on both sides of the political aisle – be it conservative or liberal – is this tendency to invoke the USSR and Stalin/Lenin when things don’t go their way.  Bear in mind, these people, for the most part, have grown up in the United States, never having known the actual horror of totalitarianism, never having known the USSR, Stalin, Lenin, Khruschev, Brezhnev or any of the other monkeys who made living in that communist dictatorship hell.  They toss around words and phrases such as “Stalinist tactics,” “censorship,” and “Soviet” in an attempt to make themselves victims and elicit some sort of sympathy without truly understanding what they mean.

Prime example is this Joe Newby character.

Joe Newby is a conservative fan of Mark Levin. Mark Levin is a radio talk show host, author, conservative commentator and lawyer. I’ll be honest, I’m not a fan of Mark Levin. I agree with a lot of his points about the economy, but he’s a bit too much of a social conservative for my taste.  He’s rude to callers who dare to voice even the slightest disagreement with his rants, he insults them, doesn’t allow them to get a word in edgewise, and hangs up on them. The only people who are allowed to speak to His Greatness are ones whose tongues are so far up his ass, they lick the back of his teeth.  Additionally, as a former broadcaster, his voice is like nails on a chalkboard to my ears, especially when he gets angry and starts to squeal like an angry sow.

All of this is beside the point. I know how to change the channel on my car radio, so when Levin comes on WMAL in the evenings, I merely tune out and listen to something else.

But back to Joe Newby. A recent article of his whines and complains about Mark Levin being taken off the air at a Toledo radio station WSPD, ostensibly for “disagreeing with Ron Paul.” I’d like to address this article, because of the sheer ridiculous rhetoric, lack of understanding of true principles of liberty, and complete constitutional retardery emanating from this douche.

Supporters of Ron Paul like to say they support freedom and the Constitution.  That is, unless someone disagrees with Ron Paul – then all bets are off.

Now let me say this: I’ve personally gotten into heated debates with rabid Ron Paul supporters. I know first hand just how obnoxious and frothing they can get. But this claim that all support for the Constitution goes out the window when someone disagrees with Ron Paul is not just stupid, but disingenuous. The most rabid of his supporters skew polls, flood any negative articles about Dr. Paul with flaming rhetoric and generally revert to some form of “if you don’t support Ron Paul, you’re a totalitarian asshole, who doesn’t understand the Constitution” meme when confronted with any dissent.  Does that make them anti-freedom and anti-Constitution? No. But Joe Newby’s understanding of the Constitution is remarkably shallow.

Earlier in the week, conservative talk show host Mark Levin was removed from Toledo’s WSPD for disagreeing with Ron Paul, after being part of that station’s lineup for more than five years.

Levin addressed the situation by first acknowledging all the program directors, managers and executives of the more than 250 radio stations that carry his program.

He explains that one of the hosts at WSPD is Brian Wilson – a man who also happens to be the program director.

“He is also a contributor of articles to a website of a gentleman named Lew Rockwell, who is a former chief of staff and newsletter editor to Ron Paul,” Levin said, adding that “this host slash PD is very close to the Paul people.”

Levin said he has been extremely critical of Ron Paul and have “gotten into it with some of his folks.”

If by “gotten into it” means called Paul a “crackpot,” calling his followers “the biggest assholes there are” and comparing them to Marxists, then sure.

So Levin insults Ron Paul and his supporters continuously on the air, knowing that his PD is a friend and a supporter, and then is surprised when his contract isn’t renewed, right?

Personally, I see no problem with this. Levin is entitled to his opinion, and the program director is entitled to either keep or get rid of his show. That is that little thing called “freedom.” You certainly have the right to voice your views, but not to avoid the consequences of your words.

But apparently, to Levin sycophants like Newby, who want to portray poor Mark Levin as a victim of those evil, dictatorial Ron Paul supporters, that is just Marxist and Soviet in nature.

But when it came time to renew his contract with the station, Wilson decided to cancel Levin because of his political views, a tactic similar to that used in the former Soviet Union.

Since Joe Newby obviously has shit for brains, let me issue a little correction.

In the former Soviet Union, Mark Levin would never have been allowed to utter anything resembling criticism of the regime, like he does on the radio every night.

