New York is Creating Jobs!

Yes, it's true! After decades of businesses closing their doors and people fleeing the state for employment and lower taxation, New York State is finally seeing a surging job market!

In the unemployment sector, anyway.

Thousands Of Newly Jobless Americans Crash Unemployment Systems In 3 States

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - Electronic unemployment systems in at least three states crashed under the crush of thousands of new claims from unemployed Americans.

Other states rushed to adjust their systems to avoid similar problems as the flow of Americans claiming unemployment benefits after losing their jobs continued.

Along with having trouble keeping up with online filings, state unemployment centers are also swamped with telephone inquiries.

The situation has an upside though, some states are hiring workers to deal with the increased workload created by other people losing a job.

THAT's an "upside"? In what way? It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a Lexington car accident lawyer to see that this type of economy is completely unsustainable. It is being built to fall. It seems that every clear-thinking American realizes this, but the politicians will not. And the media is promoting the dunderheads with their propaganda.

New York, North Carolina and Ohio were the three states whose systems totally shut down because of the increased use. In New York alone, about 10,000 people per hour tried to log on to file new claims or check the status of claims they had already filed.

U.S. unemployment has surged to 4.5 million Americans collecting unemployment benefits, which is a 26-year high.

So New York has been hiring more operators to help with the increased unemployment claims. And this is the "upside" because there are some people who are getting employment. So HURRAY because there are five steps backwards for every step forward? Ridiculous, just ridiculous.

Now You Ask?

Political Conservatives has a very good video of Ron Paul that I missed. (Too much vacationing on my end, perhaps).

Texas Rep. Ron Paul:

"We should be doing hardly anything in Washington but politically that is unacceptable. But that's the right thing to do.

Because when you develop a financial bubble and have too much investments and too much debt and too much malinvestment, you have to liquidate it.

In 1921, we had a severe depression. It was over in one year. In the 30's we had another one, but then the government decided to do all these things, bail everybody out (exactly what we're doing now) and it prolonged the correction.

So it's sad, but the whole thing is, is you should let these banks go bankrupt, you should let all the companies go bankrupt, that overextended themselves. The politicians would feel that they're not necessary, and they wouldn't like that so they have to do something. But everything they're doing is wrong so far."

Bill Maher:

"But if that's true, why do so many economists say we should do the opposite?"

Paul:

"Well, you're listening to the wrong economists if you think they're serious.

All Keynesians, Socialists, Welfarists, will say you have to do something. But if you believe in the free market and you understand the business cycle (the business cycle was caused by the Federal Reserve System), you know that you have to get rid of the mistakes that were built in the system.

The real cause was created by the Federal Reserve. And yet very few people are talking about the Federal Reserve."

Maher:

"But isn't the free market what got us into this situation? It must be a hard pill for you to swallow, because I know a free capitalist like yourself, hates socialism. But it's the screwing up of the free market and capitalism that now has brought us socialism."

Paul:

"Yeah, okay, now you've touched on the most critical question ever in dealing with that.

Because in the 30's, they said the same thing... that capitalism and the gold standard caused our problems. But that was an absolute falsehood. It was the Federal Reserve and government intervention that caused it.

Today, we haven't had capitalism. We've had too much regulation, too much spending, too much debt, too much inflation by the Federal Reserve, so we're not even close to capitalism."

Maher:

"But that's in the past. I mean, we're in this fix now. My question to you is: If we did nothing, as you are proposing, or even cut taxes and spending, give me a realistic estimation of what this country would look like in six months, in a year, in five years."

Paul:

"In six months to a year, it would still be tough, but it would be over. But the way we're going now, it's going to last fifteen years. That's where the real problem is.

But the whole thing is, is my argument won't work unless you cut. And I say you have to cut and balance the budget. But we're spending one trillion dollars on overseas maintenance of our empire.

I say: Bring all our troops home, quit spending this money, save hundreds of billions of dollars, cut the deficit, spend some of that money at home, but you can't keep printing money!"

