• About
  • Blog (Ext.)
  • Books
  • Contact
  • Education Resources
  • News Links

PERRIN LOVETT

~ Deo Vindice

PERRIN LOVETT

Tag Archives: America

Empty Seat, Empty Words

13 Wednesday Jan 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Empty Seat, Empty Words

Tags

"Refugees", America, Congress, Constitution, crime, economy, government, law, lies, Nikki Haley, Obama, Old Republic, Republicans, Second Amendment, state of the union, terrorism, Washington

Last night Hussein Obama gave what (Lord be praised) should be his final state of the Empire address to Congress. Per my usual abstinence I did not watch the presentation. I stopped watching during the stuttering, mumbling days of W. It’s a decision I have never regretted. There is always a news story the next day with highlights (lowlights?) or even transcripts if needed.

This morning I reviewed the New York Times version of the event. Nothing really jumped out at me as particularly important or impressive. It seemed like the ordinary list of hollow platitudes and promises mixed with Obama’s usual “look at me” self-lauding. It was harmless if pointless. Nothing truthful was told about the state of the Union as required by the Constitution. This is most forgivable as the Constitution was long since abandoned by Washington. Further, the remains of the Old Republic are not worth reporting on anymore.

Presidents often play stupid tricks at these spectacles both to build applause among the gathered rodent corpses and to wow the ever-gullible television audiences. Obama’s trick last night involved the gallery seating on either side of the First Lady. To her right was an empty seat which somehow represented the victims of gun crimes. This meaningless charade built on Hussein Obama’s last speech about whittling away the Second Amendment. Maybe the seat was reserved for an actual victim whom could not be lured into the show. Something last-minute perhaps?

Of course, there was no mention of the millions of lives saved guns. The space required could have only been found on the National Mall. These folks are not victims nor would any of them wasted their time attending. I declare the whole massive empty space outside the Capital represented the beneficiaries of gun violence.

sotu-blog-15-articleLarge

Empty seat at a hollow show. STEPHEN CROWLEY / THE NEW YORK TIMES.

One of the cats seated with Michelle was a Syrian “refugee” recently added to your tax doll. Hussein Obama bragged of his handling of the “refugee” crisis and related terrorism and foreign policy issues. There has been no confirmation as to whether the “refugee” in attendance is a known member of ISIS. Following Obama’s gun speech last week, when he declared criminals don’t use stolen guns, an ISIS member/criminal used a stolen gun to attack a police officer in Philadelphia. I doubt Obama took the opportunity to correct his previous statement in light of reality. Reality rarely makes an appearance at these sessions.

When not congratulating himself on his seven years of brilliant success Obama took potshots at the Republicans vying to replace him. Looking into the future, these shots are likely warranted. I won’t watch Obama’s successors but I can imagine their follies and symbolic shenanigans.

The Commoder in Grief also portrayed terrorism abroad and the domestic economy as problems solved. Ignoring Paris, the German new years rapes, the dreadful state of Europe and the Middle East, San Bernardino, Philadelphia, and the dire threats posed by Islamic invaders all across the West, terrorism does indeed seem in decline.

The economy, outside of stocks, bonds, commodities, cash, interest rates, jobs, manufacturing, debt, homelessness, hopelessness, welfare, and all other quantifiable measures, is improving. It’s doing so well one of twenty largest banks in the world this morning announced that 2016 portends a “cataclysmic year” and that investors should “sell everything.” Neither the President, Congress, nor you should be troubled by such miniscule details.

“Mr. Obama sought to pose and answer the four central questions his aides said were driving the debate about America’s future, including how to ensure opportunity for everyone, how to harness technological change, how to keep the country safe, and how to fix the nation’s broken politics.” New York Times.  The answers to these questions are each the same: get the government out of the damned way. I doubt that was Obama’s answer as he did not immediately resign while encouraging his fellows to do likewise.

He harped on Republicans to help him finish off the economy by completing his ObamaTrade legislation. I suppose they will given enough time.

One proposal he made actually made sense. As such it will never come to fruition. Perhaps due to a teleprompter malfunction Obama implored Congress to reform America’s criminal “justice” system.

That system is broken to the point of being institutionalized injustice and tyranny. The truly criminal government keeps itself in business by making fake criminals out of its entire population. The Constitution describes three federal crimes, not the three bazillion currently on the books. In a real system of justice the President and his audience would be rounded up and tried for Treason. Again, reality is not suffered in D.C. These problems will not be fixed by the same dastardly fiends that created them.

The rest of the address was more taxes, more spending, more programs and more Obama. If he wants a historical legacy, I just wrote it for him in one sentence.

