Quote for the YEAR

Quote for the YEAR

It’s past time to vote these criminals out of office. It’s time we peasants got a wild-eyed mob together. We gather our pitchforks and our torches, we go to Washington, and we track these people down with hunting dogs. – Bill Whittle, AfterburnerMountains of Money: Do you know how much $1 trillion is?

I fully expect Bill to be arrested shortly for sedition or inciting to riot, or some other similar charge.

But he’s right. And we’re fooked.

See also this post by Joe Huffman.

Yup. The Other Side is Paying Attention

Yup. The Other Side is Paying Attention

Right on schedule.

The Far Right’s First 100 Days: Getting More Extreme by the Day

Sometime back in February, about three weeks into Barack Obama’s administration, everybody on the left suddenly noticed that there was something different going on with the conservatives.

The outrageous screeds and paranoid delusions sounded pretty much as they always had — but there was a new fury behind them, a strident urgency that hadn’t been there before, and a very audible shift of the gears in right-wing behavior and rhetoric.

None of this came as a surprise to veteran right-wing watchers — we’d been predicting a bad backlash since the 2006 election — but more than three months into the new administration, it’s increasingly hard to ignore the fact that this ominous new trend is taking on a momentum of its own.

On April 7, the Department of Homeland Security ratified some of those observations. Fueled by bone-deep racism, an unnatural terror of liberal government, frustration over the economic downturn, and fears about America’s loss of world standing, they said, the militant right wing is indeed rising again.

Its numbers are up, its talk is turning ugly, and it’s not unthinkable that we could be in for a wave of domestic terrorism unseen since the mid-1990s.

I’ve been meaning for a while to talk about what changed after the inauguration, and why, and what it means to the country going forward. Our observance of the end of the first 100 days seems to be a good time to do that.

The DHS report laid out the history and the current drivers in straight factual terms and made some safe predictions about what might make the situation worse. But the report stopped short of taking the next step.

(Interestingly, the nightmare scenario for most right-wing watchers — a white-hot backlash in the wake of another major terrorist attack — appears nowhere in the DHS assessment. Perhaps they didn’t want to put ideas into paranoid right-wing heads.)

We need to look at what long experience has taught us about the past escalation patterns of right-wing rhetoric and violence and figure out where we currently stand within those patterns.

We actually know quite a bit about this. Most national agencies tasked with keeping tabs on political and religious extremist groups look for specific signs that help them sort out who’s just talking the talk and who’s actually getting ready to walk the walk.

The criteria vary from agency to agency; and our collective insights into these patterns changes and deepens every year. But there are some generally accepted principles — and applying them to the current state of conservatism gives a clearer view what’s changed in the past 100 days, what the shift really means and what could be coming next if the right keeps going down this road.

I want to make it clear: The DHS report emphasizes that there’s no specific evidence that any particular group is planning any particular action.

At the same time, what’s equally clear from the pattern analysis is that the upshift we heard was the right wing going into overdrive — the speed at which talk about revolution (which has been going on for years, but intensified after 2006) accelerates into concrete preparation for action.

Here’s why:

Go read the rest, you rightwing extremist! There’s quite a bit.

Oh, and here’s the blurb on the author:

Sara Robinson is a fellow at the Campaign for America’s Future and a consulting partner with the Cognitive Policy Works in Seattle. One of the few trained social futurists in North America, she has blogged on authoritarian and extremist movements at Orcinus since 2006 and is a founding member of Group News Blog.

What the hell is a “trained social futurist”? Does this mean she predicts the future if you throw her an occasional herring?

Wait until you read tomorrow’s Quote of the Day!

Vanderboegh Speaks Sense:

We are not ready. Not politically, not militarily. I don’t know about you, Anonymous. Are YOU ready to take on an even greater military force than the British Empire of the Eighteenth Century? I’m not. No one I know is. Well, there ARE a few folks up in Winston County. 😉 Anyway, FEW people I know are. The Minutemen and common militia at Lexington and Concord and long road back into Boston had been preparing for YEARS. Read General Galvin’s book, The Minutemen. The ability to blunt and harry a British column was not an accident. I tell you plainly, WE ARE NOT READY. The military groundwork has not been laid. The political groundwork has not been laid. We are not ready and you want to start something that will make our defeat easy?