Maher:

"Yeah, I agree with that. If we want to get serious, we have to really get serious. Which would be, I agree, ending our overseas empire. "

CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF ILLEGAL DRUGS

Maher:

"Well, in this country, people like pot. And if we ended that prohibition, that would be a giant boon of money."

Paul:

"Okay, I don't like pot. But I hate the drug war so I would repeal all the prohibitions. But I wouldn't even bother taxing it.

I would just say that people have the right in a free country to make important decisions on their own lives. If they want to make mistakes they can. They just can't come crawling to the government to be bailed out or taken care of if they get sick.

But I believe in freedom of choice, in all that we do, as long as the individual never hurts anybody else."

CONCERNING THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND THEIR SO-CALLED FISCAL CONSERVATIVE APPROACH

Maher:

"Do you guys have any credibility? You're the ones who ran up a couple of wars on the credit card and drug entitlement thing for the Medicare. It seems in my lifetime, Bush, the second Bush, and Reagan - these were the guys who broke the budget. Clinton's the one who left it okay. How did your party get to be the one who's preaching about fiscal conservatism? "

Paul:

"Well, they preached it, they didn't practice it. So they have absolutely no credibility. I hope I have a little bit. But the Democrats haven't been in charge too long yet but they're going to lose credibility if they expand the war. What about sending 17,000 troops into Afghanistan? I mean, that's not the way to have change! I want the troops to all come home. I don't want to expand the war into Afghanistan. So we need to do that or you're going to lose credibility too as all the Democrats will."

Maher:

"Right. I'm with you on that one. Thank you. Congressman Ron Paul everybody!"

I don't understand Americans sometimes. Why dismiss such an obviously intelligent, articulate, qualifiable candidate for president, and then run to him every time you need an answer to the problems plaguing our country? Is it some national disassociative plague? A desire for self-punishment and destruction? Turn on the national faucets, Americans, and cry your eyes out-- you asked for these problems. Me, I voted for Ron Paul.

:(

FFQF: My Favorite Amendment

Choosing a favorite amendment of the Constitution is something akin to choosing a favorite son, or a favorite xbox 360 game. So I am not exactly choosing one amendment over the others, just stating a particular amendment that I meditate on more than the others. And, oddly enough, this particular amendment also seems to be a Big Government favorite too-- it's definitely government's favorite one to bash and of which they have regulated away its lifeblood and intent.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It's the Fourth Amendment, and I wonder why this one has been allowed to be so thoroughly mangled and misrepresented as it has. It's quite clear in its meaning and intent. It's a perfect banner of liberty for a free people. Yet for all intents and purposes, it's as if the Fourth Amendment no longer exists for us.

The right of the people to be secure.... government has no right to invade our dwellings, our bodies, our possessions, our effects without a warrant issued under PROBABLE (not suspected) cause. It SHALL NOT be violated. And even IF a warrant is issued, there must be an oath or affirmation specifically describing what or who is to be searched.

How clearer can this possibly be?

Hercules Mulligan poignantly pointed out last week that it seems the FFQF theme for this month (the Bill of Rights) has turned out to be more of an elegy to these great doctrines. I regrettably say this is an accurate observation. I have been one of many crying the eulogy. How can I antiseptically discuss the Bill of Rights without taking into account the beatings and slashings they have received? The Bill of Rights is not mere words of ink on parchment: they are a section of the doctrines of human liberty as endowed to us by our Creator. They are living, breathing words (that do not change with the whims of society). These are ideas that cost men and women their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. These are ideas that are TRUE. How can we treat them as menial and disposable so as to obtain a sense of security that tyranny brings, or material comfort that lethargy brings?

A Victory for State's Rights

If you don't have pitchforks to defend your land, litigation will do.

Good news today for state's rights defenders, and Upstate New Yorkers who have spent that last two years under the threat of a monstrous power line skulking over their properties:

Court ruling hailed by NYRI opponents

If the state of New York rejects the New York Regional Interconnect power line application, the federal government can't step in and approve the application anyway, a ruling Wednesday by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit means.

"It's huge," said Steve DiMeo, the local representative on the multi-county group Communities Against Regional Interconnect.

