who's your nanny?

Federal Judge Pwns Obama

From today's The Washington Times:

In ruling against President Obama‘s health care law, federal Judge Roger Vinson used Mr. Obama‘s own position from the 2008 campaign against him, arguing that there are other ways to tackle health care short of requiring every American to purchase insurance.

“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.

I care little for federal judges (or State judges or city judges for that matter), but this is heroic pwnage. I just hope Obama does not pull a Lincoln and try to have Judge Vinson arrested for calling him out.

(H/T Manuel Lora)

States Always Commit More Crime Than Presumed

The Electronic Freedom Foundation has discovered (surprise!) that the FBI is violating the civil liberties of Americans at a greater extent than previously assumed:

EFF has uncovered widespread violations stemming from FBI intelligence investigations from 2001 - 2008. In a report released today, EFF documents alarming trends in the Bureau’s intelligence investigation practices, suggesting that FBI intelligence investigations have compromised the civil liberties of American citizens far more frequently, and to a greater extent, than was previously assumed.

When it comes to State violations of lives, liberties, and property, I'm an opened-ended book. The more I learn about what this dishonest, insane, and intolerable government has done, the less surprised I am about any revelations about State crimes and violations of its own laws. Basically, I think that the only real limit on State crime is political ideology. I agree with Albert J. Nock's assessment that

The State will always be criminal in proportion to its strength; a weak State will always be as criminal as it can be, or dare be, but if it is kept down to the proper limit of weakness – which, by the way, is a vast deal lower limit than people are led to believe – its criminality may be safely got on with.

And in a democratic State, not only will the amount of State crime increase, but these crimes will become more diabolical and heinous as time moves on. This is because democracies have competition in the production of bads. The U.S. has competition for the best CIA agent, the best FBI agent, the best ATF agent, the best IRS agent, the best DEA agent, etc. And the "best" usually means the most deceptive, the most threatening, the most menacing, the most violent. Just as it is almost impossible for a good man to become president of the U.S., especially as democracy continues to corrupt the masses generation after generation, it is almost impossible to find any man of good intentions or morals at the top of these agencies. Any man who does have principles will be weeded out early on. Moreover, the men who apply for these positions are part of the same corrupted masses who vote for the best liar, thief, and potential murderer as president.

Crimes that may have been considered conspiracies decades ago are carried out in the open today. Prosecutors openly lie to gain convictions today. Prosecutors and police openly hide exonerating evidence today. Police openly plant evidence on suspects today. In the past this would have been done secertly, but the masses have been so corrupted by democracy and are so worshipful of State power, that the State does pretty much whatever it wants, whenever it wants. As the WikiLeaks fall out has demonstrated, many people even wish to protect government secrecy as necessary to "national security." Thus, given this license to operate, it is not at all surprising that the State actually commits more crime than previously suspected. One really has to wonder just what type of crime the U.S. Federal Government could commit that would cause the masses to turn against it.

DHS to End Color-Coded Warning System, New Fear-Mongering System to Follow

From a CNN article I found today with emphasis added:

The much-maligned, color-coded Homeland Security Advisory System is about to be consigned to the proverbial dustbin of history.

Not that anyone is really paying attention.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is expected to announce Thursday that the almost 9-year-old threat alert system will go away in April. It will be replaced by the new National Terror Advisory System that will focus on specific threats in geographical areas, a department source said Wednesday.

The source did not provide details of the new system, which Napolitano will unveil at what the department is calling "the first annual 'State of America's Homeland Security' address" at George Washington University.

The top Democrat and Republican on the House Homeland Security Commission reacted positively to the news, although committee chairman Rep. Peter King, R-New York, reserved judgment on the specifics.

"Though the system served a valuable purpose in the terrible days and months following the terrorist attacks of September 11, it was clearly time for the current color-coded system to be replaced with a more targeted system," King said. "I know they have been working on this for a long time. It sounds to me like the changes they are proposing make sense. We will have to wait and see how they implement this new, more targeted system. I expect the biggest challenge for DHS will be balancing the need to provide useful and timely information with the need to protect sensitive information."

"The old color coded system taught Americans to be scared, not prepared," said ranking member Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi. "Each and every time the threat level was raised, very rarely did the public know the reason, how to proceed, or for how long to be on alert. I have raised concerns for years about the effectiveness of the system and have cited the need for improvements and transparency. Many in Congress felt the system was being used as a political scare tactic -- raising and lowering the threat levels when it best suited the Bush administration."

