Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Belgium Shooting – Case for Gun Control?



I was sitting around today and a thought occurred to me. Why haven’t I heard the gun control advocates taunting us with the recent Belgium shooting?

A “lone gunman” shoots and kills his cleaning lady, then enters a crowded shopping area where, using grenades, an “assault rifle” and a handgun, he kills two teenage boys, a 2 year old girl, a 17 month old girl, a 20 year old man and a 75 year old woman. An additional 123 people were injured.


Ordinarily, the gun control crowd would be salivating. But nothing? What’s the deal? So, I began looking into it a little bit and here’s what I learned.

"The conclusion for me is that we have in Belgium the harshest gun laws in Europe and certainly one of the worst in the world"


That statement is from writer/physician J.J. Martin, from Malonne, Belgium. Continuing in the same article, Martin notes

"The actual situation is: A law-abiding ordinary citizen cannot buy any type of firearm, unless he has a valuable reason (money transport, jeweler, etc.). If, by chance, he can have the authorization to buy a gun, the permit will be valid for only three years and a new application must be made at that time. If the permit is not accepted, he will have to sell, destroy or surrender the gun to the police.

Any citizen owning a gun of any type at the date of the new law must register it with the police and ask for authorization to keep it. If the authorization is not granted, the citizen must sell, destroy or surrender the gun to the police."

Now I understand. The horrendous tragedy… no, tragedy isn’t the right word… the treacherous criminal act of a murderer is evidence in support of those who have tirelessly argued that “if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns”.

In this case, not only did a parolee, previously convicted of possessing 10 prohibited firearms and 9,500 gun parts, somehow obtain more weapons in a country with some of the strictest gun laws, he was also able to obtain hand grenades. Looks like those gun laws aren’t everything they’re touted to be, huh?


Then, I was struck with another notion. Isn’t it interesting how the left is always ready to leap to the defense of Muslims, demanding others draw a distinction between the mainstream followers of Islam and the extremists (which I agree with completely), but treat all American gun owners as extremists? Think about it. When have you ever heard a gun control fanatic say anything like “The person who commits violence with a firearm is in the extreme minority and we should avoid generalizations that demonize the majority of gun owners, who are law abiding and productive citizens”?

Didn’t think so.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau



This is the agency (harrumph, bureaucracy), created by the The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, of which the Republicans are being accused of blocking Obama’s leadership appointment.


The GOP leadership claims they are blocking the appointment because it creates another czar position, with no oversight and outside all checks and balances. Okay, sounds reasonable. Of course, the first reaction from some on the left will be, “So, the Republicans created such bureaucracies, as well”.

Agreed. But, for how long will we continue this back and forth, tit for tat, bullshit? When will we draw a line in the sand and say “No more”? Yes, both political parties have played equal parts in creating this nightmare and have given The People a royal screwing. Yes, all that is true, but here it stops. No more blaming the other party.

Well, I got a little off track there for a moment, but back to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, whose initial budget exceeds one-half billion dollars.

Is this really a solution to any problems? For one thing, we already have a Bureau of Consumer Protection, within the Federal Trade Commission (whose budget is in excess of $300 million, and which boasts having filed “57 new complaints in federal district courts” in 2010. Wow! That’s efficiency for ya! $5 million per complaint! Not to mention their enormously successful Do Not Call registry, which has completely halted those annoying telemarketing calls I received in the past. WTF ever.
http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/oed/fmo/budgetsummary12.pdf

The USA.gov website provides an index of the numerous state and local consumer protection agencies.

There is the Consumer Product Safety Commission, whose budget has doubled over the past 4 years.

Take a gander at http://www.usa.gov/Citizen/Topics/Consumer-Safety.shtml , which consists of over 100 links to sites offering “consumer protection”.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Aviation Consumer Protection and Enforcement Division (U.S. DOT), Better Business Bureaus, etc. Practically every single government agency has a division “dedicated to consumer protection”. I wouldn’t have a clue about how to begin compiling a report on how much governments (fed, state and local) spend on “consumer protection”. Yet, during almost every television commercial break, at least one law firm tells us they stand ready to attack those nasty corporations, which have caused us some harm. How can that be, with all the government does to “protect” the consumer?

So, are we to believe that this new bureaucracy, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, is the end-all-be-all? Is this going to be “The One”? Are we finally going to be protected? Am I the only one who doubts that?

For those who believe so, let’s hear what the CFPB has to say about one aspect of their mission.

"When you see these prototypes, you may think, “This doesn’t look shorter or simpler than the current disclosures.” You’re right. These prototypes have some new items that you may not have seen on the current disclosures they’re replacing. These additions are new disclosures required by the Dodd–Frank Act. Basically, we’ve boiled down content that could have filled ten pages into five or six." http://www.consumerfinance.gov/knowbeforeyouowe/

What did they say? Sounded to me like “We could have made this really, really, really difficult by giving you ten pages of a convoluted explanation of your mortgage documents, but instead we only made it really, really difficult and kept it to only five or six pages of convoluted BS. See, we’re the government and we’re here to help.”

Of course, that is in addition to the mere fact that this exercise in futility is just another redundancy in government bureaucratic spending. Just within the above example, we are paying one or more bureaucracies to generate and mandate “consumer protection”, while simultaneously paying another to protect the consumer from the first! Unbelievable!

You know what is even more unbelievable? Many have allowed themselves to be convinced this is a great idea and that more government is always the solution to all of life’s problems. 

Consider the Environmental Protection Agency, with its $9 billion budget. I'm not sure how much more "Protection" we can afford.

Please, please, please. WAKE UP AMERICA! Before it’s too late.


Friday, October 28, 2011

Liberty!


            So, last week I had to give a speech for my Communications class. As painful as that was, it was made less so by our being allowed to choose our own topic. I spoke on Classical Liberalism, which is the political/economic philosophy (as opposed to an ideology) with the sole intention of instilling liberty. Of course, it was originally just known as Liberalism, but that term was stealthily hijacked by the advocates of socialism. At least Conservatives were a little more original in choosing their label, though they also fall short of promoting liberty, with their state enforced moralities.

            During my speech, I quoted Frederic Bastiat and Ludwig von Mises. Both were brilliant economists; Bastiat in the early 1800s and Mises, the early 1900s. It is amazing how their insights remain true, still today.

            Consider how Mises described the perils special interest groups inflict on society, in his book titled “Liberalism”. He said

“The parties of special interests, which see nothing more in politics than the securing of privileges and prerogatives for their own groups, not only make the parliamentary system impossible; they rupture the unity of the state and of society. They lead not merely to the crisis of parliamentarism, but to a general political and social crisis. Society cannot, in the long run, exist if it is divided into sharply defined groups, each intent on wresting special privileges for its own members, continually on the alert to see that it does not suffer any setback, and prepared, at any moment, to sacrifice the most important political institutions for the sake of winning some petty advantage.”

            Now, go back and read that underlined section, again. That was originally published in 1927! And what do we see happening today? An ever expanding list of special interest groups, with our “leaders” (spit) choosing sides, entirely for the purpose of “wresting special privileges” for themselves and seeking to ensure they themselves do not “suffer any setback”. That is not liberty. That is benefitting one group or class of People, at the expense of another, and that is simply theft. Liberty is for everyone and dividing the People and/or encouraging the People to separate themselves is completely antithetical to liberty. In fact, it is an absolute assault on liberty.

           Bastiat has become one of my favorite writers and provides an excellent summary of classical liberalism

“Away with their social laboratories, their governmental whims, their centralization, their tariffs, their universities, their state religions, their inflationary or monopolizing banks, their limitations, their restrictions, their moralizations and their equalization by taxation! And now, after having vainly     inflicted upon the social body so many systems, let them end where they ought to have begun – reject all systems and try liberty – liberty, which is an act of faith in God and his work.”

LIBERTY!



Sunday, August 7, 2011

U. S. Credit Rating Downgraded To AA+

We have just witnessed another grand hoax, perpetrated on the American People. "If we (government) don't take immediate action (on a problem that the government caused and has been festering for over 150 years) you (the peons) will suffer ill fate".

OH NO! Not the loss of a letter A! They've replaced an A with a plus symbol? It's the eighth sign of the apocalypse! Oh crap, there were only supposed to be seven. We're doomed!

Seriously, what has really changed since Thursday? The entire world has known for a very long time that we would never be able to repay $14.5 trillion of debt. On Friday, our ability to repay that debt had not changed in the least. We lacked the ability to repay 10 years ago, five years or five months.

What we need to pay very close attention to is what follows. Not how the markets react, but how those who have created the problem react. The chess pieces are being moved at a more rapid pace, but hopefully the People are finally realizing the pieces and the board belong to the elite and they are rigged. Hopefully, the People will finally understand we aren't bound to the game. We can stand up and toss the board into the air. The simple removal of that A might well be 2011's shot heard round the world.

The Politics of Economic Crisis: A Plebian's Perspective

I’d like to start this off with a quote, from President Obama’s address to the nation on Monday, July 25, 2011.

                         “For the last decade, we’ve spent more money than we take in.”

Well, no kidding President Sherlock! (Please note and applaud my enormous restraint from using the more colorful and demonstrative version of that saying. Thank you.) Now, why do you think the President chose those first four words? “For the last decade…” I believe any honest and logical person can come to the conclusion that it was solely for political gain. Let’s not forget former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s November 2008 little gem of philosophy; “Never let a serious crisis go to waste…”.

Rahm’s public utterance merely acknowledged what has been status quo in Washington for decades. Yes, that was the plural form of the word, Mr. President, which more honestly identifies the situation that has, only now it would appear, become a crisis.

I’m quite certain, due to the popularity of the website usdebtclock.org, every reader of this diatribe is aware that the United States government owes someone 14.5 trillion dollars. If this actually gets published, I’d like to compose another piece, investigating the identity of all of those someones. But, for now, let’s not get bogged down in the minutia.

When all the rhetoric is stripped away and the circus atmosphere of Washington’s faux quest for “bi-partisanship” and “compromise” is cast aside, it comes down to one thing and one thing only. Democrats and Republicans have spent too much money. They can both point their bony little castigating fingers all they want, but the truth is they are all guilty.

The way we arrived at this debt is through a history of deficits.  A history dating back to about 1850, when for the following fifty years, the government accumulated deficits of $991 million. A deficit is, simply, spending more than was received. From 1901 to 1939, there were 18 years of deficits. Since 1940, or the past 71 years, they’ve spent more than they took from us, in all but 12. That’s 83% of the budgets passed by Congress and signed by Presidents! ¹

Of the last 34 sessions of Congress, Republicans have held the majority of at least one House during 12 of them and Democrats, 28. Democrats have controlled both the House and the Senate 38 of those years, while Republicans have controlled both Houses 6 times, or 12 years.  We’ve had a Democrat President 32 of those years and a Republican for 36 of them. ²

Now, what you hear in this age of sound-bites, is one party or the other laying claim to surpluses in individual years and blaming the other party for deficits in others. Don’t let yourself fall into that trap of deception. Think back and listen carefully now, to the talk of cuts and spending. Very few spending cuts and even fewer expenditures are discussed in terms of individual years. The most often used period is 10 years. “This will cost $___ over ten years”. “We will cut _________ spending, over ten years.” It is completely meaningless and in fact dishonest, for the pols and pundits to discuss surpluses and deficits, in terms of individual years. Of course, the elite don’t expect us to figure this out and the media sure as hell won’t call them out on it.

What? You’d like a current example of this, you say? Alright, how about the “Budget Control Act of 2011”, the legislation enacted to “stave off” the “debt crisis”? Beginning on page 9 and covering each year from 2012 through 2021, it includes authorization for an increase of over $11 billion in Social Security spending. Beginning on page 11 and covering each year from 2012 to 2021, there is authorization for an increase of $4 billion, for HHS “health care fraud abuse programs”. For the same years, it includes $9 trillion in “new budget authority”, in the “discretionary spending” category. Those are not budget decreases, like we have been led to believe. They’re simply limitations of budget increases. Of course, we all know how well the government abides by previous legislation, when it comes to spending.

Politics as usual. Create a crisis, then do absolutely nothing about the crisis, while patting yourselves on the back for averting the imaginary crisis.

In order for us, the proletariat, to gain control and return to the true representative republic form of government, which our founders graciously bestowed upon us, we must first understand that the Republicans and Democrats have long ago abandoned us. We must hold them accountable for what they have destroyed. We must not fall prey to their Houdini-esque tactics of distraction and sleight of hand. We must ignore their attempts at inciting class warfare. We the voters hold the power of term limits, with the ballot box. Sometimes, the only way to stop an infection is to amputate the limb that threatens the rest of the body. We can save our country. But, to do so will require biting the proverbial bullet and severing those in Washington, whose actions have and continue to threaten our well-being.

Our current economic situation was decades, in the making, Mr. President, and until you fully and contritely acknowledge your own party’s culpability, you are not part of the solution. Mr. Boehner and the rest of the Republican establishment, you can wipe those smirks off your faces. The same goes for you.

¹    -   http://www.davemanuel.com/history-of-deficits-and-surpluses-in-the-united-states.php

We The People

Recently, it occurred to me that although we continue to capitalize President, Congress, Senator, Congressman and Representative, at some time we have stopped capitalizing "The People".


Search some of the government's websites and some news articles, for "The People". You will find the only time it is capitalized is when used in the title of something. There is something inherently wrong with that.


September 17th is "Constitution Day" and I encourage each of you to take time to re-read its content. That document, a foundation of the forming of our country, begins "We the People", for a reason. When reading, remember that the sole intent of its establishment was to constrain the government and to prevent it from interfering with the natural rights of The People.

Remember that the framing of The Constitution followed a mandate, prescribed in the Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"


We the People seem to have forgotten that it is We who give the government its powers. Join me in reminding them.

Take every opportunity to use the phrase "The People" and ALWAYS capitalize it.