“A long train of abuses and usurpations.” When did Jefferson write those words? MORE THAN A YEAR AFTER LEXINGTON. Olofson’s case certainly falls into that category. But it is not yet time. This fight, if all else fails politically to prevent it, MUST be undertaken reluctantly. We must accept the burden of the abuses and usurpations as long as they can be borne, so that when we round on the whipmaster and feed him his whip it will be seen as justice by as many onlookers as possible. The Regulars MUST march out of Boston of their own accord. They MUST fire the first shot. Or the second. Or the third. THEN, and ONLY then, we will finish them and their tyranny. If they pass laws to accomplish this (they think) without direct confrontation, we will defy the laws and goad them into attempting to force us to comply. Think Boston Tea Party. Their whole system depends upon willing subjects. They don’t react well to defiance. They WILL give us the moral high ground. Their appetites will demand it.

Because what happens the moment after that shot is fired is so horrible than any sane person would do anything to avoid it. I have NO patience for someone who WANTS A FIGHT. It usually means they’ve never been in one. Do you understand what horrors await us all after that terrible moment? Have you ever seen the bloated bodies of children on the road? Entire neighborhoods in flames? Heard screams of dying innocents in the night? Smelled roasting flesh of men, women and children, people, innocent people, even as you, or me, or our loved ones?

I doubt it. But you know what? Neither have I. My son has. But I have not. Still, I am smart enough to understand that that’s what happens when you open up the Pandora’s box of civil war. Why wouldn’t you do everything in your power to put that off as long as possible, until you could not delay a second longer this side of defeat and slavery?

There’s a lot more, before and after.

The only real difference that exists between me and Mike in this case is that I don’t believe the Republic and the Constitution can be restored. As Ambrose Bierce put it, revolution will resort – at most – only in “an abrupt change in the form of misgovernment.” My choice, and the choice of people like me, will be whether to live in servitude or die resisting it. As Mostly Cajun put it, “Retire? I will probably get killed in the early battles of the coming revolution.” And the reason for that is illustrated by JD of Ballistic Deanimation and many others (including yours truly) in posts like Dumbing Down and The George Orwell Daycare Center. We’ve been outmaneuvered, and now we’re overwhelmingly outnumbered. The Founders could at least depend on a third of their countrymen to support them. We cannot. And I don’t think we’ll ever again be able to, because Leviathan can Olofson anyone, at any time, (or worse) and we’ll never be ready. Remember Atlas Shrugged:

There is no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is to crack down on criminals. When there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking the law. Create a nation of lawbreakers and then you can cash in on the guilt. Now that’s the system!

So people like Mike and like me are considered “anti-government extremists.” No we’re not. We’re Constitutionalists, who think that our elected and appointed officials ought to mean it when they swear their oaths to “uphold and defend the Constitution.” They ought to at least be somewhat familiar with the thing. But that time has passed, sometime around FDR’s first term. The next “shot heard ’round the world” will never be fired. There will just be a few more Carl Dregas, a few more Marvin Heemeyers, and probably a Timothy McVeigh or two. And the screws will tighten further, and the long train of abuses and usurpations will continue. Eventually a breaking point will be reached, and we still won’t be ready.

And we’ll lose.

And that’s why my line-in-the-sand is my front door, but not, necessarily, yours.

On that happy, note: Sleep tight.

Quote of the Day

People are getting tired of being pushed around.

In my home state of Utah, the federal government just set a bunch of rules about how you can travel on government land. Basically this makes it so that if you live in the extremely rural counties of Garfield or Kane, you can’t actually GO anywhere. You can’t actually travel across land that your ancestors travelled across with wagons or handcarts, and that your family has crossed for the last hundred years, because a bureaucrat in Washington (who’s never actually been to Utah) decreed that you can’t cross that land unless you do it in some sort of magical conveyance that doesn’t make noise or carbon. This might not sound like much to some of you, but with the stroke of a pen, the lives and livelyhoods of thousands of people were just altered for the worst on a whim.