Allow me to translate this from State-speak: After 9/11 the color-coded system helped sustain the climate of fear the allowed us to start two wars, pass the Patriot Act so that we could have more power over the everyday activities of Americans, create the DHS and TSA to help enforce these new powers, and redistribute wealth from hard-working Americans to our cronies in the military-industrial complex. However, Americans have become inured to the old color-coded system and no longer bow down in fear as they used to. Therefore, we have created a new system which we hope will produce the desired Pavlovian response. This system will be based on geographical areas, and although we know most Americans are pretty bad a geography thanks to the public schools we created to indoctrinate them to worshipping the State, we do believe that they can recognize the continental United States. Thus, if we simply light up specific States with "warnings", we might induce the appropriate fear necessary to stop them from complaining about scanners and pat-downs, and just be the obedient sheep we want them to be. We plan to reveal the details of this system at an annual State of America's Homeland Security conference where we can announce new threats and create new hobgoblins each year. This is because we know that fear is the foundation of State power. However, if Americans refuse to fear the imaginary enemies we create for them, they will learn to fear real violence from their own government.

Question for Dog-Lovers Who Despise Michael Vick

During the 2010-2011 football season, Michael Vick, who was not supposed to start this year for the Philadelphia Eagles, resurrected his quarterback career by playing very good football. In a few games, he seemed unstoppable. The reason Vick's career needed resurrection was due to his time served in jail for dogfighting among other charges (don't get me started on this complete failure of justice). But even though he has "served his time and paid his debt to society", many people, namely dog-lovers, refuse to forgive him. Tucker Carlson even stated that Michael Vick should have received the death penalty. He later retracted that statement, but it's clear that for many dog-lovers, Michael Vick should not be forgiven nor should he be allowed to play football, no matter how much contrition he shows.

So here's my question to these people. How come you folks never criticize police who invade people's homes and murder their dogs? Just about every week, Radley Balko links to a story about a cop shooting a family dog. Just search for "puppycide" on his site and see how many results appear. Today I found this link from Radley about a woman in Pennsylvania who called the police (big mistake, never call the police) to report a burglary. The woman claims, "[The police] shot him six times with a pistol and once with a shotgun. They took the dog and we asked them if we could have him back to bury him and they won't give him back to us."

I read about these stories just about everyday, but I hear no outrage from anyone other than from, of course, libertarians. On the other hand, I have heard and still hear many people angry at Michael Vick for something that he did years ago. So are you folks going to start picketing local police departments around the country just as you picketed the Eagles's stadium when Michael Vick returned to the NFL?

Malcolm X on Police Brutality

Here's a fiery speech from Malcolm X on police brutality and the justice system. What I find most compelling about this speech is its eerie relevance for 20th century America. The only difference I can discern between Malcolm X's description of police then and the police now is that the police brutalize anyone regardless of race today. In this speech Malcolm relates the story of a black Korean war veteran who was killed, not in combat, by the police in his own country. It has been about fifty years since this speech, but the police are still killing veterans today. This is only more anecdotal evidence to confirm Robert Wick's observation that "we are all niggers now".

 

Eventually, 'Opting Out' Will No Longer Be an Option

From the LRC Blog today I found this report from Kane who recently flew out of Tulsa:

I flew out of the Tulsa International Airport this morning.  At TUL, the TSA has installed millimeter wave body scanners at all its checkpoints.  This morning, the TSA had roped off the metal detectors, forcing everyone to go through its porno-scanners.  Even more alarming, the signs stating that the porno-scanners are experimental technology and one has the right to opt out were nowhere to be found.  It seems that while one can still opt out as I did, the TSA is no longer making that known to the traveling public, at least in Tulsa.

Eventually, opting out will no longer be an option for anyone. The TSA has already made it clear that airline passengers who decide not to go through security and ask for refunds of their ticket will still be arrested and considered "terrorists suspects." These violations will not be limited to just airline passengers. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and TSA chief John Pistole (who appear to be engaged in a contest for "most fascist security bureaucrat" with each other) have both been quite candid about their plans to expand the reach of TSA.   The TSA is expanding to bus stations and train stations. I suspect that in the future there will also be random TSA roadblocks, all done in the name of "security," of course.

I used to think that the U.S. would not officially become the U.S.S.A in my lifetime, but honestly, I am quickly losing hope. Now I think that the U.S. will become a (official) fascist police state during my lifetime. The fact that many Americans are armed is utterly useless if the vast majority of Americans do not want freedom. Or even worse, I suspect most Americans think that they are free, just as the Germans did according to Milton Mayer. Surely a people who think they are free are not going to resist the government in any meaningful way.