The suit, filed by DiMeo's group, the New York State Public Service Commission, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and the Piedmont Environmental Council, challenged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's interpretation of a key section of the 2005 Energy Act.

New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who led a group of 14 other states in filing amicus briefs to the suits, also hailed the decision.

“Today's decision denies the federal government the right to big foot New York State, and empowers citizens to protect their communities,” Cuomo said in an emailed statement. “As Attorney General, I will continue to fight for New York's right to make decisions on projects like NYRI based on our state's environmental and energy needs, not on the desires of private companies or the federal government.”

Of course, the federal commission may appeal. Here's hoping they get the point and BUTT OUT. This land is OUR land, buddy.

For a while now, NYRI has been feeling the pinch. A few weeks ago, the company complained that the Federal Commission's decision was taking too long.

"NYRI's investors have in the last two-and-a-half years spent over $18 million in engineering costs, right-of-way acquisitions, and state and federal regulatory proceedings with no guarantee that they will have a reasonable opportunity like every other utility-transmission owner in New York to recover their investment," the motion reads. "Unless the commission grants the requested rehearing or clarification, it is unlikely that large-scope, technologically-innovative, congestion-reducing projects like the NYRI project will be built because there will be no way to recover a return of and on the investment."

Oh, boo hoo. They want to create a Draconian monster that trumps property rights and will scourge Upstate New York like Mesothelioma, and here they are complaining about their bottom line.

Like I said: when we can't use pitchforks, litigation will do. All hail the ingenious American.

Vacation is a Beautiful Thing

So after a few manic weeks of forcing myself to complete various assignments and tie a few loose ends at work, I've decided to relax this week and do

nothing.

That's a rare word from a workaholic.

I've been inspired, you might say. I read someone's online review of the book, Shadow Divers, The True Adventure of Two Americans Who Risked Everything to Solve One of the Last Mysteries of World War II by Robert Kurson. It looked fascinating, so I got it. Couldn't put it down. Then I spotted an older book (1972) The Lusitania by Colin Simpson. It's much more academic, not as suspenseful, but still an excellent read. I have this sudden and strange fascination with German U-boats and other such machinery of late. I suppose I have been hitting the studies a little hard and have needed some R&R. It's been nothing short of luscious to relax with a good, enjoyable book. Hadn't done it in a while and I've missed it.

So this week I will sit in the corners of my room where the sunbeams cast their weary winter's gaze, grab a hot cup of joe, and read books. And watch Christian videos. Which reminds me, GodTube has changed its name to Tangle. Meh. Not a good move, personally. I liked God Tube, it was such a straightforward name.

Oh, and I'll not be reading headlines this week, either.

Not much, anyway.

FFQF: Bill of Rights Rant

This month, the theme for the FFQF is "Bill of Rights." I admit I am having a bit of a struggle with creating content right now. As I sit here, just one thing comes to mind:

THEY'RE GONE! THE BILL OF RIGHTS IS GONE!

They've been dissected, mangled, misinterpreted, revised through court injunctions... we have them in name only, but when it comes to prctice, what do we really have? And how many people KNOW what the Bill of Rights contains? How many people are knowledgeable of their own freedoms? That's the crime.

I love the Bill of Rights. They were developed out of the pressuring from the "anti-Federalists," who were extremely concerned that the new federal government in 1788 would rise up a terrible tyrant and strip the states of their liberties. James Madison and Noah Webster explained that a Bill of Rights was unnecessary, because the Constitution as written already limited the federal government's powers (few and enumerated). The anti-Federalists were not succored, and demanded an enumerated list of the most basic rights of the American people-- the basic untouchables for the federal government. And the Bill of Rights was born. And so, in less than 500 words, our basic rights were delineated. Take the time to read them now. See how brief they are. And as you read, think of how they have been mangled to make them say what the federal government wants them to say, not how We the People know them to say.

Amendment I

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.

Amendment II

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.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

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 offense 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.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

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.

I think these rights are worth preserving. And I again repeat my challenge that our nation should stop reciting the stupid Pledge of Allegiance, and turn to the Declaration of Independence Preamble and the Bill of Rights; that every schoolchild and government worker be forced to recite it before every work day begins.