In the former Soviet Union, there were no privately owned broadcasting outlets. They were all state owned, and neither Brian Wilson, nor Mark Levin would have been allowed to air their views – or any views critical of the state – on the air.

In the former Soviet Union, the government-controlled media would have shut Mark Levin up – not a PD working for a privately-owned (or corporately owned) radio station.

Levin was taken off the air for biting the hand that fed him, so to speak. For all intents and purposes, he insulted his boss’ views, and like in any free society, that boss had the right to take action if he so chose. In other words, they both made free choices – and Levin faced the consequences of said choice.  Believe me when I tell you that in the former Soviet Union, those choices would not have existed.

But to Newby, facing the consequences of one’s words  and actions is something akin to Stalinism. He believes that his idol, Mark Levin has the right to speak his mind, but his employer doesn’t have the right to fire him based on that speech, even though he is the one providing Levin with the medium to broadcast those thoughts and paying him to do so.

And then there’s Levin himself, who’s not above invoking the festering carcass of Stalin to make himself out to be a victim in all this.

Levin said that his team received a note from Wilson basically saying that unless Levin apologized for comments made about Paul and some of his supporters and changes his attitudes, he would not be renewed.

“It’s one thing to drop a program and to add a program, and everything in between.  It’s quite another to try and censor a program,” Levin said, in order to control what he says on the air.  Levin said that rather than wait the 90 days, “we quit,” and excoriated Wilson for using “Stalinist tactics.” [emphasis mine]

Stalinist, eh?

You mean like complimenting Ron Paul’s son Senator Rand Paul for being rational and astute in March 2011…

“…there is a lot that is sensible, particularly on the Rand Paul side of the family when it comes to the Constitution, and economics and so forth.”

…and then threatening, yes THREATENING to work to defeat Rand Paul in Kentucky, despite admitting that the Senator has it together when it comes to the Constitution and economics, if Ron Paul runs as a third party candidate.

“If Ron Paul decides that he is going to go third-party, which is detrimental to this nation, and pulls a million votes, which is relatively insignificant in the big scheme of things, I will do everything in my power to defeat his son in Kentucky. I will do everything in my power to defeat his son Rand Paul in Kentucky,” Mark Levin said on his radio program tonight.

This is how thoroughly irrational and backwards Levin and his supporters are. Apparently spouting off nationally about your boss’ views and his friends and political allies and reaping the consequences of your boss’ decision to discontinue your employment is “Stalinist.” But threatening to use your considerable media resources to defeat the SON of a politician with whom you disagree – merely because you dislike his dad, and having publicly admitted the son is actually a good politician (yes, I know – an oxymoron) is perfectly OK.

Being fired from a job, because you continuously insulted your boss is totalitarian, but using your extensive media contacts and outreach to exact revenge upon an innocent man because of who his father happens to be is somehow moral and right. Because, gosh… Ron Paul threatens the status quo, so we must sacrifice Rand Paul for the good of the country.

Which one sounds more totalitarian?

These men grew up in a free country. They grew up in a nation where the government is prevented by the Law of the Land from infringing upon your rights. They have enjoyed those rights since childhood. They have opportunities to broadcast their views. They have media to publish their judgments and beliefs, and they do so without government interference or the fear that they will be silenced by government force.

They have no concept of what it’s like to live under a totalitarian regime, where the state controls all media, where their voices would be silenced by government force, where they would be jailed or killed for speaking out against those in power.

And yet, they have the gall to sit in front of their mikes and computers and assail the very system of freedom that protects their right to be pernicious warts on a national level. They purport to support freedom, and yet they smear others’ right to logically react to their words.

They want their freedom to spew, but don’t like it when they have to confront the fallout of said spew. They want their right to say what they want, but don’t want others to have the right to react as they see fit. Their freedom to speak their minds is sacrosanct, but their employer’s freedom to dismiss them as a result is not.

Mark Levin apparently thinks he has the right to that job, no matter what he happens to say on the air, without consequences. And his employer’s decision to terminate him based on those words is “Soviet” in nature.

It makes it clear that despite being a constitutional lawyer, Levin not only has very little respect for the rights protected by said Constitution, but also doesn’t understand the nature of the freedom it protects.