Moreover, many Americans simply do not want to give up the crumbs of loot that fall from the State's table. They want their Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and welfare checks among other goodies to keep coming. Americans who fall into Paul Krugman's morality believe that it is right and just to take wealth forcefully from the rich to give to the poor. Such people might argue over the amount of wealth to be taken or over the definition of who is wealthy, but it is a given that taking money from one class of people and giving it to another is "just." The truth, however, is that no just or righteous or moral society can be built on a foundation of theft. As such, I sincerely doubt these types of people listed above would ever resist the State itself. They may object to certain policies, but these people would never question the legitimacy of the State.

Government: Protecting Vultures at Your Expense

In yet another of example of the State making life miserable for its subjects, vultures are invading part of northern Virginia, but the residents cannot kill them because they are federally protected.

Molly Pallavicini has seriously considered selling her house to get away from her new neighbors. "They're disgusting," she said. They carry on in public. They hiss at each other. They use her driveway as a toilet.

"They are big black and turkey vultures," Pallavicini said, enough to darken the sky when she drives home from work about 5 p.m. to her house in Staunton, Va. "I've had as many as 50 of them at the house. When they take off and leave, it's such a loud noise, like a wreck or something."

Staunton, population 24,000, is the latest winter destination of federally protected vultures - about 500, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services, more than ever before. After trying unsuccessfully to scare them away for weeks with fireworks, the USDA recently turned to firepower, killing at least two dozen each Monday and Tuesday night, and still the vultures haven't retreated....

The USDA is the only agency authorized to kill vultures and other birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. A felony if convicted of killing a protected bird, the penalty is up to $200,000 for an organization, $100,000 for an individual and/or up to one year in prison.

Public works officials in Staunton and residents like Pallavicini can look at vultures but can't touch them. Vultures, of course, aren't much to look at. Dressed appropriately in black plumage, they serve an important role as the undertakers of the natural world, scarfing down carrion.

Yes, you read that correctly. The USDA is the only federal agency authorized to kill vultures (Although I suspect that a DEA agent or FBI agent or ATF agent could kill a vulture without consequences given that these agents kill innocent people without consequences regularly.) I'm quite sure that the residents in this area could take care of the vulture problem themselves, but in the name of "protecting endangered species", the vultures make life miserable for these residents. But the State has arrogated to itself the right to kill anyone and anything without consequence. In this case, the Federal Leviathan has asserted its dominance over its vassals by preventing even local officials from killing vultures. Only the USDA can kill vultures and if a mere mundane should kill one, he faces fines and jail time. And should he resist, he could be killed by the State.

Anything the State "protects" is at our expense. When the State protects vultures, it threatens violence against its subjects who break its laws. When the State protects low income workers with minimum wages, it threatens violence against anyone would dare offer a wage lower than its arbitrary wage rate. When the State protects us from terrorists attacs, it threatens violence against all of us through the DHS, the TSA, and the Patriot Act. I am sick tired of being "protected" by the State.

 

The Most Heroic Liberal on Earth Needs Help

Glenn Greenwald, the most heroic liberal on Earth, needs our help:

Reader support has always been vital to the work I do here.  Each year, I hold an annual blog fundraiser in the first part of the year.  As I always note, relying on reader support is what allows me to maintain full independence while also providing an important form of accountability.  It means the overarching obligation is to maintain credibility with one's readers, and nothing is owed to anyone else.  The blog fund-raiser also enables much-needed assistance for the work that is done here, including having a regular research assistant.

No, I do not think that I dubbing Greenwald "The Most Heroic Liberal on Earth" is an exaggeration. He has been a man on fire lately. He is the only liberal that makes me, an anti-State libertarian, want to shout "Amen!" after reading his columns. Just take this excerpt from a recent post called "The reflexive call for fewer liberties" as an example:

What lies at the core of this mindset is desperate pursuit of a total illusion:  Absolute Safety.  People like William Galston believe that every time there is a violent or tragic act, it means that the Government should have done something -- or should have had more powers -- in order to stop it.  But that is the reasoning process of a child.  Even if we were to create an absolute Police State -- the most extreme Police State we could conjure -- acts like the Arizona shooting would still happen.  There are more than 300 million people in the U.S. and, inevitably, some of them are going to do very bad and very violent things.  Thus has it always been and always will be.  The mere existence of bad events is not evidence that the Government needs to be more empowered and liberties further restricted.  Just as there are serious costs to things like the Arizona shootings, there are serious costs to enacting the kinds of repressive systems Galston envisions, yet people like him never weigh those costs.