That is just another example amongst the hundreds. Things like that are what are driving the Tea Parties.

– Larry Correia, Monster Hunter Nation

If you’re interested in some of the other hundreds, if not thousands of examples, pick up a copy of Vin Suprynowicz’s The Ballad of Carl Drega, or if that’s too dry for you, John Ross’s Unintended Consequences.

Here’s Your 1st Rightwing Extremist Suspect

Here’s Your 1st Rightwing Extremist Suspect

Tax protester in hot water over tea bags

A Beeville grandmother who sent tea bag tabs to Washington and Austin earlier this month found herself at police headquarters Monday answering questions about her intentions.

“I’m just a normal person. I’m a single grandmother raising two granddaughters,” said Faye Freeman Tuesday morning.

So imagine her reaction when Texas Ranger Andy Lopez and Beeville Police Department Staff Sgt. Richard Cantu came to her door Monday and told her they wanted her to go to the police department for questioning.

The reason? Freeman had mailed the tags from 64 tea bags to different elected representatives in Austin and Washington on April 4 to protest government spending. And one of the recipients had called the authorities to report her, saying he or she had received something suspicious in the mail from a woman in Beeville.

“If you were on the receiving end of something like that, what would you think?” Freeman said Lopez asked her.

“If I’d got something like that, I would have called the person back and said, ‘Can I help you?’” was her response.

But you’re not a clueless politician. No fair!

When investigators asked if she thought she would open a suspicious envelope that had no return address, Freeman said, “The envelope had my return address on it.”

Later she asked this reporter, “How did they find me if there was no return address?”

Wouldn’t “DUH?” have been an easier reply?

Freeman was doing what thousands of working taxpayers are doing this month as part of a protest against increased government spending and coming tax increases.

Instead of sending tea bags, the grandmother decided to send the tabs from the bags and use the tea herself.

This saves .gov money since they don’t have to run a mass-spectrum analysis on the contents of the teabags to determine if they’re Earl Gray or just Lipton like the tag says.

When she was asked why it was that she did not include a note in the letter explaining why she was sending the tabs, she had a simple answer. “That would have been an awful lot of writing.”

And we know our elected officials can’t be bother to even read the legislation they vote on, so what would have been the point?

Freeman sent the envelopes to everyone in Washington and Austin she thought might listen. That included President Barack Obama, her U.S. senators and a number of representatives, state senators and representatives.

“When you do something like this you want to cover the chain of command,” she said.

But she never expected lawmen to show up at her door asking her to go downtown.

“I’m really surprised it happened,” Freeman said. “You should have seen my neighbors. I’m just a normal person and when the Texas Rangers came looking for me, they said, ‘Oh my goodness, what’s going on?’”

“I was stunned to start with,” Freeman said. “I didn’t have any idea. They kept assuring me that I wouldn’t be arrested.”

As long as she cooperated.

But if she stepped out of line . . .

“They were polite. I didn’t have any problems answering their questions,” Freeman commented.

Never answer their questions. Ask if you are under arrest, and get a lawyer. The police are not your friend, and they are not there to help you. And yes, I’m serious. I know there are a lot of good ones, but I also know you can’t count on that. Lawyer up.

She said she planned to attend the tea party scheduled for the Bee County Courthouse lawn this morning. The entire tea bag tab incident was related to that event, a protest against the government for spending big and taxing big at a time when regular people are trying to make ends meet.

Other Bee County residents also mailed off tea bags to state and national representatives, but unlike Freeman most included a note of explanation with theirs.

“It seems to me that they keep wanting to tax people but they aren’t listening to what we want,” Freeman said. To her, that is taxation without representation, the reason the first tea party was held in Boston at the beginning of the American Revolution.

It is to a lot of us, Ms. Freeman. (OUTSTANDING name, BTW. That’s probably what set the pol in question off. “Freeman? Can’t have THAT!“)

Lopez said he cannot comment much on the investigation. He said he received a call from someone who was concerned about the letter received from Freeman.

Lopez said he believes if she had included a letter explaining her feelings in the envelope there might not have been a complaint.