Repeal 25th Amendment?

That idiot, Jose Ferrano, D from NYC, never ceaes to amaze me. he comes up with the most loathesome, stupid, harmful ideas. From the RFID in the driver's license to the NYRI project, to this.

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

This is like thumbing their noses to We the People. These jerks won't give us term limits for congressmen, but turn around to give themselves raises and then propose removing term limits so as to create a monarchy. And how very convenient now that we have such a worthy Savior to be our new king.

I very much like the 25th amendment; I like it more and more as the years go by, especially as I witness the buffoons and pawns who get elected to office every term. Moreover, judging the quality of our elected officials the past 60 years or so, I propose limiting all governmental office terms to a YEAR.

God help us.

Legal Poisoning

From The Washington Post.

Almost half of tested samples of commercial high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) contained mercury, which was also found in nearly a third of 55 popular brand-name food and beverage products where HFCS is the first- or second-highest labeled ingredient, according to two new U.S. studies.

HFCS has replaced sugar as the sweetener in many beverages and foods such as breads, cereals, breakfast bars, lunch meats, yogurts, soups and condiments. On average, Americans consume about 12 teaspoons per day of HFCS, but teens and other high consumers can take in 80 percent more HFCS than average.

"Mercury is toxic in all its forms. Given how much high-fructose corn syrup is consumed by children, it could be a significant additional source of mercury never before considered. We are calling for immediate changes by industry and the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] to help stop this avoidable mercury contamination of the food supply," the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy's Dr. David Wallinga, a co-author of both studies, said in a prepared statement.

In the first study, published in current issue of Environmental Health, researchers found detectable levels of mercury in nine of 20 samples of commercial HFCS.

Corn syrup is Big Fascist Business in the United States. It's subsidized by the government and Big Business dumps it into just about every processed food available. Corn syrup is known to be a major cause in obesity, diabetes, and other health problems. So mercury or no mercury, the food supply in this country is being filled with products toxic to the human body, and the FDA is entirely complicit.

Not surprisingly, the Corn Refiners Industry has issued a press released claiming that the study is flawed:

“The article’s authors and IATP engage in unfounded claims and speculations based on scant data of questionable quality. High fructose corn syrup is safe for use in foods and beverages. To imply that there is a safety concern based on this incomplete and flawed report is irresponsible,” stated Audrae Erickson, President of the Corn Refiners Association.

“The article and the report are based on outdated information of dubious significance,” Erickson added. “Americans should know that no mercury or mercury-based technology is used in the production of high fructose corn syrup in North America.”

“It is important to put these questionable findings into context. Trace amounts of mercury can be found in the air, water, soil, and many other foods. The authors admit that they cannot determine the source of the mercury cited in the report.”

“Equally important,” noted Erickson, “the amounts of mercury the authors and IATP purport to have found in food products containing high fructose corn syrup are far below levels of concern set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Ah, that's the caveat, isn't it? Mercury is in EVERYTHING, so a little in the corn syrup doesn't hurt. And what's more, no one knows where the mercury is coming from. So pass the syrup, everybody!

Nothing is mentioned how MUCH corn syrup is dumped into our foods, and, therefore, more mercury is in our foods. And nothing is mentioned about determining where and how this mercury gets into the syrup, nor is anything mentioned about eliminating it.

Intentional or not, this is essentially the legal poisoning of the food supply, on the same level that adding flouride to drinking water makes the population more docile (Hitler's minions found this out rather quickly). Yet, there are no conclusive results that flouride in drinking water has prevented tooth decay (which was how the flouride was sold to us decades ago).

Mighty strange.

Out of Touch

Completely, totally, insanely out of touch.

Silver says New York needs to boost tax revenue

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver says the state's income tax brackets ultimately should be restructured, but
not now.

The Manhattan legislator says the immediate goal is to increase revenue to help close a projected $13 billion budget deficit for the state's upcoming fiscal year.

Silver's majority in the Assembly has previously passed legislation to raise taxes on New Yorkers earning $1 million or more a year. He says that so-called "millionaire's tax" is still before his Democratic conference, and he hasn't brought any other proposal.