Thomas Sowell Is Heroic on the Federal Reserve Bank

I have my issues with Thomas Sowell mainly on war and the police state, but he is a good economist and he is on point about the Federal Reserve Bank. This interview was recorded December 11, 2010, but I cannot find it on the National Review website. Thomas Sowell was asked if he would abolish the Federal Reserve Bank and his answer his "Yes". Later in the interview Peter Robinson of the Hoover Institute says, "...I have to say I wasn't expecting your answer to run in this direction so I don't have questions, follow-up questions prepared and you may actually have, I may actually have to think here in realtime." When Robinson presses his question about replacing the Fed, Sowell replies, "...replacing things always bothered me. When someone removes a cancer, what do you replace it with?" Heroic reply! I'll use that when people ask me what would I replace the State with.

 

The Myth of a "United" Nation

I wasn't planning to write about the Arizona shootings simply because it became clear to me over the past couple of days that the shooter was crazy. There does not appear to be any real political motivation based on the evidence so far. This does not appear to be an individual who was fed up with the Federal Government and attacked a congresswoman in anger at the State. So far this looks like the act of a deranged individual similar to the Virginia Tech shooter and Columbine killers. But since everything is politics and politics is everything, it was inevitable that the target of the shootings and the incoherent political ramblings of the shooter would lead the American public to question the vitriol and animosity that is part of the current political landscape. However, since no one in the mainstream will ever deal with the true problem that leads to such heated political rhetoric, I thought I would discuss it briefly.

The reason why our political culture is acerbic and angry is because the U.S. public continues to believe that we are a united nation and that we should be a united nation. I suspect we can thank Lincoln's war to "save the union" for this unpleasant state of affairs Lincoln demonstrated to the entire world that political unity was possible only at gunpoint. That a people could truly become united as long as there was a strong central government extant that could force everyone to be together as a political unit. This necessarily means that without secession as a viable option, whoever controls the State controls the lives and property of millions of other people. Whatever plans a politician can dream of to "make the world a better place", he can effect through the violence of the State. But our situation is even worse since we live in a democratic State.

Boehner's Moment of Honesty

House Speaker John Boehner, speaking on the tragic shooting over the weekend in Arizona that claimed the life of a 9-year old girl and several federal officials:

"An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve. Acts and threats of violence against public officials have no place in our society."

That's right. Everyone knows that acts and threats of violence are only to be committed by public officials.

An Oscar Award-Winning Impersonation of a Police Officer

From today's Washington Post:

A Prince George's County police officer willingly lent his cruiser to a man who used it to impersonate an officer and take money from Hispanics during patdowns, authorities said Friday.

The officer and the man were acquaintances, but the officer might have thought the man was a sworn fellow officer who needed a cruiser while his own was being repaired, said Capt. Misty Mints, the assistant public affairs commander for the police department.

She said police have arrested the man who they think impersonated an officer, and they have placed the officer whose car was used on paid administrative leave....

Larry E. Hawkins, 27, of Temple Hills was charged with armed robbery, impersonating a police officer and other related counts, court records show.

This is probably the best police impersonation story I've read in that the accused did pretty much everything a real cop would do. Not only did Mr. Hawkins drive an official police cruiser and dress up like a police officer, he also robbed Hispanics while patting them down. Rather than being arrested, he should be offered a job with the the PG County Police Department.

 

The Ghost of Frederic Bastiat Laughs from On High

Passing by the ol' re-education machine in the break room today, I received an unexpected--and surely unintended--dose of humorous irony.  Just the thing I needed to boost my spirits and carry me over 'til quittin' time.  There on the screen, courtesy of Fox News, was dear old Unkle Barry, flanked by a pair of sickly-looking lesser parasites, flapping his gums about something I assume was related to the economy (the screen titles indicated he was introducing some bright new "economic advisor," surely another Goldman-Sachs alumnus and staunch supporter of the Keyensian one-trick pony show, although I have yet to look into the matter).

Nothing too out of the ordinary so far, right?  But here's the punchline:  the setting for this bit of melodrama was apparently the warehouse of some favored (i.e. unionized) company, complete with a beautifully staged backdrop made up of the company's fine products:  prefabricated windows!