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley delivered the empty GOP retort to Obama’s empty blathering. She said nothing important though, in typical Republican fashion, she did pander to the Likudniks: “We would make international agreements that were celebrated in Israel and protested in Iran, not the other way around…” Perish the thought someone in the American government do anything to be celebrated in America.

Empty, hollow, vapid, useless – another evening with “our” government. State and status aside, the odor of the Union is strong.

Somebody Went to a Convention and All I Got Was This Lousy Constitution

09 Saturday Jan 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Somebody Went to a Convention and All I Got Was This Lousy Constitution

Tags

10th Amendment, 16th Amendment, 17th Amendment, America, Cicero, Congress, Constitution, Constitutional Convention, Courts, evil, freedom, government, Greg Abbott, Jonathan the Tortiose, law, States, The People, Washington

About twenty years ago Newt Gingrich and the Republican party foisted upon the people something called “the contact with America.” It was a typical hollow pledge to do great things – cut the budget, reduce debt, make life freer and happier, etc. It was a gimmick and for that purpose only it was a success. I think every single provision failed. In fact, we got the exact opposite – less freedom but more of everything else government.

The masses love a good gimmick. They also have short memories. This makes for good political sport. As carnival goers flock to one rigged, losing game after another so do the people cheerfully fall for a never-ending assortment of grandiose election schemes.

All this leads me to Jonathan the Tortoise. At age 183 this remarkable reptile is the world’s oldest living animal. Over the long-span of his blissful, apple eating life Jonathan has outlasted dozens or scores of Presidents, Prime Ministers, Congresses, Kings, Queens and various other con artists and criminals. Maybe by the time the spry, jolly turtle turns 283 the world will have outgrown the foolishness of the state.

All this leads me, back around from Jonathan, to the current governor of Texas, Greg Abbott. Greg has proposed the nuclear option of the political gimmick world – a Constitutional Convention.

Actually he has called for a convention of the states which is really the same thing but substitutes idiots in Congress with idiots in state capitals. It’s in Article Five of the old parchment.

“If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America,” Greg said to a gathering of policy hacks in the Lone Star State. He proposed to restore that rule of law by adding yet more laws. (What’s a little more sand on the beach?)

His proposal itself ran on for 70 pages and outlined a host of new Constitutional Amendments (more laws). Tully once reminded us that more laws mean less justice. Truly, it only ever results in more government. Fuel on the fire and such.

I would happily support, even participate in, a convention if its sole purpose was to abolish the United States. Of course, even that would only buy a few generations of liberty. People like government and heaps of it. Anyway, here’s a look at Greg’s potential amendments and what they would and wouldn’t do. (All following proposals taken from Dallasnews.com; my remarks italicized).

Prohibit congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one state. We already have this protection; it just doesn’t work. Congress can only regulate activities affecting interstate commerce which, over the past century, has been defined as anything. Stating something twice does not deter tyranny.

Require Congress to balance its budget. I almost like this one but I imagine there would be no controls on the amount of the budget nor on how the balancing might be achieved. The thieves could always print money or pile on more taxes as necessary and without end. If the current state system must be maintained, then a better limit would be to ban debt, establish a private gold currency, and abolish taxation completely. In other words, and as it once was, Washington would be left to beg the states or the people for funding without guaranteed results.

Prohibit administrative agencies from creating federal law.
Prohibit administrative agencies from preempting state law. These agencies are not allowed under the Constitution in the first place. Better to put an end to them and their Byzantine rules altogether.

Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision. Congress has the power to override the Court or even preempt it as is. It just doesn’t use the power. The States gave up their claim on Congress via the 17th Amendment. States would be free to ignore Court decisions but that might endanger their federal funding. They gave up their money with the 16th Amendment. Almost like a plan or something.

Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law. See my answer immediately above. Also, every once in a while the Supreme Court needs to rule on important Constitutional issues, democratic or not. Democracy, mob-rule with a fancy name, should be shunned in civilized places.

Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution. This might mean repealing 16 and 17 Amendments. It might also mean the exact same as the 10th. The Empire is already so limited on paper, by law. Again, there is no magic in redundancy.

Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds. Proper redress under the existing law is carried out in Congress. On paper, that is. In reality, there is no redress. Given the self-imposed legal interference I noted previously, I do not see the value in shifting venue between the branches. Also, as Greg seems to have an aversion to federal courts, this one seems self-defeating.

Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a federal law or regulation. I think I’ve covered this already. Those states have essentially given up their authority for cheap federal fiat money. It’s called getting what you pay for. Any state is free to override or ignore any act of Congress it finds offensive. However, the cost is generally prohibitive, monetarily speaking. A really offended state is free to leave the union. But, then, there was the long, painful lesson of 1861-1865.

Another thing to consider is the woeful quality of the people who might attend and vote in the convention. The men who debated the Constitution of old may just as well done so eons ago on a planet long destroyed in some celestial cataclysm. People today obtain their worldview from babbling, paid for nitwits on television. Their “representatives” are the most loathsome, self-absorbed, and corrupt rodents to emerge from the political sewer since Roman times. Knowing who these people are there is no knowing what evil they might do given the chance.

As I have repeated here, repeatedly, repeating laws and policies does not make them stick. It just gives the vampire class more to feed on. One hundred years hence some other governor would likely call, again, for the same failed limitations already set forth in the failed Constitution. Einstein and insanity or something similar.

It would be refreshing if this turned out to be an honest effort, misguided as it seems.  I judge this a gimmick and unlikely to survive November’s slave suggestion box election. But for my reminder who would remember the GOP’s Contract? At any rate, these conventions move at a snail’s pace. It’s more likely than not the next big change in American law will be the implementation of Sharia.

Long live Jonathan!

2FDFF70300000578-3388423-It_was_feared_Jonathan_the_giant_tortoise_was_on_his_last_legs_w-m-51_1452165903037

Jonathan and friend. Dailymail. I would trust this dinosaur with my government more than any current politician.

All But Dissertation

24 Thursday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Other Columns

≈ Comments Off on All But Dissertation

Tags

ABD, America, anarchy, college, communism, Diploma mills, education, Gary North, JD, Perrin Lovett, PhD, political science, political theory

A.B.D. has special meaning in the academic world. It stands for All But Dissertation and means a scholar has completed all work towards his PhD except for the final review of his primary research project. Universities advertise many professorships as open to ABDs so long as the candidate meets the other job requirements. Dissertation approval and granting of the actual degree is, of course, necessary.

I know this because I have applied for scores of academic jobs only to be declined every time. According to the American Bar Association a JD is equivalent to a PhD for teaching purposes. Most hiring committees have a different view. In reality they want a professor with a terminal degree in the exact discipline taught. I almost exclusively applied for political science positions so I understand my handicap. That, and my personal political philosophy is at odds with most American faculties: me, anarchist; them, communist.

At any rate I am not hurt in the least by this quandary. In fact, I’m kind of happy about it. I’m not alone either. There is a glut of advanced degrees out there destroying the market. There are shocking figures about PhDs taking jobs as waiters, bartenders and truckers. Others turn to alternative disciplines. My writing career is my alternative to teaching and to law.

Gary North faced a similar situation decades ago. He just wrote an enlightening and somewhat damning article on the experience.

Certification vs. competence: Which is it to be? Of course, it would be nice to have both, but Christian colleges are strapped financially, and they cannot afford both. In fact, given the nature of bureaucracies, especially academic bureaucracies, they cannot be sure of anything except certification. There are no measurements of academic competence that are easily examined, since each field is so specialized that aging faculty members are hardly able to judge the competence of their younger, more energetic colleagues. If anything, competence in the classroom is a threat to the self-esteem of those who are tenured, and who also make the decisions. But certification upgrades their departments, and therefore lends prestige to them. What those doing the hiring really want is to hire new men with superb credentials and only mediocre performance subsequent to the earning of those credentials.

When I Didn’t Get Hired, North, Dec. 22, 2015.

Still, part of me wants a PhD in political science – political philosophy, specifically. I see three avenues for achieving this goal. I could return to school and earn a degree. I wrote a short time ago of my last failed attempt to do this. I spent seven years earning the two diplomas I have now. They sit in a box somewhere. This strategy isn’t likely to succeed. Neither is the second option – being gifted an honorary doctorate. I suppose I will have to wait and see if some university values my contributions to the liberty movement or my literary achievements enough for recognition.

6a00d8341c562c53ef01538f8abd65970b-800wi

BBA, JD, fishing tackle, etc.

I’m leaning towards option three – claiming or manufacturing a PhD. This is a very popular trend. Americans by the thousands are buying degrees online from diploma mills. Some use these credentials for fraudulent or criminal purposes. Not me. I’m putting my fraud out there now, before the fact. Nothing to hide. And for the degree I want I think I’ve already done the required research and work.

Some college professors admit that many of the “fake” degrees are not so far off the mark anyway. Many who pass successfully through “real” schools come out as dumb as they went in.

Here is my current idea. I may look through the political theory class offerings at MIT’s free course website and see how my experience and skills stack up. I may need a little legitimate brushing up. Then I will simply grant myself a title and print up a diploma. It can keep its predecessors company in that box – if I can find it …

As a Doctor of Law I can already proclaim myself “Dr. Lovett.” I do not but I might. I just might. Let’s just say I’m a JD, PhD (ABD).

graduation-doctorate-phd-large

All Bear Dissertation …

Rache the Vote!

19 Saturday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Rache the Vote!

Tags

America, anarchy, election, government, insanity, Obama, Paul Ryan, political parties, The People, voting, Washington

How can a place essentially named “Washing Town” contain so much filth? The only thing awash is the corruption.

The past two weeks have seen inordinate stupidity flow from D.C., even by D.C. standards. In response to terrorism against the people Hussein Obama and his administration announced they will crack down on the people (little more than racist gun nuts, you know). Obama is a Democrat. Democrat, got it. The opposite of a Republican. To demonstrate their oppositeness the Republicans, led by Paul “Blackbeard” Ryan, passed a budget funding everything Obama holds dear.

Funding for Obamacare? In there. Funding for Planned Parenthood? In there. Funding for more terrorists? In there. Bigger government? Got it. More debt? Check. More war? Bombs away.

There will soon be more terrorist “refugees” admitted to the Empire than there are Republican voters in Iowa. Soon there will be more laws than there are people in this nation. Two parties, one result.

The people love it! They don’t just tolerate the insanity, they demand it with religious zeal. In between drunken binges of fantasy football and the Kartrashians they root for their own servitude. David Shellenberger explains the process:

They claim that we consent to be governed, government is our servant, and “we are the government.” This would mean that we consent to domination by criminals, the criminals serve us, and we are part of the criminal enterprise.

They give money to politicians, financing criminal contenders. They enjoy politics, seeing competition among criminals as entertainment. They vote, encouraging the criminal enterprise. They make demands of government, begging the criminals for favors.

Shellenberger, The Absurdity of Tolerating the State, May 18, 2014.

Of course, all this will change for the best immediately after next year’s election. Just like last time.

paul-ryan-beard-resized

Arrrrr. Avast thar, me tax slaves!

Powers Vs. Rights

16 Wednesday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Powers Vs. Rights

Tags

America, anarchy, Articles of Confederation, Bill of Rights, Congress, Constitution, Courts, fantasy, freedom, God, government, law, law school, Liberty, Lysander Spooner, monarchy, Natural Law, politics, republic, rights, States, The People

This post concerns the force and effect of the United States Constitution and similar documents. I’ll stick with the U.S. version for simplicity and because most state and many foreign constitutions are based on the federal version.

The old parchment is divided into several articles and subsequent amendments. Each of these deals with different legal concepts. Article One grants certain powers to Congress. Article Two does the same for the executive. Amendment Three prohibits the government from sheltering soldiers in your house during peacetime. There are seven primary articles and twenty-seven amendments.

Aside from formal division the Constitution may be properly divided into two parts. Good Constitutional Law professors cover this in first year law school. The notice is generally lost amid a mad scramble to interpret Byzantine case-law and make a living as an attorney. The lesson is almost completely unknown outside of law and political theory education.

The first effective feature of the Constitution is that is allows powers for the government. In fact the Constitution created the federal government. In 1789 those seeking strong central political control replaced the Articles of Confederation which had loosely united the several (and wholly independent) states for a very few mutually beneficial purposes. The first ten amendments, the Bill of Rights, came along two years later as almost an afterthought.

The anti-federalists were concerned that certain fundamental rights needed official recognition and legal protection. Their theory was that a strong government, even of republican nature, could run roughshod over the freedoms of the people – like a dictatorial monarch. The amendments were added without much fuss as it was then concerned the new government, its keepers, and their successors would never seek to abridge such rights as freedom of speech, bearing arms, or freedom from illegal arrest and punishment. No one saw any harm in the additions.

The inclusion of those additional protections proved both prophetic and pointless. Those ten amendments and a few others comprise the other practical function of the Constitution – protection of individual rights.

In an ideal world government would only exist to protect people from those things they would be otherwise vulnerable to. The proper function of law and politics would be a careful balancing of the power of the government and the rights of the people. Powers versus rights. Some legal scholars still wax elegantly about the concept. Their conceptualization is largely just conceptual.

The new federal government lost little time in enacting various laws which curtailed individual liberty. The trend continues to this day in addition to the habit of constantly expanding the realm of federal authority light years beyond what the Constitution allows. The courts, allegedly the arbiters of the balancing test, have largely consented to this gross shift. They too wasted no time in inventing new authority for themselves – “judicial review” for example.

Any review usually ends up empowering the state. They are on the same team after all. The people, now bereft of representation and appellate avenues, are on the outside looking in. Lawyers gleefully await court decisions to tell them what laws really mean. The public, largely fat and ignorant, continues to support this corrupt system with astounding zealous patriotism.

As a result of all this what we are left with is a central government of unlimited power ruling over a nation of peasants who are happy to receive whatever liberty the rulers confer upon them. Every once in a while one or another branch kindly reaffirms some right. These are usually in trivial matters. However, the march to greater control never ceases. It works well as most do not favor freedom. Under the faux two-party system, most go along so long as their side wins on a somewhat regular basis.

In truth, they lose. We all lose. All except for the corrupt politicians and beaurocrats and their corporate crony enablers. The system is wrecked and bears nearly resemblance to even that central authoritarian regimes of the late seventeen Century let along an ideal state.

In modern reality ignorance abounds. Some speak of the right of the government to do some thing or the other. Governments have no rights as they are artificial constructs. Only human individuals have rights. These rights are natural, God-given. Governments can only protect or (more often) abridge those freedoms.

Others decry freedom outright. They declare the people have too many rights. For them, in their simple lives, they may be right. Argument for order and justice is lost on them and a waste of time.

There are those who indulge in the fantasy that a return to the original text and intent of the Constitution would usher in utopia. If this myth was anything but, I could agree with them. The federal government of 1791 would be infinitely better than what we suffer today. That of the Articles would be better yet.

The myth lovers assert the Constitution established a national government of limited scope. Maybe they are correct in theory. In real life no government worth its salt stays limited for long. Geometric growth of government is an iron law of political science.

bbnhyu66667

So it is with freedom and central authority. Mencken.

Lysander Spooner said it best of the lost war of Rights versus Powers: “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” He elaborated: “A man’s natural rights are his own, against the whole world; and any infringement of them is equally a crime, whether committed by one man, or by millions; whether committed by one man, calling himself a robber, (or by any other name indicating his true character,) or by millions, calling themselves a government.”

I find my view of anarchy criticized at times as belief in fantasy. It is said that men, by their very nature, cannot be trusted for long to maintain free, peaceful association and mutual respect. This, sadly, may be true. It, then, is also true that an honest man, desiring to remain free, cannot trust a government, any government. Belief in central authority is thus misguided. Tell you what, you have your fantasy and I’ll have mine. The rest of you have a choice to make: support powers or support rights.

Three Ghosts

13 Sunday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Three Ghosts

Tags

America, Charles Dickens, Christians, crime, evil, Fred Reed, guns, Jesus, Natural Rights, politics, Second Amendment, terrorism

Christmas time is fast approaching and a literate few may still ponder Scrooge’s spectral visitors of Dickensian legend. Much may be learned of the past, the present, and the future. Art often imitates life and visa versa.

Kutter Callaway wrote last week in The Huffington Post of his Christian call to renounce his Second Amendment rights. He has politely requested I do the same. I politely decline.

I do not doubt Callaway’s sincerity so much as I do his premise and logic. You may read his article and judge for yourself. He starts with a declaration he is not appealing to political discourse per se. He then immediately spouts the popular, one-sided and discredited political arguments for gun control. His title is even stated in political terminology. Second amendment rights as opposed to Christian natural rights of self-preservation.

He is correct when he says, “as a Christian, my primary obligation is to stand in radical opposition to the forces of death and destruction that threaten to undo the very fabric of God’s good creation, regardless of what the Constitution says …” However, while Christ taught love, He did not abandon the principle of readiness. You may recall He did not turn the other cheek when confronted by evil doers in the Temple; rather, He armed Himself and beat the devil out of them – literally.

I acknowledge, though I do not necessarily respect, Callaway’s decision. To me, he and his kind represent “Christmas” past. They are relics of a failing Civilization, ever turning the other cheek as the ghost of the present does it hellish work.

The present is represented rather well by those of the jihad persuasion. They are relentlessly pursuing their goals. Murder everywhere with the promise of more to come. Has anyone seen the Moody Two lately?

The same type of Satanists whom Jesus ran out of the Temple are actively at work in American politics. No act of terrorism deters them from brining in more terrorists. Those who willingly disarm in the face of this evil merely abet it.

A preview of the future has been painted by none other than Fred Reed. His story, Allahu Akbar! :The View from 2018, is a reasonable continuation of our past and present, told with Fred’s usual thought-provoking wit and humor. In Fred’s future, three years hence, both terrorism and blind stupidity continue apace:

Everyone of importance—the New York Times, MSNBC, NPR, the Huffington Post, Mother Jones, and Salon—agreed that there was no obvious motive. Time and again for many years attackers had come from nowhere and killed for no reason. There was no pattern except the strange cry, “Allahu Akbar.”

Mrs. Clinton’s Secretary of Defense, Wilhelmina “Creepy” Crawley, offered an explanation.

“My staff at the Pentagon have determined that “Akbar” is a combination of “AK,” automatic Kalashnikov, which I am told is a form of gun, and BAR, Browning Automatic Rifle. This shows an unwholesome fascination with guns. We are investigating links to the NRA:”

The past is behind us. The present we have. The future, to a degree, is ours to make or change as did Scrooge. What, if anything, have we learned from our ghosts?

0805386758e327ee934b38b7c45e9880

Google.

Simple Solutions From The D.C. Comedy Club

08 Tuesday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Simple Solutions From The D.C. Comedy Club

Tags

America, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, due process, government, gun control, H.L. Mencken, politicians, Second Amendment, terrorism

President Obama spoke 1910 words Sunday on the threat of Islamic terrorism. Actually he only used 160 words for ISIS. He spoke almost as many, 131, chastising Americans for owning guns and another 372 telling Americans what a bunch of racists they are. His speech on terrorism was only 8% terrorism and 27% It’s all your fault. The remaining 65% was empty political babble.

Gun control, says Obama will stop terrorism. He has the brilliant idea to restrict gun ownership for anyone on the government’s “no fly” list. This almost sounds like the common sense reform liberals are always going on about.

The problem, one of them, is that the list is compiled in secret with a total absence of Due Process. One can land on the list for any reason or for no reason. There’s little one can do about it. To be deprived of Second Amendment rights one needs to be convicted in a court of law or have a court agree with a physician’s assessment about mental health. There has to be a trial or a hearing. Attorney representation. Examination. Appellate procedure. Notice. Evidence. Due Process. A former Constitutional law professor should know that.

Not to be outdone, Republican front-runner Donald Trump has called for a total moratorium on Muslims entering the United States. I have no idea how the word count worked out.

Muslim control, says Trump, will stop terrorism. Again, there’s a temptation to agree with The Donald here. Most Islamic terrorists are, in fact, Islamic. His recommendation set off a firestorm amongst his GOP and Democratic rivals. I found it a comical firestorm.

Trump’s plan is full of problems. For one, it won’t, by itself, fix the problem. Unless and until the U.S. starts minding its own business, terror-prone lunatics will never cease to wish us harm. It would be better to let them all continue their centuries old feuds by themselves and far away. Our business, concerning terrorism, should consist entirely of stamping it out in America. We don’t need to venture abroad in search of ISIS as they are right here, right now. San Bernardino. Chattanooga. Boston. A man who travels the country should know that.

Both of these suggestions are somewhat tempting and may appear somewhat plausible. They are very, very simple. Our problems a little more complex. That is the trouble. Mencken said: “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”

220px-Simple_Simon_2_-_WW_Denslow_-_Project_Gutenberg_etext_18546

Simple Simon met a politician…

Reading The Law: The Ancient Alternative to Law School

07 Monday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Reading The Law: The Ancient Alternative to Law School

Tags

"reading the law", ABA, Abraham Lincoln, Alan Watson, America, attorneys, Blackstone, cartel, Cato, Cicero, English common law, government, Greeks, history, law, law school, legal education, legal profession, Lysander Spooner, Rome, Scotland, Solon, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas More

A few days ago I wrote a column about the trials and tribulations of a beautiful, talented young woman enrolled and embattled at the Moritz College of Law at THE Ohio State University. I’ve also written about my legal education.

Law schools have become a collection of expensive but houses where, if one can tolerate the boredom and foolishness, one is allowed the honor of applying for a state license to practice law. The courses studied in these schools bear little resemblance to the actual law. Graduation does not guarantee admittance to the Bar. Bar test preparation is left to the student once he graduates.

Many determined and intelligent students will succeed on their own merits. A few law schools do a fair job readying students for the profession; most are dismal in their attempts. Alan Watson, of whom I have sung praise before, is the preeminent expert on legal philosophy. He wrote a book, The Shame of American Legal Education, which should be required reading for any American giving serious thought to attending law school.

Watson decries the lack of intellectual rigor and dependence of the case method (religious study of court interpretation of the law) which plague American law colleges. He praises the system of his native Scotland where students attend school for a shorter period of time and actually learn both the letter of and the ideas behind the law. Following graduation the Scots apprentice under established barristers to round out their education and transition into the field.

It’s a far better approach than we Americans use. It is similar to our old system which we adopted from the British. They had adopted it from the Romans and the Greeks.

For ages attorneys were educated men who studied the law under the tutelage of a practicing attorney. A few had a short period of standardized class time at a college. This formal lecturing range from a few weeks to a year. Upon completion of the apprenticeship the budding lawyers were either certified by a local court or eligible to sit for Bar examination (if any) or they just started working on their own.

The institution was known as “reading the law.” Most of the greatest attorneys of history were produced this way. Their ranks include: Solon, Cato, Cicero, St. Thomas More, William Blackstone, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, John Jay, Lysander Spooner, Abraham Lincoln, James Byrnes, and Robert Jackson. All of these men were accomplished attorneys. Some were titans of the field.

Marco_Porcio_Caton_Major

Cato the Elder.

In America this was the standard of legal instruction from colonial times until the early 20th Century. The College of William and Mary was the first American school with formal law lectures. These were designed to enhance the student’s apprenticeship. Jefferson attended lectures at William and Mary.

Young men were encouraged to read the law, to understand theory and application:

If you are absolutely determined to make a lawyer of yourself the thing is more than half done already. It is a small matter whether you read with any one or not. I did not read with any one. Get the books and read and study them in their every feature, and that is the main thing. It is no consequence to be in a large town while you are reading. I read at New Salem, which never had three hundred people in it. The books and your capacity for understanding them are just the same in all places.

Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any other one thing.

Abraham Lincoln, 1855

Things began to change in the late 1800s. It was then the newly formed American Bar Association began to lobby states to restrict licensing to those who had attended law schools. Later the ABA commenced its practice of certifying the schools. This cartel approach of command and control protected the monopoly of the existing bar members. The results, from a quality viewpoint, were mixed. Blackstones and Jeffersons are hard to come by these days.

The radical expansion of law school power coincided with the massive growth of government. Both resulted in the growth and increased complexity of the laws. As Cicero noted, more laws means less justice. Of course, justice had nothing to do with these trends. They were premised entirely on control and money.

Nonetheless a few states still adhere to the reading tradition although it is frowned upon. Those who stand to lose prestige and tuition frown a lot.

California, Maine, New York, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington still allow reading in place of law schooling. Each has its own standards and in some a period of law school attendance is required. Out of over 80,000 new lawyers minted in 2013, less than 100 read the law.

The surviving process of reading has been lauded of late by Business Insider and the New York Times. Both note the difficulties faced by a reader.

“The A.B.A. takes the position that the most appropriate process for becoming a lawyer should include obtaining a J.D. degree from a law school approved by the A.B.A. and passing a bar examination,” said Barry A. Currier, managing director of accreditation and legal education for the group.

Robert E. Glenn, president of the Virginia Board of Bar Examiners, was less circumspect. “It’s a cruel hoax,” he said of apprenticeships. “It’s such a waste of time for someone to spend three years in this program but not have anything at the end.”

NY Times.

Of course, anything but the cartel’s way is a hoax. The frowners frown. Never mind the vast number of students who drop out of law school or graduate but cannot pass the bar. At least they paid tuition.

A few organizations exist to perpetuate the old tradition. Sterling Education Services is one. “What if, instead of a traditional law school degree and six-figure debt, you could take the bar exam and achieve your goal through hands-on legal experience?” – Sterling. These groups offer study aids and seminars. They’re looking to cash in on the alternative. Then again, these are the exact same bar prep services law school graduates turn to immediately after law school.

Though frowned upon this ancient alternative is viable. If a lawyer reads the law in a reading state and passes that state’s bar, he can then apply in other states. It would certainly warrant examination by those considering the legal profession. Those who follow this path follow in the footsteps of giants.

It’s All Your Fault

06 Sunday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

America, First Amendment, freedom, government, gun control, lies, Republicans, Second Amendment, terrorism, War

America is under assault from Islamic terrorism. ISIS has claimed responsibility for the murderous rampage in San Bernardino. The FBI, almost reluctantly, has opened a terrorist investigation over the attack. It almost seems like an afterthought.

First, Loretta Lynch (does her name need a trigger warning?), head of the Justice [SIC] Department, which includes the FBI, announced she would prosecute any American who encourages violence against Muslims. Why threaten us first? As far as I know, no one has called for violence against any Muslims other than those involved in terrorism. In other times they would have been referred to as the enemy.

I suppose we are the enemy now of this debased government. While there are occasions when free speech ceases to be free, they are rare. A call for violence must be reasonably calculated to incite immediate violent, unlawful action before it may be considered criminal. It’s a tenuous standard at best. Not that that matters to Lynch. Her goal is to silence opposition against the regime’s plan to turn America into a burning third world wreck.

The federal government doesn’t like you and your freedom – especially your free speech aimed at it. In this former land of the free, people are being charged with felonies just for handing out pamphlets about the truth. The government finds the truth inconvenient.

If the First Amendment is a threat to the government, then the Second is extremely dangerous to them and just as critical for us. Gun violence has been falling nationwide for years except in “gun free zones.” Soft targets are easy targets. California is a model for the type of control the gun grabbers harp about for the rest of the country. It’s a model that doesn’t work. The UK is virtually gun free (the free people are gun free at least). That didn’t stop some ISIS bastard from attacking people on a London subway yesterday. Paris has stringent gun control too.

These facts are some of the inconvenient truths which hinder the government’s plans. Never one daunted by reality, President Obama tells us more gun regulations will deter terrorism. The fool says this as he simultaneously creates more terrorists abroad and imports as many of them as he can to the States. He’s scheduled to address the nation on these issues. He’ll probably blame you. He’s at war with us. It only makes sense he wants to disarm his enemies.

President Barack Obama speaks about college education, Thursday, Jan. 16, 2014, in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House complex in Washington. The event which is to promote opportunities for students to attend and finish college and university, was attended by college and university presidents and leaders from nonprofits, foundations, governments and businesses. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) ** Usable by LA and DC Only **

President Obama: “Blah, blah, blah, blah. Your fault!” Google.

In the government’s eyes it is your fault the terrorists are so mean. They would behave if you weren’t so bigoted. Any bad thing that happened is your fault. It is not the fault of those who carried it out. You have too many scary guns. You say too many truthful facts. You don’t care enough. You don’t pay enough. Your fault, all of it.

In fact, any of this only becomes your responsibility if you go along with the official lies and destructive programs. Obama boldly states his lies. Where are all the Republican candidates on these issues? They’re in their pathetic poll-based fantasy world calculating. We can take their silence as either disinterest or approval.

Elsewhere a few leaders dare tell the truth. They deserve credit. Sheriff Arpio of Arizona is calling the armed citizenry to vigilance. So is the police chief of Detroit. Opposition leaders in France are riding the wave of anti terrorism to victory. These few are putting their people first and the enemy last – or the enemy dead.

Like it or not a war is underway. Pick your side. Choose freedom and be free. Choose the government and what happens will be your fault.

The Perfect Storm?

03 Thursday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on The Perfect Storm?

Tags

America, disaster, economy, false flag, Federal Reserve, government, gun control, terrorism, The People, The West, War

Moving on from Paris we now have San Bernardino. No doubt this was an act of terrorism, even if the terrorists lacked official connections. Farooq Saeed and Tashfeen Malik and company brought jihad to a meeting at a center for the disabled. I have a theory.

Farooq worked for the county as a health inspector or something similar. Malik was a likely girlfriend. The center was run by nonprofits. Catholic Social Services is a nonprofit. CSS works hard to import “refugees” into the U.S. some refugees may need the assistance of centers like this one.

Farooq probably had a grudge against someone at the center based on what he considered ill treatment of a refugee or a similar person. He went to the meeting to pick a fight. They kicked him out. Moments later he and his cell members returned armed to the teeth. Murder, murder, murder.

My theory cannot be far off the mark.

The police responded with extraordinary speed and power. Maybe they were prepared for this type of event. Maybe they were waiting on this specific crime to happen.

The national media was ready too. Their initial coverage almost seemed pre-packaged – militia types with assault rifles. Barry, on cue, immediately blamed ordinary Americans and our guns. He hates both.

We have deadly serious problems in this country. Like the rest of the West we’re being overrun by foreign invaders who want to destroy everything in their path. They’re “fleeing” wars cooked up by the government. The government brings them here. The government is waging an indirect war on us.

CVQGmDRVEAADT2w

Right you are, Barry. Nothing ordinary here. This is a plot. Twitter.

We still have the means to fight back, being the most heavily armed people on earth. The government knows this and sees it as an obstacle. Thus the gun control angle.

Throughout history states have used false flag events to seize power. Or, they make good use of “natural” tragedy for the same purpose.

Some Americans are awake. Others are hiding in safe rooms, playing Call of Duty, obsessing over filthy celebrity trash, or cheering on the political theater. The gov counts on these weapons of mass distraction.

The wars, invasion, and gun/culture control are like a hurricane bearing down on us. A second storm of equal magnitude is converging.

The government’s wars and social engineering/ destruction programs are expensive. $674 Billion in a day expensive. The necessary funny money and control apparatus is wrecking the economy.

Those in the know, regardless of position, are sounding the alarms. Gerald Celente, Citi Group, and High Priestess Yellen have sounded off just this week. Yellen’s interest rate announcement yesterday was as surprising as she is attractive. The Fed is trapped in its own bubble and out of options. A rate hike would crash (into the bedrock) the economy today, not just next year per schedule.

Like the jihad the financial woes are global. Greeks will soon have to declare valuable assets when preparing tax returns. That’s so their belongings can be stolen to help the Banksters help the government help the robbery victims. It could happen anywhere. It could happen here and probably will – again. We saw it previously in the 1930s.

The storm collision is tracking hard and fast. Best move the Andrea Gail to safe harbor if possible.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Perrin Lovett

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

Perrin Lovett at:

Perrin on Geopolitical Affairs:

Archives

  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • June 2012

Prepper Post News Podcast by Freedom Prepper (sadly concluded, but still archived!)

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Join 42 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.