11 Monday Jan 2016
Posted in Uncategorized
≈ Comments Off on Coffee
16 Wednesday Dec 2015
Posted 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.
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.
18 Sunday Oct 2015
Posted in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes
Tags
Amercia, anarchy, arms, army, Athens, authority, firearms, freedom, God, government, guns, history, Iraq, law, Melian Dialouge, Melos, military, murder, Natural Law, Paul, police, police state, power, Romans 13, Second Amendment, self-defense, self-preservation, state worship, The People, War
A man in Wyoming was out riding his bicycle. According to him he was attacked by a vicious German Shepherd (Belgian Malinois). Fearing for his life he shot the dog to death with his trusty revolver. It’s a story you may have missed. It only made the news because the dog in question was a former military service dog, a Bronze Star recipient, no less. I find the story interesting because it sheds light on a schism amongst the American people.
Mike was a nine year old dog who previously served two combat tours in Iraq. Upon his retirement Mike was adopted by Matthew Bessler, a retired Army Ranger. Both veterans suffered from PTSD; they provided each other with beneficial companionship.
Bessler went hunting. He left Mike in the care of a friend. Mike wandered off and encountered the cyclist – with deadly results. There, the news story ends.
The cyclist was not charged, his use of deadly force deemed by police to be justifiable self-defense. A GoFundMe page has been set up in order to provide Mike with a military burial.
A sub-controversey surrounds the fact the lethal shot hit Mike in the rear or back. I discount this factor. Attacking dogs move very fast. Shooting scenarios move fast too. A shot in the back does not, by itself, disqualify self-defense, especially concerning an animal. The old, false adage that retreat is better if possible is dangerous when one crosses a predatory animal. Withdrawal might trigger a chase or hunt instinct which could be worse than the initial confrontation. Like everyone else, I was not present and I can only go by the shooter’s account, tempered by reasoned thinking.
On the surface I find this story sad all the way around. I regret Mike’s death. I regret the cyclist felt his life was endangered to the point of resorting to shooting. I’m sorry Mike and Bessler suffered PTSD. I’m sorry their conditions were the results of the government’s inexplicable and indefensible war in Iraq. It’s terrible some think we need that government.
Mike, another victim of the State. Daily Mail, UK.
Based on the bare facts reported by the (British) press, I support the cyclist’s account of the incident and his use of force. I can see a dog with PTSD (even if usually docile) becoming aggressive around a stranger. It happens.
I also hold Mike blameless. Even a vicious, dangerous animal is still just that, an animal. Mike was utterly blameless, too, regarding his military service and resulting illness. A human soldier with a conscious can object to illegal wars of aggression. A dog can’t.
Any blame here rests with the friend who was supposed to watch Mike. Large dogs should be leashed or fenced. Maybe there is no one to blame. Mike could have escaped a reasonable containment. Dogs do things like that. Maybe this was just a bad thing that happened – like a tornado or a freak accident.
At any rate, all of this is merely supporting background for my story. I noticed themes in the comments which accompanied the news which, upon further consideration, formed my titular dichotomy.
There were hundreds of comments which roughly divided into two camps. The first was supportive of the cyclist. They found the shooting justified. Most of these also held a pro Second Amendment bias. The other group was mortally offended at the death of a military hero, albeit a dog.
The former group fully supported the individual right of self preservation even if they found Mike’s death lamentable as I do. The latter hold the shooting of a military veteran indefensible under any circumstance.
There were a few other reactions. Some found the existence of the subject firearm the problem. I suppose some might hate bicycles or hate dogs. These opinions are outliers and safely factor out of my analysis.
Some pro-shooter comments:
Should have been on a leash.
…
Too bad for the dog but most communities have leash laws for a reason…and yes, many joggers and bicyclists are bitten by uncontrolled dogs, that’s why pepper spray is a good idea.
…
“Park County Sheriff Scott Steward said: ‘Essentially, if you feel your life is in danger or threatened by an animal, you can act against it.’ Exactly
Pro military, no matter what:
Sounds like another Democrat got there hand’s on a gun !!
…
this cyclist had no business killing this dog. Charges should be brought against him immediately.
…
I would not blame or feel bad at all and I would even back the dog owner if he wanted to take fatal retaliation against the cyclist. It is just. What the hell is wrong with people that want to kill a dog like that…This soldier has one more mission to accomplish! …huh rah!
…
I hope the shooter gets hit by a car and suffers a long painful death
These views show a division between otherwise aligned interests. Most of the folks are likely “conservative” by political philosophy, perhaps a few libertarian. “Liberals” would abhor the gun itself.
I see this as a difference of opinion between “red staters.” I suspect the majority of both sides generally support the carrying of individual arms. Both likely support justifiable self-defense. Here’s the division: the first group seems to support self-defense regardless of the aggressors status. They find a man free to act when illegally threatened. Period. I’ll call these the people “freedom lovers.” The others support self-defense unless the aggressor is a member of the hallowed legions of the state. I’ll call them “government lovers.”
The government lovers are more extreme. Not only do they want the cyclist prosecuted, they want him dead – by a “long painful death” – for a situation they did not witness. But, to them, the facts do not matter. They are more worshipers than mere lovers of the state. The government and its uniformed agents (even dog agents) must not be challenged – ever.
The worship of the state may be increasingly seen in American churches, particularly Evangelical protestant churches. Government has seemingly replaced God for many. Much of this stems from an overzealous but false interpretation of Romans 13. Paul was only speaking to legitimate state authority – authority not acting against God’s Natural Law.
The Nazis, acting under Hitler’s “legal” orders, carried out the murder of dissidents and other war crimes. Were these too God-sanctioned acts of official authority? I think not.
The statists see it otherwise – at least concerning the American government.
If American soldiers kill innocents overseas, regardless of conditions, it’s acceptable collateral damage. If the police shoot a dog it’s okay, even if the police are breaking their own laws during the shooting. The same standard applies to police shootings of innocent civilians. No matter the cause, no matter the circumstance, the government is never at fault.
In the odd event the government is at odds with one of its servants the lovers will throw the individual under the bus without thought or hesitation. The false god of the almighty state suffers NO challenge.
This highlights both a disdain for individuality and a lack of logic among the parishioners of official authority.
For those of us who value freedom over safety this dichotomy and this particular example illustrates both a dire problem and a hazardous solution for liberty. It reminds me, for some reason, of the Melian Dialogue (with a twist).
A bit of archaic history: In 416 B.C. Athens was perhaps the most powerful military force in the known ancient world. The Athenians sought to subjugate the small, peaceful island state of Melos. The Athenian navy arrived at Melos. The dialogue went something like this:
Athens: “Surrender and join us.”
Melos: “No.”
The Athenians then proceeded to exterminate the Melians and seize their island.
Ruins of Melos. Google.
Many in the freedom camp rightfully seek to resist the evil of the modern state. However, as to outright martial confrontation, they see no hope. Maybe they are right. The American military and police state is almost powerful beyond measure. Outright rebellion would be almost impossible.
It may though be possible to indirectly oppose state oppression. An individual might be able to resist a single agent of the state and legally get away with it. Such resistance is still fraught with gravest danger. After such an incident the individual will be faced with resentment and hatred of the government’s unthinking masses. Hatred to the point of murder in revenge.
A safer if slower strategy might be to seek out those of the opposing camp and convert them to the truth of freedom. If they can think and reason this may be possible. They can be armed without an army. They can be safe and secure absent official structure. They can act as individuals. They can regard God as God and alone the Supreme source of authority.
All of this is open for consideration. What say you?
26 Wednesday Aug 2015
Posted in Legal/Political Columns
Tags
abortion, America, Bobby Franklin, children, Christian, church, Constitution, Courts, Devil, Federal Judges, freedom, George Bush, Georgia, God, government, guns, legislation, murder, politicians, press, principles, regulations, Second Amendment, Senate, taxes, The People
Several days ago several of my friends lamented both the constant barrage of stories about abortion and the subject itself. All averredly pro-life they are none-the-less tired of hearing about Planned Abor…Parenthood, pro-choice, pro-life, and broken Republican rhetoric. One asked, “why doesn’t anyone just do something?”
Someone tried. Oddly enough it was an elected Republican from Georgia who actually used his position of power to make a difference. He tried time and again. Failure to him only meant another chance to try again.
He was dead serious about protecting children in addition to championing various other causes of freedom. He was one of the very few living politicians I admired. I knew the man personally. His name was Bobby Franklin.
Robert “Bobby” Franklin represented Georgia’s 43rd House District (Cobb County) from 1997 until his death in 2011.
Bobby Franklin at work. Google.
A self-made businessman he served on the House Banking Committee, among others. At one time he was chairman of the House Reapportionment Committee. He consistently stood for less government and more freedom. He was never shy of controversy.
His most famous stand was for those unborn Georgians. In 2011 he made sure the very first bill in the House hopper was one which would have made abortion a felony punishable by either death or life in prison. See: H.B. 1, 2011. He rightly considered the practice a form of murder.
His hardest critics, had they not been weak cowards, would have possibly tried to murder Bobby himself for his stance. Of course, they resorted to base distortion and lying, going so far as to say Bobby would criminalize ordinary miscarriage. These were and are the same sort of satanists who laugh while discussing chopping up living babies and then selling the parts.
You can read and judge for yourself the would-have-been effects of H.B. 1 via the link above. Here is the pertinent part of the Bill, concerned with protecting the rights of all citizens:
H.B. 1, 2011, GA Gen. Assembly.
Extreme, huh?
Upon his untimely death his detractors still mocked:
Bobby Franklin was the demagogue the Founding Fathers feared and warned us about, a perfect example of the excesses of democracy that would strip the common American citizen of his or her rights.
If you must have a eulogy from me this morning, it will be this, and this only: Bobby Franklin was a danger to democracy and a danger to women and now he’s dead.
Hrafnkell Haraldsson, No Eulogies for Georgia State Rep. Bobby Franklin,
July 28, 2011.
Nonsense, all of it. The free people of the state had no better friend.
Bobby did want to strip away certain things from out the overfilled lumber room of Georgia law. He wanted to strip out taxes. He wanted to strip away regulations. He wanted to strip away government involvement in people’s lives – to include abolishing the requirement for a state-issued driver’s license.
Had the ultra-left not been so preoccupied with killing babies they might have recognized Bobby’s position of licenses as similar to those of the 1960’s counter-culture.
“Free people have a common law and constitutional right to travel on the roads and highways that are provided by their government for that purpose,” Franklin’s legislation states. “Licensing of drivers cannot be required of free people, because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of an inalienable right.”
In an interview with CBS Atlanta News, Franklin claimed driver’s licenses are a throw back to oppressive times.
“Agents of the state demanding your papers,” he said. “We’re getting that way here.”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/georgia-republican-nobody-should-need-a-driver-s-license
TPM Muckraker, Feb. 2, 2011.
He further proposed other “unthinkable” freedom-centered legislation, to include:
*The sole use of gold or silver as currency (where did he ever get that idea???);
*Taxing and regulating the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta like any other bank;
*Banning forced vaccinations;
*Eliminating the state income tax;
*Eliminating property taxes;
*Banning eminent domain;
*Recognizing that civil government is last and least after family, religion, and community;
*Protecting the right to bear arms and to use them in self-defense;
*Making it legal to carry a firearm into a Georgia church (actually passed three years after his death); and
*Mandating that questions of Constitutional Law be settled by elected officials in the General Assembly rather than the Courts.
Bobby never quite trusted the courts nor lawyers (maybe to include me..). He was not afraid of them and did not worship their decisions as most lawyers do. In fact, his H.B. 1, supra, would have specifically banned federal courts from reviewing his law, as they lacked jurisdiction (true if moot today):
H.B. 1, 2011. Federal courts need not apply.
A little known fact about Bobby Franklin was that he actually wanted to become a Federal District Court Judge. He once called me, during the early 2000s, to ask what the qualifications were and, specifically, if one had to be an attorney. I explained to him he met all the (very few) technical qualifications. There is no requirement that a federal judge of any sort be an attorney. Some of the finest of all American jurists have been (long ago) non-lawyers.
We then discussed the political qualifications. Politically, one does need to be an attorney. One also needs to contribute heavily to a President’s campaign. One must be capable of passing U.S. Senate scrutiny after securing a nomination. I asked him if he thought George Bush (the dimmer) would nominate such an outspoken, relentless champion of liberty. We laughed and he apparently dismissed the idea. That was a shame.
I think what had stirred him to this unlikely career change idea was the flap over the separation of church and state caused by the public display here and there of the Ten Commandments. I’m sure he had other reasons too. He would have made a fantastic judge.
Bobby was a fantastic man. A man in real life in addition to the newspapers and the state house. We attended a men’s wild game dinner at the First Baptist Church in Woodstock together. Then governor Sonny Perdue gave a short sermon before shotguns were raffled off. Sometimes Georgia is a damn fine place! Perdue actually gave a decent homily, concerning the wrath of the devil in our lives: “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.” 1 Peter 5:8, JKV.
That is a powerful verse and Perdue’s usage was well placed. Powerful also was Bobby Franklin’s response to a joking question asked that night by another speaker. Remember, it was a men’s group. The speaker laughingly asked how many of us were “henpecked.” A thousand or so of us sheepishly raised our hands. Bobby did not. Real. Man.
I found out he was gone one day when I was poking around my Facebook feed and realized Bobby wasn’t on anymore. A Google search revealed his death to me. As could be guessed from his legislative history, Bobby was a staunch Christian. His death was discovered when he failed to show as usual at his church on Sunday morning. He died of well-hidden heart problems. One would have never suspected he took prescription medications of any kind – he was as physically fit as he was steadfast to his principles.
The popular press was a bit kinder than the lunatic left in its obituary:
“He was one of the few politicians who stood by what he believed in, whether you agreed with it or not.” …
“He would want to be remembered first as a person of faith and second as a person who loved his country and loved liberty.” …
“While he certainly was controversial, he was never vitriolic and was never mean. This is a very sad day for Georgia.”
Franklin could also often be a thorn in the side of Republican leadership. While his go-it-alone attitude was rarely problematic, he could tie up committee meetings for hours. A member of the Judiciary Non-Civil Committee, he would frequently attempt to add anti-abortion language to unrelated bills to the exasperation of his colleagues.
He also was unafraid to challenge the speaker of the House, an act somewhat akin to challenging a king. On several occasions, even challenging a member of the same party, Franklin would force a vote of the full House in an attempt to overrule the speaker. This was true under both former Speaker Glenn Richardson, R-Hiram, and current Speaker David Ralston, R-Blue Ridge.
Franklin Remembered, AJC, July 26, 2011.
I suppose this is my belated good-bye to Bobby. His loss was a sad blow to Georgia and America. Also, sadly, we will not likely see his kind again.
16 Sunday Aug 2015
Posted in Legal/Political Columns
Tags
America, Congress, crime, debt, God, GOP, goverment, Jacob Lew, law, lies, Obama, Treasury, unfunded liabilities, voting
God be praised! The U.S. government is no longer issuing debt!
Okay, not exactly. It seems Congress is behind on their usual vote to raise the debt limit. They always raise it – even those fiscally “conservative” Republicans. The GOP used to make a fuss before the caved. Now, they just cave.
Ahead of the vote the Treasury has decided to suspend debt issuance (read “reporting”) for a record 5 months. They’re still spending, just not reporting how much. It doesn’t really matter. No one cares and the reported amount isn’t accurate anyway. It’s not $18 Trillion (like that’s not bad enough) but much more like $200 Trillion (factoring in SSI, Medicare and other items the government is legally obligated to pay but can’t afford).
On July 30, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew sent a letter to the leaders of Congress informing them that he was extending a “debt issuance suspension period” through October 30.
In practice, that means that unless Congress enacts new legislation to increase the limit on the federal debt before then, the Treasury will continue for at least the next eleven weeks to issue Daily Treasury Statements that show the federal debt subject to the limit beginning and ending each day frozen just below that limit.
The Daily Treasury Statement for March 13 was the first to show the debt subject to the limit closing the day at $18,112,975,000,000. Every Daily Treasury Statement since then has reported the same thing: the debt closing the day at $18,112,975,000,000.
Every Daily Treasury Statement since Monday, March 16, has also reported the debt beginning and ending each day at $18,112,975,000,000.
CNSnews.com.
They’ve spent us into oblivion and they’ll keep going until the chickens come home to roost (any day now). Then they’ll say it’s your responsibility to deal with the impossible burden. By that time the amount owed will be so ridiculous they might as well not tell us what it is.
But, please, keep on voting for all this insanity.
Google.
29 Wednesday Jul 2015
Posted in Legal/Political Columns
Tags
America, Bible, Christ, death, debt, Democrats, don't vote, God, government, Republicans, voting, War
America is awash in so-called Christian rhetoric, much more so than actual Christianity. It’s a great thing Christ warned against false teachings.
Recently a gentleman penned a letter to the Editor of a large Southern newspaper, God Should Guide Vote. As one might guess this means voting for God’s chosen party, the Republicans. It says so right there in the Bible.
May I suggest that when you enter the voting booth this time, May I suggest that when you enter the voting booth this time, vote for what God would want for our country. Align yourself with that party and push the button. I’m betting on God. Align yourself with that party and push the button. I’m betting on God.
This same man wrote a similar letter several years before, Don’t Vote Democrat. God wouldn’t like that. Instead we should vote for the party of perpetual war, constant debt increases, overbearing regulations and a police state. Well, yes, that is both major American parties. Stick with the Republicans! They are good people like Denny Hastert, the child molester, and George Bush, the semi-literate war criminal.
Let us review a few of the GOP’s accomplishments of the past few decades:
Numerous undeclared wars against manufactured enemies in various countries;
Many of those countries destroyed;
This country bankrupted;
Millions dead, wounded or displaced;
$200 Trillion in debt and liabilities;
DHS and the Patriot Act;
Common Core;
55 million babies murdered without consequence;
The death of the middle class;
Shoe-tapping in the airport men’s room;
Baphomet worship.
These are but a few and, yes, the Republicans had tremendous assistance from Democrats but… But… Where was I?
Oh, voting for what God would want!
God told me not to bother voting.
03 Wednesday Jun 2015
Posted in News and Notes
≈ Comments Off on Burning Down the House
Tags
Augusta, Columbia County, construction, elderly, fire, God, life, Marshall Square, miracles
1983’s Burning Down the House by Talking Heads was a bizarre, new-wavy love song of sorts; the pseudo cultural ramblings of an odd man for some 80’s woman. Maybe a woman like Caitlyn Jenner – hey, it’s America.
Early yesterday morning the newly built luxury home of a hundred or more elderly people in suburban (Augusta) Georgia burned down. Ninety-one year old Dorothy Carpenter died in the fire.
(Augusta Chronicle.)
The damage is as bad as one would expect from the Chronicle’s photograph.
The Fire Department did a fantastic job and saves dozens of lives. An 82-year-old woman was pulled alive and in relatively good shape from the rubble seven hours later. Miracles do happen today, praise God.
County, State and BATFE officials have just began their investigation. At a preliminary news conference the Fire Chief stated the fire started big and spread fast. Thus, the massive damage to the structure. I have no idea what started the conflagration but two theories stand out – arson or a mechanical/electrical failure.
County officials were quick to point out the building was designed to code and that a certificate of occupancy was issued prior to the recent opening. The resort has only been in business a few months.
I suspect the structure was not up to code or either the code is grossly inadequate. I will leave further discussion until after the investigation. I will say this: my gym is next door and I watched the place go up. Like so many modern buildings, it was built seemingly overnight. It was like the Two Lazy Pigs Construction Company threw it up of twigs and straw – both flammable.
I understand places like this charge an arm and a leg in way of rent for the convenience, etc. offered by the home. This incident may cause some to think twice about placing a loved one in such abode rather than allowing them to live with their family.
The loss of life and memories is regrettable. The fact this wasn’t much worse is amazing.
26 Tuesday May 2015
Posted in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes
≈ Comments Off on American Disturbia
Tags
America, anarchy, arms, Catholic Church, China, demons, evil, freedom, God, goverment, Jesus, Russia, Satan, teens, The People, War, Washington
This is the first blog post created and published entirely from my new smarty phone. Please forgive me if something goes wrong. It’s the phone’s fault…
Rumors of War:
The neocon nuts in the Central regions of Mordor have been picking a fight with Russia for years now. Bereft of the cold war they desperately want a hot war. The banks and defense contractors just aren’t making enough money in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya.
Now the fools and their tools want a war with China. This is beyond dangerous, beyond reckless. It borders on national suicide in the name of corporate profit. If we can’t beat “enemies” in places the size of Alabama and with half the martial capabilities, how in the hell do we battle world powers? Russia and China have nukes and the ability to use them. This can’t end well. It can’t start well either. There is no just reason for animosity with either country.
Then again, it would give the rabble an excuse to wrap themselves in the flag, go to “church,” and worship their real god – Mars.
Meanwhile:
On the home front, while their parents wave flags at church, our young people are busy trying to summon a demon. Priests are, naturally, sounding the alarm. “I want to remind you all there is no such thing as innocently playing with demons,” said father Stephen McCarthy.
I once spoke to a Priest about this subject. The fact is, as bored as teens may be with school, with sexting, and with MTV, demons are real. When you summon the shadow world, there is no telling what might answer and it might answer.
The Bible is clear: Jesus did not deal with Casper The Friendly Ghost; He expelled Satanic monsters destined to destroy men, body and soul.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that demons came about from the original original sin and the fall of Lucifer. See: CCC 391, et seq. These hateful beings want to destroy. The last thing anyone should do is foolishly invite them in. Find me a Baptist or Methodist Minister who disagrees with the Church on this point.
The dark forces of Hell are best left to the Lord, to Jesus, and Their Angels.
Let us, on Earth, concern ourselves with exorcising those demons of Washington, who threaten all mankind with the profitable, yet Satanic spectacle of world war.
(More related than one might think, these stories. Google.)
This was a bit more tedious that computer publishing. It’s done though. You may thank me later.
PS: This post was modified by PC after the fact.
24 Sunday May 2015
Posted in Legal/Political Columns
≈ Comments Off on Political Party Time!
Tags
America, anarchy, bankers, Bush, CAFTA, Christian, Christie, Clinton, Congress, crime, democracy, Democrats, elections, fraud, freedom, George Washington, God, GOP, government, hate, immigrants, Israel, jobs, libertarians, Mencken, NAFTA, Obama, people, politicians, politics, power, President, Rand Paul, republic, Republicans, robots, Romney, Ron Paul, secret, Senate, stupid, trade, Washington
I hate politicians. In Christian terms it is wrong to hate any man. Politicians are less men than rodents. Thus, I feel exonerated in my feelings. Elections are exercises in stupidity and herd-think. Presidential elections are the worst.
H. L. Mencken summed it up best: “All of the great patriots now engaged in edging and squirming their way toward the Presidency of the Republic run true to form. That is to say, they are all extremely wary, and all more or less palpable frauds. What they want, primarily, is the job; the necessary equipment of inescapable issues, immutable principles and soaring ideals can wait until it becomes more certain which way the mob will be whooping.” Mencken, 1920.
The difference between 1920 and 2015 is that, back then, there were people pretending to be true patriots. At some point they dropped the pretense and proceeded from a desire for pure, unadulterated power. The mob of the American people conveniently ignore this fact. The television is just too entertaining to disagree with. The country sinks lower into the sewer of politics.
A political “party” sounds like a fun time until one realizes the term refers not so much to an event as to a lowest, dumbest degenerates ever assembled under the sun (in truth, like all roaches, they prefer the darkness). Washington warned against them. Mencken ridiculed them. The people, ever plumbing the depths of stupidity, embrace them with jealous fervor. It’s “us” Democrats against “them” Republicans and visa versa. Spare the sane the idiocy of it all.
America is dominated by two predominate political parties. They are nominally referred to as conservatives and liberals. As I see it they both liberally dispense what may be conservatively described as bullshit. The people seem to like it.
Third parties exist, apparently to provide comic relief for the big two. I experimented with what I thought the most honest of these alternatives, the Libertarians. Given the choice I would gladly be ruled by Libertarian politicians than those which currently plague us. However, given power, I am sure they would be corrupted by the mainstream of political discourse. Anarchy is the only happy solution. The people do not like happy solutions. Thus, we are suck with the rats and the roaches.
These parties care nothing about you. They’re priorities are: bankers, Israel (Likudniks), and anyone else. Not you. Not me.
I am sick of this G*****ned nonsense and what it to f**king stop. Okay? There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans! They respect and represent neither democracy nor any republic.
(Different approach, same results. Google.)
An illustrative story from the popular news presses:
If the God-fearing Republicans exist to save us from the Godless, communist Democrats, then why are Republicans Rallying to Save Obama’s Secret Trade Deal? You can read more about this phenomenon here and here and here.
I’m not entirely sure what this new “secret” trade deal means for America. But, first, it’s secret. That means bad when it comes from Washington. Second, it’s a trade deal. NAFTA and CAFTA, etc. have given American the SHAFTA. I remember being lied to about NAFTA. The dirty manufacturing jobs of old, they said, would give way to a new world of high-paying service jobs which would benefit everyone.
In truth, we have lost the industrial work, pay and all. In exchange we have gained menial minimum wage employment serving hamburgers and such. Robots and immigrants and Indians now do the productive work for real pay. What a change.
I’m sure the new law – sure to happen – will be more of the same. It supposedly grants the President new powers concerning foreign trade. I understand Obama caught wind of a few, final high-paying jobs left in American and is determined to stamp them out. The displaced workers will receive healthcare and cell phones for the bargain – at a cost.
A few Democrats and Rand Paul (son of the mighty Ron Paul), realizing the potential liabilities of robbing the people of their last shot at the American Dream, have stood in the way. Paul filibustered against the deal in the Senate. His speech fell of deaf and stupid ears. The President will get his way, supported by the “conservative” opposition. Trade will be geared ever towards non-American interests. Americans will lose jobs. Reality TV will continue to be popular among the uneducated rabble.
Just remember this when the election rolls around and the Bush/Romney/Christie machine makes the usual patriotic rumblings. Remember it when Hitlary bashes the GOP for being unsupportive of freedom. Blah, blah. Sounds like the same old BS to me.
Remember, if you can, how the various Democratic Congresses and Bill Clinton ran up the national debt, creating new and useless government programs along the way. George Bush, the dimmer, was elected to change all that. He promptly created new agencies and doubled the debt while commencing new wars everywhere. His Excellency, Barack Hussein Osama, was elected to reverse course. Dutifully, he doubled the debt again while continuing and adding to the wars. Now he wants to finish off the trade work began by Clinton and Bush the Vomiter. I see a conspiracy.
The people, bloated by beer and television see nothing. They hear nothing. They say nothing. One of the new fools (or an old fool) foisted upon us by the elite will be the next President. Business will continue as usual.
Spare me your partisan rhetoric this year and next.
14 Saturday Feb 2015
Posted in Legal/Political Columns
Tags
America, Augusta Chronicle, corruption, Courts, death, Gandolf, Georgia, God, government, Hitler, injustice, jury, justice, law, Lord of the Rings, murder, Paul, Romans 13, Satan, South Carolina, Stalin
This morning I read a letter to the editor of the Augusta (GA) Chronicle wherein the author proposed streamlining the dead penalty process. The author had, I think, a mild semblance of good intentions behind his missive. He certainly picked a sympathetic test case. However, his proposal is extraordinarily dangerous. And, unfortunately, his thinking is all too common in modern America.
His letter recounted the guilty plea entered by a South Carolina defendant accused of murdering a police officer. As I have written elsewhere most criminal cases end in plea “bargains.” By entering his plea the defendant avoided the possibility of the death penalty. This is a common practice.
The author argued the defendant deserved to die for his actions. Perhaps he does. I am not opposed to the death penalty per se. Under the right circumstances it is a fitting punishment. But, as I have written before, an American courtroom is one of the last places on earth one may find appropriate circumstances.
The author notes, correctly, that in South Carolina and Georgia (all civilized jurisdictions) a jury’s decision in a death penalty case must be unanimous – all of the jurors must agree the crime of murder was committed by the accused. After reaching that conclusion they must separately and unanimously decide if death is the appropriate punishment.
Our letter writer calls on “both state legislatures of Georgia and South Carolina to change the law that requires a unanimous decision by a jury for the defendant to receive the death penalty.” He proclaims: “When heinous crimes are committed, it should only take a simple majority of jurors for the person to receive the death penalty.”
His most disturbing and telling comment is: “The government should be the sword of God, and the guilty party should be hanged in public in front of the courthouse.” The government should be the sword of God… I submit he really believes the government should be … God. This sentiment is as common as it is alarming.
First, as a legal matter, there is a sober reason why jury verdicts should be unanimous. In a criminal case, especially a death penalty case, the burden of proving the underlying facts and elements of the crime rests solely on the state. The state must prove these elements beyond all reasonable doubt. This means a reasonably prudent man (twelve of them) must have no logical reason to question the defendant’s guilt.
(Google.)
I’m working an article about the origins and logic behind the jury system. In short, it is a last check against a tyrannical prosecution. Should a corrupt government bring a baseless (or sloppy) case against an accused individual, the jury stands between that individual and injustice – or so it was intended. Having multiple jurors eliminates the possibility of individual juror prejudice co-opting justice. In critical murder cases the unanimity rule adds a final layer of protection. If only one juror maintains doubt, the whole jury is “hung.”
This protection is in place for all of us. The Chronicle letter was followed (online) by several reader comments. All but one wholeheartedly agreed with the author. The lone holdout noted a Ohio case where three men were convicted or murder and sentenced to death. After 39 years in prison they were exonerated in a crime they never committed. This too is an all to common occurrence in America. Hang them and let God sort them out?
If I read the author’s thought correctly, then I suppose he would really like to dispense with the jury and trial altogether. In his mind an accusation should lead to immediate execution … for God’s glory, no doubt.
I also suspect he subscribes to the simplistic reading of Romans 13 – that government is a righteous extension of God’s will. Paul qualified this passage in terms of just law and order. Should that government derive its authority and actions from Natural Law this assumption would be correct. I do not know of any government, ever, which has so existed. By their logic, blanket 13’ers would have to sanction any and all government actions as the will of God – including those of Stalin and Hitler.
The “sword of God?” Government is just a sword – pure brute force – imposing the will of the ruling (Godly or not) on its subjects. As I said above, I think the writer would supplant the Almighty with earthly governance. This blasphemy is in vogue across the political spectrum.
CNN news anchor and Fordham Law School educated Chris Cuomo recently espoused the view that laws and rights come from earthly government and not God. ‘Our Laws Do Not Come From God’.
Maryland Congressman Elijah Cummings goes further – he says people “come to government to feed their souls.” Rep. Cummings: People ‘Come to Government To Feed Their Souls’.
The views and quotes show plainly that the new American religion is statism (a pitiful, second-rate brand of Satanism).
As to the suggestion the South Carolina defendant deserved to die, I recall several lines from The Lord of the Rings. While discussing Gollum’s crimes, Frodo asserted that Gollum deserved to die. Tentatively agreeing, Gandalf answered masterfully: “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.” As true in South Carolina or Georgia as in Middle Earth.
PERRIN LOVETT 
You must be logged in to post a comment.