As for Newby, the fact that he parrots Levin’s petulant claim about the program director using “Soviet tactics,” when he ended the station’s association with Levin’s show, shows him to be an uninformed buffoon who wouldn’t know freedom if it jumped up and licked his shriveled nutsack.

For two people who have never lived under the Soviet regime, who have never been censored by the government (and no, an employer’s decision to take Levin off the air because of his views is not censorship, it’s the exercise of the employer’s right to run his station as he sees fit – his property rights), and have spent their lives taking advantage of the rights and freedoms this nation strives to protect, these two are sure quick to toss out the “Soviet tactics” accusation when confronted with the unpleasant reality of having to sow what they reap.

UPDATE: So Joey boy was whoring his ridiculous article on the Spokane Examiner Facebook page. I decided to go over there and confront him about his assclownery. I told him, in essence that he had no clue about what Stalinism was, and no idea what the Soviet tactics he claims were used in the firing of Levin actually were. I encouraged him to keep writing, because it showed everyone what kind of jackass he truly is.

Joey replied with the usual deflection of “you don’t know what I’ve been through!”  He then proceeded to claim that he was merely quoting Levin when using the “Stalinism” quote.  So I pointed Joey boy to his own words: But when it came time to renew his contract with the station, Wilson decided to cancel Levin because of his political views, a tactic similar to that used in the former Soviet Union.

Whoops!

Caught with pants down!

Now you didn’t expect me not to call Joey Boy out on his lies, did you?

I did, and guess what happened next!

He deleted both my comments, and barred me from commenting on that page again!

I note with no small amount of irony that when confronted with his own ignorance and lies, Joey boy simply erased my posts and prevented me from commenting again.  By his and Levin’s standards, I should now be claiming that they’re using “Soviet tactics” against me!

After all, I have a right to my opinion, and it doesn’t matter that it’s a medium owned and managed by someone else! Right?

No?

It’s Newby’s page? But… but… but…

Exactly.

Clue to Holder

1 Comment

Congress represents the American people (yes, I know many of you will find this debatable, but bear with me here). They are duly elected representatives of the American people – the same people for whom you work, dilweed!

So when you arrogantly ignore the duly elected representatives of the American people as they investigate your numerous lies and obfuscations in the ” Fast and Furious” investigation, don’t be surprised if you are held in contempt of Congress.

On Tuesday Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House committee on Oversight and Government Reform, took a major step toward holding Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for his failure to provide subpoenaed documents and other information about Operation Fast and Furious.

In a Jan. 31 letter, Issa had threatened Holder with such a move if he failed to provide all the subpoenaed documents relating to the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal by Feb. 9. That deadline has come and gone, and Holder’s Department of Justice still hasn’t provided most of those documents. Issa’s subpoena dates back to Oct. 12, 2011.

If I had to choose a member of this administration that I consider the most appalling, racist, repugnant, lying sack of malodorous excrement, I would have to say it’s Attorney General Eric Holder. And that’s saying a lot in a town where politicians hide cold, hard cash in the freezer, regularly fail to pay taxes, drunkely crash their vehicles into police barricades and assault children (yes, I’m referring to you, Jim Moran!)

This is a guy who accused Americans of being cowards when it comes to discussing racial issues, while running a Justice Department that ostensibly favors black defendants over white victims.

This is a government official who is a terrorist coddling, terrorist pardoning, race baiting, criminal pardoning (as long as they’re Obama supporters), Second Amendment hating corruptocrat.

This is an Attorney General who lied repeatedly in the Fast and Furious investigation, and who finally gave a definition of “lying” so similar to Bill Clinton’s definition of “is,” I had to look closely to see if Holder was wearing a Bill Clinton mask during the hearing.

And now he shows his contempt not just for Congress, but for the American people for whom he works, who pay his salary and to whom he’s supposed to be accountable.

Not that the arrogant bastard cares.

Subpoenas? He don’t need no stinkin’ subpoenas. He’s Eric Holder, dammit!

Someone please run this crooked reprobate out of town! I’m sick and tired of reading about his continued disregard for America and Americans.

 

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: