Archive for October, 2009

If you plan to rob someone odds are the intended victim will not cooperate. You’re going to need to persuade them to hand over their property. You are going to need…a weapon!

Sticks, stones, knives and guns have been successfully employed to redistribute wealth, but they do have a downside. These items can prove dangerous to use and often turn a simple robbery into something far uglier. Besides, weapons like these work just as well for the intended prey as they do for the hopeful robber.

But criminals take heart, there is a better way!

Today’s sophisticated and savvy miscreants make use of a more subtle and effective weapon in the crusade to relieve owners of their lawfully earned property. The weapon of choice for the smart thief is the politician!

Not just any brand of politician will do, however. Those who know choose the political brand which has consistently delivered the “goods.” Yes, only one brand has made wealth confiscation their reason for existence and turned this “redistribution” into an art form. So if you’re seeking a simple transfer payment, or you want an elaborate take-over of a major portion of the nation’s economy…

Look For The LIBERAL Label!

Of course, if you prefer to earn your own living there‘s a place for you too! We call it the “uninformed voter” category. All you need to do is just keep working and pay no attention to anything which doesn’t directly affect your internet service or your television remote control. After all, criminals need victims and someone has to earn the money.

What is Truth!?

That question, posed over two thousand years ago by Pontius Pilot to Jesus, still reverberates with monumental relevance for us today. America cannot, as Pilot did, ask rhetorically. His subsequent actions betrayed how little he cared about truth. I wonder how future generations will judge our concern regarding truth?

Truth is approached in our nation primarily from two very separate, distinct and disparate vantage points often referred to as Liberal and Conservative. But the labels are themselves misleading. Liberals believe in surrendering liberty to state control and the individual freedom advocated by so called conservatives is, historically speaking, quite radical! I choose to employ terms which are more accurately descriptive of the ideas behind the two groups; Statist for liberals and Individualist for conservative.

If you carry away nothing more than what I write in the next sentence I will consider my efforts a success. Truth is always a radical proposition! We will consider three topics universal in scope yet very personal and practical in application in order to demonstrate the radical nature of truth.

The Truth About Human Nature.

Men and women are by nature and by choice selfish. We all tend to work diligently at those things we believe beneficial to us and our families. This situation obviously puts some at a disadvantage. The weakest and most helpless members of our society are subject to oppression and cruelty.

Individualists recognize the truth of human nature as well as the absolute futility of attempting to change or circumvent that nature. One practical outworking of this reality is the understanding that equality of outcomes is impossible. People are too unique to guarantee this kind of “equality.” Even if it were possible the individualist would not do it because the price in human dignity is just too high. Because the individualist values personal freedom and personal responsibility he turns to government to protect the rights of the citizen. A free market is the natural consequence of free people engaging in transactions absent force and coercion.

Statists find the human condition unacceptable and believe “change” can and must occur to achieve equality of outcomes. Practically speaking this means taking from those who earn and giving to those who do not. There must be a mechanism for this confiscation and transfer of wealth so the statist turns to nameless, faceless government. Only a powerful, centralized government has the means necessary to accomplish the goal. Basically, the statist ignores the truth about human nature and attempts to circumvent it by relying on coercion and force.

The Truth About Human History

The history of mankind is a sordid and sorry tale about the abuse of power. The weak and poor have ever been dominated, oppressed and even enslaved by those in power. Centralized political power has almost always been the means to create and sustain the tyranny.

The Individualist acknowledges the regrettable reality of human history and proposes an altogether radical solution; Self government by responsibly individuals. The primary, immediate and only legitimate role and activity of government is the protection of the individual from outside powers and from criminals inside the nation. It boils down to life, liberty and property. That’s it!

The Statist finds human history an inconvenient truth and prefers to believe that we are more enlightened and somehow able to avoid the problems which have perpetually plagued mankind. Rather than dealing squarely with the truth about human history the statist simply rewrites it. This offers double advantage to the statist by avoiding embarrassing facts as well as providing propaganda with which to “educate” the unlearned and young. (I am constrained here to point out the intent of deception has ever been, and can only be, maniacal.) Summarizing, the statist avoids and denies the truth about human history.

The Truth About Human Existance

Now we enter the bloodiest of battles and the crux of all other issues. What is the nature of human existence? What does it mean to be human and what are the implications of our answers?

Metaphysical is the term used to describe intangible reality. Emotion, willpower and desire are quite real and yet quite intangible. They represent reality outside and apart from the physical realm. Metaphysical reality forces men and women to face uncomfortable possibilities.

The Individualist understands the question to be whether man is meat or spirit. Can personality arise from nonperson? Individualists acknowledge the immaterial part of man as valid and worthy of examination and exploration. From such explorations have come the ideas of human dignity and human rights. These are ideas worth protecting and defending.

The Statist finds it difficult to broach metaphysical reality because of where the implications lead. “What is the Source of human dignity and human rights?” If the Source is transcendent then the statist is obliged to seek for the Source. Stated bluntly, if the Source is anything other than man or the state then the statist has no moral high ground from which to force and coerce. Ultimately, in order to deal with the truth about human existence, the statist is forced to invent a new religion whose only tenant is Tolerance; Tolerance of and for virtually anything…well…anything but an Individualist.

See what I mean about truth being radical?

In an effort to make government-run health care more appealing to those against it, the left is trying to change the name. Yesterday, Miss America (Nancy Pelosi) referred to the public option as the “consumer option,” and her colleague Debbie Wasserman Schultz called it the “competitive option.” Both suggesting the new moniker might help trick, err- suffice any doubters “among the public, consumers, or competitors.”

from the AP

“You’ll hear everyone say, ‘There’s got to be a better name for this,’” Pelosi said. “When people think of the public option, public is being misrepresented, that this is being paid for with their public dollars.”

I thought all government dollars were our public dollars? Oh, my mistake I forgot all dollars are really Congressional dollars.

As for having the votes to pass such a measure, both women said a public option would survive. They wouldn’t get into numbers of congressional supporters, but said it was simply a matter of picking which type of public option to pursue.

With all due respect, Madam Speaker, I have a suggestion; how about the failed option? No?  Give it three or four years, that name might grow on you.

I haven’t talked about this, because, frankly, I never felt there was much I could do about it, and there still probably isn’t, but this is about more than the 23rd NY congressional district. It’s about principal, it’s about freedom, and it’s about “We the People.”

Here’s a quick rundown. Back in June, Obama appointed John McHugh to Secretary of the Army. With that appointment, McHugh’s was up to a special election on 3 Nov, a week from tomorrow. New York state GOP nominated Dede Scozzafava, a liberal republican state assemblywomen to run on the GOP ticket. Grass roots conservatives had a cow. Here’s why, Scozzofava is a tax and spend, pro-union, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, and basically pro-Democrat liberal.

Now, back to my point. Why is it that Michelle Malkin, Fred Thompson, Sarah Palin, Steve Forbes, Dick Armey, Mark Levin, and other conservative activists have lent support to NY-23 candidate Doug Hoffman? Perhaps because he’s conservative! He supports the 2nd amendment, he’s pro-life, supports the marriage amendment, smaller government and lower taxes – hmmm, sounds like he has the right ideas. But, Newt Gingrich and a few other brainwashed establishment republicans have a problem with Hoffman, because he’s third partier. Politico is reporting Newt was caught telling tea party organizer Lisa Miller “a vote for Hoffman would be a ‘mistake.’”

“I just think it is a mistake for the conservative movement to think splitting in the special election is a smart idea,” Gingrich said. “If we give that seat to the Democrats, shame on us.”

With all do respect Mr. Speaker, did you look at Scozzafava’s record, her whole record? What would a vote for her would be giving up?

Asked why he chose to back Scozzafava, who supports abortion rights, same sex marriage and has ties with local labor leaders, Gingrich responded, “Let’s just start with she is the nominee of the local party. My bias is to be for the nominee of the local party, and I don’t second guess the local party.”

Perhaps you should second guess the local party when it nominates a candidate who doesn’t fall in line with the party platform. Some have said the GOP is the open party, the tent party, the party that allows all candidates, the party that support all opinions, the party that positions itself for all Americans. Well, some may be right; perhaps it is the tent party, the all inclusive party, and because, it’s now the MINORITY party. It’s not about party Mr. Speaker, it’s about principals.

Gingrich also argued that Scozzafava, a state assemblywoman, stands a better chance of winning the seat over Hoffman, who is trailing in public polls.

“In the last poll that came out yesterday, she is well ahead,” he said. “And she is much more likely to beat the Democrat than Hoffman because Hoffman doesn’t live in the district.”

“He’s never won an election in the district,” Gingrich said of Hoffman, “[Scozzafava] represents the biggest county in the district. She actually knows the local issues, and Hoffman has says publicly he doesn’t know the local issues.”

Oh, I didn’t realize he was behind in the polls;  there is certainly no way he can win now. Does the name Virginia Shapard ring a bell, Newt? Oh, and he doesn’t know the local issues; by that don’t you mean he doesn’t know the pork? Isn’t this a national seat?

Mr Speaker, an old buddy of mine once gave me an analogy about a pan of brownies. He asked if a wanted a pan of brownies. Sure, why not, right? Well, what about if I swapped out a few chocolate chips, for something else – let’s say a byproduct of Alpo. They still look like brownies, probably smell like brownies. But, in reality, they’re full of crap. Well, apologies Mr. Speaker, but the grassroots conservative movement has a pretty good nose, and you sir, the NY GOP are peddling brownie, and them ain’t chocolate chips.

See the YouTube video here.

This weekend I have looked at several articles about why we should reduce our troop involvement Afghanistan, and others wondering what “winning” would entail, and others asked what it would be like when we left. I am one of those who believes the commanders on the ground. If McChrystal thinks we more troops, let him have ‘em; if Petraeus needs more money let him have it. At this point it’s not about winning or losing, it’s about recognizing those who put their lives on the line and giving them what they need to get the job done. It’s about giving them the honor they deserve when they get home.

Here’s the newest video post from Military Moms. Enjoy, and the next time you see a soldier, sailor, airman, or marine say “Thanks!”

Last week the city I currently call home made the national news. And, while I think this small eastern NC town could use the notoriety, I am not proud of how it made the headlines. It seems Forbes Magazine has included Rocky Mount in its list of the most impoverished cities in America.

Forbes, which included Rocky Mount’s metro area (suggesting Rocky Mount has a metro areais like suggesting John Heder has a large following) focused on median income, income of the bottom fifth, percent of people below the federal poverty line, percentage on food stamps, unemployment rate, and national health care enrollees. (I am curious how the last figure will be adjusted with the passage of Obamacare.). Regardless, here’s a little hometown insight, although admittedly slanted to the right. 

Rocky Mount had a per capita annual income of $22,662, and income of the bottom one-fifth of residents was $7,840. About 7.8 percent of people earned below 50 percent of the poverty line, and 17 percent received food stamps.

More than 28,000 people received public health care, and the unemployment was 8.7 percent. Since the survey was taken, the unemployment rate has risen to 13.8 percent.

Obviously the all the previous numbers are indictative of the last; no job, no money, no health insurance. So why is the unemployment rate so high, uh, no employers. Although, Mayor David Combs disagrees, Rocky Mount area is not a place that attracts new businesses. 

Mayor David Combs said Wednesday that there is no denying that the city has had its economic struggles, but he questions whether the statistics are a fair assessment of the city.

“There are also ongoing efforts to recruit new industry and new businesses to the city,” he said.

Major efforts, both state and local, like raising state corporate income tax, now the second highest in the southeast, or changing the local property tax; Edgecombe County has the fifth highest in NC. Efforts like increasing employer overhead, Rocky Mount utilities are also among the highest in the state.  

[City Councilman Reuben Blackwell IV ] “We can’t pretend that the numbers aren’t real. We can’t pretend that the realities that exist don’t exist. We just have to now mobilize ourselves, create a plan and work the plan together as a region.”

Create a plan to increase government and work the plan to provide entitlements for the residents. Rocky Mount is the perfect picture of how liberal, err- progressive policies fail; jobless numbers continue to rise, because employers are closing or leaving. With few employers, residents lean on the government for support, and as government support increases so do the taxes, and the cycle continues.

From WRAL

cross posted at ConservativeNC

In the spirit of bipartisanship, the White House has determined that black voters can’t vote the issues, black candidates are only viable if they’re in the democratic party, and that white voters don’t have to capacity to look past skin color.

From today’s Washington Times (emphasis mine)

Voters in this [Kinston, NC] city decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party.

The Justice Department’s ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their “candidates of choice” – identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.

The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters’ right to elect the candidates they want.

Did anyone in the DoJ Google Kinston, NC? It’s 65% minority; there is a very good chance blacks will be represented. And, what about this doesn’t sound race driven? “So that black voters can elect their ‘candidates of choice’…” Is the DoJ suggesting black voters can’t decide based on the issues, or even based on personal knowledge; it’s small town USA for Pete’s sake, everyone knows everyone. Oh, and what about black republican candidates, are they not legitimate?

And, by the way, why in the world is the DoJ concerned about the local elections in a town of 23,000? Shouldn’t the DoJ have it’s sites on right-wing extremists and would-be conservative lunatics?

Even the local NAACP thought it was a little over the top.

“To begin with, ‘nonpartisan elections’ is a misconceived and deceiving statement because even though no party affiliation shows up on a ballot form, candidates still adhere to certain ideologies and people understand that, and are going to identify with who they feel has their best interest at heart,” said William Cooke, president of the Kinston/Lenoir County branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Mr. Cooke said his group does not take a position on this issue and would not disclose his personal stance, but expressed skepticism about the Justice Department’s involvement.

Justice Department spokesman Alejandro Miyar denied that the decision was intended to help the Democratic Party. He said the ruling was based on “what the facts are in a particular jurisdiction” and how it affects blacks’ ability to elect the candidates they favor.

“The determination of who is a ‘candidate of choice’ for any group of voters in a given jurisdiction is based on an analysis of the electoral behavior of those voters within a particular jurisdiction,” he said.

Hmmm, sounds like affirmative action for elections. Hello, the city is 65% minority and a democratic stronghold! Even the residents couldn’t recall a GOP candidate, ever. What, does the White House think, if the elections were based strictly on the issues, that somehow the republicans would steal the election?

Critics on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights are not so sure. “The Voting Rights Act is supposed to protect against situations when black voters are locked out because of racism,” said Abigail Thernstrom, a Republican appointee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. “There is no entitlement to elect a candidate they prefer on the assumption that all black voters prefer Democratic candidates.”

Well, Ms. Thernstrom, I have to disagree with you here. The is always an entitlement for the democrats.

Kinston residents contributed to Barack Obama’s victory as America’s first black president and voted by a margin of nearly 2-to-1 to eliminate partisan elections in the city.

The measure appeared to have broad support among both white and black voters, as it won a majority in seven of the city’s nine black-majority voting precincts and both of its white-majority precincts.

Ms. [Loreta] King [head of the DoJ civil rights division] wrote that voters in Kinston vote more along racial than party lines and without the potential for voting a straight Democratic ticket, “the limited remaining support from white voters for a black Democratic candidate will diminish even more.”

Black voters account for 9,702 of the city’s 15,402 registered voters but typically don’t vote at the rates whites do.

As a result of the low turnout, Ms. King wrote, “black voters have had limited success in electing candidates of choice during recent municipal elections.”

“It is the partisan makeup of the general electorate that results in enough white cross-over to allow the black community to elect a candidate of choice,” she wrote.

It is demeaning and racist to suggest that blacks don’t have the capacity to know or care about the issues, and to assert their only option is ‘voting a straight Democratic ticket.”

Mrs. Thernstrom of the civil rights commission blasted the department’s interpretation of the law.

“The Voting Rights Act is not supposed to be compensating for failure of voters to show up on Election Day,” she said. “The Voting Rights Act doesn’t guarantee an opportunity to elect a ‘candidate of choice.’ … My ‘candidate of choice’ loses all the time in an election.”

Read more here…

cross posted at ConservativeNC

Please check out the new line of products in the Desperate State Store. Click on the widget in the right sidebar or go to the store here.

I am not sure why this surprised me the way it did. After all, didn’t the apostle John have a “revelation” about these things? Lord Christopher Monckton, former advisor to Margaret Thatcher and climate change anti-Al Gore, gave a speach at Bethel University last week. In that speech, he warned of the consequences of the UN Climate Treaty to be signed in December in Copenhagen. 

Thanks to Minnesota Majority for providing the video.   

I was a volunteer firefighter for nearly ten years; I kept an American flag decal on my helmet. If it burned up on a call, I put on another; it’s just a fireman thing. They are generally very patriotic. So, needless to say this story from FireFightingNews.com fired me up… no pun intended.

A Chester City firefighter was suspended without pay yesterday for refusing to remove an American flag sticker from his locker. James Krapf, an 11-year veteran of the department, could face more days of suspension if he does not remove the sticker, Fire Commissioner James Johnson said.

Johnson directed the force’s 61 members to remove all decorations from the outside of their lockers over the summer after a firefighter posted a cartoon that others found offensive. The drawing, which firefighters said was posted by a black colleague, showed two black men and included a racial slur.

Firefighters can post personal items inside the lockers, but the outside must remain “free of alteration,” according to the directive.

Some firefighters didn’t think the American flag was included in the ban…

And, would they think the flag wasn’t in the ban? Perhaps, because it’s sewn on their uniform, or maybe because there is one on all the apparatus; what about the big one on the pole out front. Hmm, our mistake.

“The directive says ‘everything,’ ” said Capt. John Barbato, vice president of the department’s union. “I never would’ve thought the American flag would be included in that.”

Yesterday, almost seven weeks after the order went into effect, 11 firefighters were notified that they were still in violation.

Krapf removed a union sticker and a picture of a truck, but refused to scrape off the flag, a one-inch-square sticker that has adorned his locker for a couple of years, he said.

“Anybody who finds the American flag offensive shouldn’t be working there,” Krapf said yesterday.

Well, there you go James, getting all snobbish-American… this land is a melting pot; everyone is able to keep their culture and heritage, even if that heritage includes hatred of… well, you get the point. 

“I said, ‘No disrespect, Chief, but I’m not scraping that sticker off my locker.’ He said, ‘OK. Go home.’ ”

Banning all materials from locker doors was the simplest way to avoid bickering among the staff, Johnson said.

“How do we know what offends who?” he said. “I have to play Solomon here.”

Solomon, as in wise Solomon? I am pretty sure, the wisdom of Solomon would have told him not to make such a ridiculous, knee jerk, sweeping policy. Wisdom is the do what’s right regardless of consequence, not making sure there is not consequence.

Johnson said Krapf would face a two-day suspension if he did not remove the sticker today. Next would come a three-day suspension, and then the matter would go before the mayor and council and could go to arbitration, officials said.

Walter Miles Jr., the city councilman who oversees public safety, said he did not know all the specifics of the incident. “I strongly back my fire commissioner,” he said. “A directive is a directive.”

The Chester City Fire Department has worked without a contract since 2007. Johnson said the handful of firefighters making a fuss over the stickers were trying to gain sympathy from the public during contract negotiations, an allegation Krapf denied.

Krapf, 31, said he hoped to speak with the union and the commissioner today and reach a compromise. He doesn’t want to miss more pay, and he’s worried that this will be a negative mark on his record.

“I certainly can’t afford to lose a day’s pay, but it’s something I believe in,” he said.

 Now that’s the wisdom of Solomon.