“I was asked to look into it, to see if there was anything fishy about it,” Lopez said of the envelope. “I was enlightened by Mrs. Freeman.”

Lopez did suggest that she might have been more clear with her intentions by including a note or letter of some kind. He said that when she said it would have taken a lot of writing to include a letter in each of the 64 envelopes, he simply suggested that she could have written one letter and made copies.

See above. Only a moron or a legislator (but I repeat myself) could have misinterpreted what a tea bag tab meant.

Lopez admitted that he had not kept up with the news regarding the tea party movement but he understands the intent now.

“She’s articulate and she seems sincere and genuine about that,” Lopez said.

As far as the tea bag letters and tea party protests planned for Wednesday across the nation, Lopez said he could understand the intent.

“This is America,” Lopez said. “Whatever makes your boat float.”

Here’s a picture of this dangerous subversive:


Be afraid. Be very afraid!

Preach It

Preach It!

“Concerned American” writes of his observation of cognitive dissonance en mass at the Atlanta TEA Party he attended. Excerpt:

As I stood listening to the speakers, I kept listening and looking around for any signs (literally and figuratively) that folks actually understood politics in Comrade Barry “We Won” Soetero’s America, circa 2009.

The closest I saw?

One woman I spotted on my way to the transit station holding a sign which simply said, “Peaceful Attempt”.

But if I gotten up on stage and said, “Do you understand that by demanding the elimination of socialism from this country — which you claim to want — you are implicitly and necessarily demanding the end of

– Social Security;
– Medicare;
– Medicaid;
– the new prescription drug benefit for geezers;
– Federal aid to local schools;
– the deductibility of mortgage interest;
– subsidized student loans; and
– a myriad of other government transfer payments?”,

I would have been booed off the stage, at best.

Read the whole thing. Twice. Then pass it around.

But What if Your Loyalty is to the Constitution?

DISCLAIMER: Until proven otherwise, I’m going to go with reader juris_imprudent’s assessment that this “report” is a very clever fraud, thus my Quote of the Day for Monday, April 13. I was not the only one suckered (not an excuse), but juris is right – it smells, and I can only plead stuffed sinuses for not recognizing it. Still, I’m not going to pull the post. I admit my mistakes when I make them, I don’t shove them down the memory hole.

UPDATE 4/14: Michelle Malkin confirms THE REPORT IS REAL, though she does concur with juris that it is “one of the most embarrassingly shoddy pieces of propaganda I’d ever read out of DHS.”

I ought to feel better about not being a dupe, but I think I actually feel worse knowing that the Department of Homeland Security actually did conceive, create, publish, and issue the damned thing.

End of update. Please, read on.

I guess it makes you a potential Rightwing Extremist. I don’t listen to Roger Hedgecock. As far as I know he isn’t syndicated on any station here, but apparently he got a copy of a Department of Homeland Security report, dated April 7, 2009, and did his show on Friday about it. Someone at AR15.com – a hotbed of over 10,000 potential Rightwing Extremists – posted a link to the document, entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment (PDF), so I gave it a read. It’s only ten pages long, including the cover. Aside from the predictable warnings about neo-Nazi skinheads recruiting because our new President has a skin-tone darker than alabaster, there’s some actual new stuff our political masters seem to be worried about. Here are some of the highlites lowlites:

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

Perhaps they read Neil Strauss’ Emergency? We now need to be afraid of pissed-off military veterans!

Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.

Well, we knew they were keeping track of the Three Percenters already. That is, after all, their stated goal of being loud, proud, and in-your-face; to make sure the .gov knows there’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed.

A recent example of the potential violence associated with a rise in rightwing extremism may be found in the shooting deaths of three police officers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on 4 April 2009. The alleged gunman’s reaction reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a Jewish-controlled “one world government.”

Right. This is in keeping with “The Nazis and eugenics were right-wing” meme that Jonah Goldberg so thoroughly debunked in Liberal Fascism. But Goldberg is a JEW, so, um, nevermind. . . (Liberal Fascism will be out in paperback in June, just so you know. Strongly recommended.) Yeah, this nut, probably off his SSRI meds, decides to shoot three cops to death because of his paranoid fear of having his guns taken away, therefore he’s the poster-boy for “rightwing extremism.”

It goes on in this vein for a while, but here’s the really interesting parts:

Many rightwing extremist groups perceive recent gun control legislation as a threat to their right to bear arms and in response have increased weapons and ammunition stockpiling, as well as renewed participation in paramilitary training exercises. Such activity, combined with a heightened level of extremist paranoia, has the potential to facilitate criminal activity and violence.

During the 1990s, rightwing extremist hostility toward government was fueled by the implementation of restrictive gun laws—such as the Brady Law that established a 5-day waiting period prior to purchasing a handgun and the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that limited the sale of various types of assault rifles—and federal law enforcement’s handling of the confrontations at Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho.

On the current front, legislation has been proposed this year requiring mandatory registration of all firearms in the United States. Similar legislation was introduced in 2008 in several states proposing mandatory tagging and registration of ammunition. It is unclear if either bill will be passed into law; nonetheless, a correlation may exist between the potential passage of gun control legislation and increased hoarding of ammunition, weapons stockpiling, and paramilitary training activities among rightwing extremists.

Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred rightwing extremists—as well as law-abiding Americans—to make bulk purchases of ammunition. These shortages have increased the cost of ammunition, further exacerbating rightwing extremist paranoia and leading to further stockpiling activity. Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move at this time.

DHS/I&A assesses that the combination of environmental factors that echo the 1990s, including heightened interest in legislation for tighter firearms restrictions and returning military veterans, as well as several new trends, including an uncertain economy and a perceived rising influence of other countries, may be invigorating rightwing extremist activity, specifically the white supremacist and militia movements. To the extent that these factors persist, rightwing extremism is likely to grow in strength.

Unlike the earlier period, the advent of the Internet and other information-age technologies since the 1990s has given domestic extremists greater access to information related to bomb-making, weapons training, and tactics, as well as targeting of individuals, organizations, and facilities, potentially making extremist individuals and groups more dangerous and the consequences of their violence more severe. New technologies also permit domestic extremists to send and receive encrypted communications and to network with other extremists throughout the country and abroad, making it much more difficult for law enforcement to deter, prevent, or preempt a violent extremist attack.

Sounds frightening, doesn’t it? Especially those parts about “as well as law-abiding Americans”.

Now, for me, this is the pièce de rÊsistance (pun intended):

DHS/I&A assesses that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States. Information from law enforcement and nongovernmental organizations indicates lone wolves and small terrorist cells have shown intent—and, in some cases, the capability—to commit violent acts.

As opposed to leftwing extremist lone-wolves and small terrorist cells who, apparently, are only capable of torching animal testing labs, McMansions under construction, and SUV dealerships, or blowing up their own membership by being incompetent bombers like Bill Ayers.

Essentially, the leftwing extremists must not be seen as much of a threat, since they can’t (apparently) organize anything as complex as a birthday party for a five year-old.

And, of course, there’s the Muslim extremists, who don’t do “terrorism” anymore, they do “man-caused disasters.”

But here’s where the real error lies, I think: misidentifying the problem:

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

They missed the single biggest group out there: those of us who aren’t anti-government, we just want our elected and appointed officials to do what they swear to do upon taking their offices: uphold and defend The Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic. As one ARFCOMmer put it:

This “homeland” shit that suddenly started up in the last couple years pisses me off. It reeks of the “fatherland” and “motherland” propaganda shit our enemies used throughout the 20th century. The Nazi regime was “father” to the German people. The Soviet regime was “mother” to the Russian people.


This guy is our uncle and that’s as close as I want the fucker.

I don’t need the government to be my big brother, my parent, my nanny, or my caretaker. It needs to maintain public services (roads, etc.), maintain foreign relations and the military, keep the states from squabbling, and stay the fuck out of my life.

This desire, apparently, makes us “antigovernment rightwing extremists.”

So be it.

Because what really frightens them is that we really do know what we’re doing. We are, after all, the people who build and maintain the infrastructure of these United States. People like Joe Huffman, who – when he’s not coding for Microsoft – makes explosives for fun. People like Mostly Cajun (or for that matter, me), who understand what it would take to bring down our electrical grid. These are just two examples off the top of my head. I’m sure my readers can chime in with their own. That ought to frighten the piss out of our political masters. I know the TEA Parties do.

I wrote another post with this same title almost five years ago. It was about the possibility of another American Civil War. I concluded that piece, thus:

What prevents another Civil War here isn’t the Army or the fact that we hold a higher loyalty to our Nation than to our State of residence, it’s ignorance and apathy.

It would appear that both ignorance and apathy are beginning to wane. And it’s not because our new President is black.

No wonder they’re worried.

Rope, Trees, Some Assembly Required

Rope, Trees, Some Assembly Required

Orlando Sentinel columnist Charley Reese cut loose in the mid-80’s. It’s even more pertinent now, and it’s making the rounds of the blogosphere, updated by someone. Here’s my little assist.

545 PEOPLE

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are really against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are really against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of representatives does.

You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason.. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

Don’t you see now the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the Speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. Stop and think how long she has been Speaker of the House…..

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts — of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red .

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq, it’s because they want them in Iraq.

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way. If they were on Social Security then they would fix it fast.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation,” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do. Change the law so that it is unlawful for quasi public companies (like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to donate to politicians or political parties etc and unlawful for those persons/organizations to accept donations from those over which they have oversight.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power..

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses … provided the voters have the interest and incentive to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

We should have, long ago. I think it’s too late for that to ever happen now. As I’ve said before, Claire Wolfe was wrong. It’s not too early to shoot the bastards, it’s too late.

Quote of the Day

Quote of the Day

It’s always the same, isn’t it? They’re going to infringe our rights just a little bit — and all for our own good. Little itty-bitty law, passed with nobly-strained faces.

Then, once it’s passed, next session of Congress, they take that law, and they tack on one itty-bitty extra sentence. Next session, they add a teeny,tiny little paragraph — and next thing you know, the whole stinking bloody camel is up under the tent. – Lawdog, Sweet zombie Jeebus here we go again

This behavior is often associated with the original nobly strain-faced lawmakers saying “We never intended THAT!

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of it.

Zero Oversight and Insufficient Regulation

Zero Oversight and Insufficient Regulation

Mostly Cajun has a very interesting post up on government interference regulation of his industry, the pumping of natural gas from the Gulf of Mexico up North where people use it to do stuff like, oh, heat their homes. Excerpt:

One of the things I learned was that when these engines were designed, the EPA was some sort of bad dream only found in the diseased minds of abusers of heavy drugs. That was then. This is now. Students of engine operations know there is a certain proportion of fuel to air that produces maximum power. We can’t run many of our engines there. Why? Because we’re not interested in maximum power any more. We’re interested in minimum pollution, and that ‘maximum power’ thing give a higher level of oxides of nitrogen.

That’s okay, though. We learned how to operate there, and we tested our engines regularly to see that they met the goal, and if one was acting up and emissions went up, we dutifully took it off line and fixed it. Life loped along. So they changed the rules. Where we could hit a “twenty” on the spotted owl-killing scale, they dropped the number to five. Okay, you guys on the pipeline, tighten up your acts. So the engineers twiddled and tightened things even more. And goals were met. But the baby seals were still crying from their big, soulful eyes, so the number was changed again.

You know, it’s getting VERY hard to meet the numbers. And our people tell the rulemakers. And the rulemakers say “Meet the numbers or face fines.” And our people say, “We can’t meet these numbers. We’ll have to shut down horsepower.” And the rulemakers say “Meet the numbers.” And that’s where we’re heading.

The policy-makers apparently think that we’ll keep lights on and homes heated by means of windmills and unicorn farts. I’m telling you that we folk who work in a real world have real and immutable laws to work with, things like Ohm’s Law and Boyles’ Law, and these laws and others like them say that you can’t move gas from the well to the end user without horsepower. There are other laws too, and those laws, despite the attitude of the current administration, say that when it gets to the point that it costs more to do a thing, then you stop doing it, and that’s where a lot of industries, mine included, are headed.

Read the whole post. Pay particular attention to the last two lines.