Wouldn't it be better just to flush New York State down the toilet? Just to confiscate everyone in New York State and declare them, their income, and their property as slaves to the system? I mean, why beat around the bush?

FFQF: The First 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.

See what's up with today's FFQF at Meet the Founders blog

The Bill of Rights is getting a beating these days. Have people entirely forgotten? How is it that more people know the underwear size of their favorite celebrity rather than the Bill of Rights?

There is a vast ignorance of the liberties that have made us a free nation. The Founding Fathers realized this- that liberty without religion and morality (these elements at their very least; but better yet, the conversion of the heart by Christ) would lead to licentiousness. And yet the very security they gave us for assuring such liberty has been dismissed (and accepted) with the nonsensical phrase "separation of church and state."

"Yes, we did produce a near perfect Republic. But will they keep it, or will they, in the enjoyment of plenty, lose the memory of freedom? Material abundance without character is the surest way to destruction." -- Thomas Jefferson

"Religion, morality, and knowledge ... [are] necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind." -- Northwest Ordinance (1787)

Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime & pure, [and] which denounces against the wicked eternal misery, and [which] insured to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments. -- Charles Caroll

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?" -- George Washington

Our plight is pitiful.

Of course, there will always be those who decry the Christian religion, the liberties of our nation, the intents of the amendments. But never before have so many been swayed by the decrying. Never before have so many troughs been filled with plenty by government largess, feeding the masses who stupidly and willingly walk on to the slaughter.

I made a suggestion and I repeat it again: rather than the Pledge of Allegiance (or sports scores) chanted across the PA systems of this country, all schoolchildren and government officials should be forced to recite the Declaration of Independence preamble and the Bill of Rights before beginning the workday. I think we need some "balance" here.

Addendum referring to "balance": I touched on another element of the First Amendment at this post, discussing the new, modernist definition of one clause of the amendment.

The End of Free Talk Radio?

Free public talk radio just may go the way of the dinosaur- or the satellite- for the same reasons that television went to cable. Government kooks are demanding "balance" on the airwaves. Although it's just Bill Press (Kook Oficiale) blabbing with Senator Stabenow from Michigan, these two are vocalizing what some other, quieter kooks are thinking:

BILL PRESS: Yeah, I mean, look: They have a right to say that. They’ve got a right to express that. But, they should not be the only voices heard. So, is it time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.

BILL PRESS: Can we count on you to push for some hearings in the United States Senate this year, to bring these owners in and hold them accountable?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.

Once again, I defer to the First 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.

As WE THE PEOPLE, we have the right to free speech, not the right to "be heard." This Fairness Doctrine is anti-First Amendment. Tax dollars and taxpayer's ears are not to be used so that some may be "heard" for the sake of "balance."

Mr. Press, I DO NOT want you to be heard. I do not want to hear you at all. I refuse to be forced to pay so that you may be heard. As a matter of fact, I strongly urge you to shut your flap. It's annoying.

Americans are, for the most part, perceptive and shrewd. If you force this Fairness Doctrine down our throats, we will find another way to tune you out, and hear and say what we want.

May the Fourth Be With You

What ever happened to the Fourth Amendment in this country? What ever happened to WE THE PEOPLE standing up for it, defending our rights?
Controversial measure would require DNA sampling at arrest

OLYMPIA — Suspects arrested in cases as minor as shoplifting would have to give a DNA sample before they are even charged with a crime if a controversial proposal is approved by the Legislature.

State criminal defense groups and the American Civil Liberties Union say the House bill is unconstitutional. It would mandate that police or jail staff collect DNA from all adults and juveniles arrested on suspicion of a felony or gross misdemeanor.

More than a dozen states already allow law enforcement to collect DNA from suspects before they are convicted. Three more states, including Washington, are considering such proposals this year.

"It is good technology. It solves crimes," said Don Pierce, executive director of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, which has long pushed for DNA tests at the time of arrest. "We take fingerprints at the time of arrest, which in many ways is a lot more intrusive."

Idiots! Propaganda! Fingerprinting is not more intrusive than DNA collection!

The Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

WHERE are our RIGHTS?

And why is our government refusing to protect, preserve, and defend them?

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

I think we need a new law in this country: rather then the Pledge of Allegiance chanted every morning, the people and especially government workers should be forced to recite the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights before the work day begins, every day!

Saving Live$ One TaxPayer at a Time

"Cash-strapped" states are looking for more ways to generate income (it's much, much too hard to cut costs!) and so are as always punishing looking to the taxpayer for more cash.

Drivers better buckle up or pay the price: More cash-strapped states want to give law enforcement officers the authority to pull over motorists just for not wearing their seat belts.

More than a dozen states that are considering making the switch to primary seat-belt enforcement laws need to do so before July to be eligible for millions in federal money.

One of those states is Ohio, which would get $26.8 million if it changes its law. Currently, officers in the state must first have some other reason to stop drivers over before issuing seat-belt citations.

...Congress adopted the federal incentive program in the 2005 federal transportation bill as a way to encourage states to adopt the primary enforcement law. The goal was to save lives, reduce insurance costs, and cut medical bills.

The traffic safety agency found that in 2007, 54 percent of passenger vehicle occupants killed in traffic accidents were not wearing seat belts.

Only 54%? That's not a terribly high ratio of seatbelt to non-seatbelt use. And the bunk that we hear in those public service announcements that say more accidents happen within 50 miles of one's own home is all the more ridiculous when you realize that most people do not travel more than 50 miles away from home, anyway. The argument is a mere matter of semantics and propaganda, all the while dismissing our Fourth Amendment rights to be secure in our persons and property. Ridiculous. Be aware of laws that are imposed for "our safety" that bring heaps of revenue for government.

How to Call the Police

Found this at Yeah, Right... who got it from Political Humor. Good one!

George Phillips of Meridian Mississippi was going up to bed when his wife told him that he'd left the light on in the garden shed, which she could see from the bedroom window.

George opened the back door to go turn off the light but saw that there were people in the shed stealing things. He phoned the police and told them that there were burglars in his shed.

The officer asked, "Is someone in your house?" and George said no.

The officer replied that all patrols were busy, and that he should simply lock his door and an officer would be along when available.

George said, "Okay," hung up, counted to 30, and phoned the police again. "Hello I just called you a few seconds ago because there were people in my shed. Well, you don't have to worry about them now cause I've just shot them all."

Then he hung up. Within five minutes three police cars, an Armed Response unit, and an ambulance showed up at the Phillips residence.

Of course, the police caught the burglars red-handed. One of the Policemen said to George: "I thought you said that you'd shot them!"

George said, "I thought you said there was nobody available!"

Bonus Boneheads: Wall Street Crumbles But the Piper Still Plays

There's an excellent article in the Houston Chronicle:

Bonus Boneheads: Wall Street Bankers Continue to Reward Themselves After Job Poorly Done

Even as their firms took in billions of taxpayer bailout dollars last year, Wall Street financial executives continued to pocket and ladle out big bonuses as if blissfully unaware that the nation’s economy was contracting in a painful recession that’s already destroyed thousands of jobs and resulted in myriad home foreclosures.

According to a report by New York State Controller Thomas P. DiNapoli, financial companies paid out at least $18.4 billion in bonuses to employees in 2008, not counting stock options that are usually part of the package to executives. The rewards were down considerably from the year before but still constituted the sixth largest on record.

This is far more than mishandling of funds. And this is far more than mere greed. Rather, the bold actions of the "bailout" recipients (not just the stock trading companies but also the banks) show clearly that the government finesse received is not truly a bailout- it's payment received for services to be rendered (more government control). If the situation is so terribly tragic for the banks, then why did Citigroup recently purchase a new jet? Why all these bonuses, why the secretive spending? And why no change in the economy?

In the case of the bankers, what’s really galling is that they have already absorbed the first installment of Troubled Asset Relief Program funds without divulging how the money is being used. Instead of mandating hard and fast rules prohibiting assistance from being used inappropriately, the Bush administration and Congress failed to ensure both transparency and responsibility for the expenditure of the money.

In an indication that the industry still doesn’t get it, numerous financial analysts have stepped forward to defend the bonuses as necessary to keep top talent on board. Given the sorry performances by many executives, it would be better if they peddled their money-losing skills elsewhere.

I find it extremely difficult to believe that all the funds pumped into the banks and brokers were for shoring up the amorphous American economy. Not even online trading has seen a boost from the efforts of online brokers...

And I don't understand why people get angry and yet still do nothing. How can Congress so blantantly be allowed to kill our country in such a cavalier manner?

"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt." Thomas Jefferson

How is it that our rulers are allowed to continue to snap up more and more property within our free market system with nary a peep? And how far-reaching will this coup d etat go?

I realize I am ranting, and that not very coherently. But enough has been said by enough people to show the shell game that this bailout (and Obama's "stimulus" package) truly are. And still, the farce chugs along contentedly without resistance. What gives here?

Drive Like a Government Official

January is finally over and spring is nudging a little closer. Couldn't come too soon. My ailing vehicle is as tired of the cold as I. This has been a difficult winter, much of it in deep-freeze and under snow. I have never desired the entrance of spring so readily as I am this year.

Houses and cars are usually the first things on the minds of buyers as the snow melts and warmer weather ensues. I like to window shop in anticipation, in particular the very lovely bmw models lining the car lots. These are some of the best manufactured vehicles on the planet, as the raving bmw m3 reviews show. And after all, don't we all want to drive like our legislator and congressman, when only the best --a fully loaded bmw m3-- will do? Just make sure to keep those tires inflated-- save the planet and all!

Looking to do your part and save the economy as well as the planet? Take a gander at the 2009 bmw m3. And joking aside, these are nice cars.

Brought to you by your friends at the Car Connection.

To the Elites

It was so much easier when the voices of the little people were stifled and moderated by NBC, CBS, and ABC, wasn't it? An article in the Financial Times by Lucy Kellaway tells of how despairing stories of suffering, recession-stricken everyday people are. It was so much easier to stick one's head in the sand back in the olden days when everything was smoothly spoken and blithely mandated: "that's the way it is."

I have fallen into recession’s web of fear

In the middle of last week I tipped over from a state of mild fearfulness about the global economy to one of wild panic over what is to become of us.

On Wednesday, I became host to all sorts of crazy worries – big, unmanageable ones as well as little, stupid ones. I worried about there being anarchy on the streets of London – while at the same time fretting over whether I should have painted the boxroom cream rather than white.

This is the sort of mixed-up mental state I am familiar with from bouts of wakefulness at three in the morning. Never before have I known it at three in the afternoon.

The thing that tipped me over was tiny and distant and concerned a woman I have never met, who lives 3,000 miles away. There were plenty of other bigger things that happened to me last week, but none of them really moved me.

...The internet has created a global psyche. The web has mentally joined us at the hip, so we can no longer put our heads in the sand. If that sounds painfully contorted, it is because it is. Just as no country can decouple itself from the ailing global economy, none of us as individuals can decouple ourselves from the ailing global psyche.

Through blogs, websites and e-mails the world’s economic ills are fed to us on a drip all day long. It is not just that we hear about bad things faster, we hear about more of them and in a more immediate way. My worries become yours, and yours become mine. On the internet, a trouble shared online is not a trouble halved. It is a trouble needlessly multiplied all over the world. After reading this article, people in Australia will surely start worrying about my paint colours, too.

...Instead, I sit over my computer all day and feed my anxiety. The day after I read about the begging woman I was sent something even more upsetting. A banker at Commerzbank e-mailed me to say that he and 499 other senior colleagues had just been summoned to the bank’s headquarters and told to write their ideas on A4 pieces of paper and stick them on the plastic branches of a tree.

In good times I used to delight in stories like these. Aren’t people silly, I used to think with a complacent air of superiority. But now my thinking is different: if banks’ response to the current crisis is to stick bits of paper on fake trees, then the only rational thing for the rest of us to do is to surrender ourselves to panic.

Haha. Sorry the plights of the unwashed masses upset you in the upper echelons of society and media...