I couldn't help but chuckle to myself as I imagined His Majesty lauding the valiant efforts of the factory workers, the superior quality of their American-made products, and their collective contribution to "national security," before ensuring their job security and stimulating the economy by turning around and smashing them all to bits.

I hope the ghost of Frederic Bastiat was tuned in for that one.  I think he would have appreciated it every bit as much as I did.

Here Are Some Suggestions, Mr. Boenher

House Speaker John Boenher, R-Ohio seems to have difficulty deciding what government programs to cut. Apparently in an NBC Nightly News Interview on January 6, 2011, he could not name single government program or department he would cut. Neither can most Tea party supporters for that matter. So here are three specific suggestions to get the ball rolling.

1. End all foreign wars and bring all troops home immediately. According to this USAToday article dated in May, the Afghan War costs $105 billion in 2010 and the Iraq War will cost $66 billion in 2011. For argument's sake, let's say that the Afghan War will cost $105 billion in 2011 as well. Ending the wars will save least $171 billion. Bringing the troops home and closing all foreign bases will also save billions. This money can then be returned to the American public. In addition, the soldiers who are fighting these wars can come home to find productive jobs (just stay out of law enforcement). Given that the U.S. Federal Government would no longer be a menace to the world, the threat of terrorism would drop to almost zero. This means that we could also abolish the Department of Homeland Security and with that the TSA. This means more money can be returned to the public and these bureaucrats can also find productive jobs (just stay out of law enforcement).
2. End the war on drugs. I have no idea how many billions that it would save, but ending this immoral and ludicrous war would not only save money, but thousands of lives. A lot more Mexicans would live this year as would grandparents. Police departments around the country would shrink drastically. The DEA and the ATF could be abolished. The CIA and the FBI could be shrink dramatically. And freedom would increase exponentially.
3. Abolish the FTC. With all of this money now reaching the hands of the American public and all of these former bureaucrats now unemployed, businesses will need to increase production so that they can increase employment. However, the FTC is an utter menace to the entrepreneurs in this country who we depend on to create jobs. Killing the FTC would dramatically reduce uncertainty about future economic conditions. Entrepreneurs could spend more time worrying about their business rather than whether some useless bureaucrat will fine him for not putting a comma in the correct place for a business license.

These are just some suggestions for a start, Mr. Beonher. I tried to pick programs and departments that would snowball on their own and lead to even more freedom and release more resources back to the American public. You may also consider Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the FDA, FDIC, IRS, EPA, FEC, FCC, SBA, NSA, NASA, NTSB, SSA, SEC, GSA, NSF, OPM, OSHA, Federal Reserve Bank, Departments of Health, Agriculture, Interior, Education, Energy, Defense, Commerce, Justice, Transportation, Treasury, State, Bureaus of the Census, Labor, Engraving and Printing, ad infinitum. Take your pick(s).

Nigga, Please!

Now, they're trying to get rid of the word "nigger". Trying to get rid of my beloved "nigger." Last year the NCAAP had a funeral for the word "nigger". Well, tonight it's Easter.-Chris Rock in Kill the Messenger

To my surprise today I found not one, but two articles about the word "nigger". The first article I found via the LRC Blog. Apparently a publisher has decided to issue new editions of Huckleberry Finn without the word "nigger" which will be replaced with "slave". The second article I found via Vox Populi. Tom Burlington, a white man, was fired for using the word "nigger" in the workplace. He filed suit against his former company "claiming a double standard and alleging that he was the victim of racial discrimination". His case is now going to trial. According to this article

The dispute began after Taylor, who is white, used the phrase the "n" word during the 2007 staff meeting. She said participants at the burial had said the full word "at least a hundred times or more," according to court records.

"Does this mean we can finally say the word n-?" Burlington asked colleagues, according to depositions.

Nicole Wolfe, a producer and one of the three African American employees among the nine people at the meeting, exclaimed: "I can't believe you just said that!"

Burlington told Taylor that although he did not necessarily expect her to use the word in her story, he thought that doing so gave the story more credence.

Now before I continue with my thoughts, let me reiterate that I am a black male. Therefore, if any white liberals are reading this post, please stop writing that email to tell me that "I cannot say the word 'nigger'." It's one of the few things that white liberals allow me to do, so I will say it as much as I want.

Frankly I don't find the word offensive and I am sure that this is a generational issue. I am a Gen X'r. I grew up listening to hardcore hip-hop groups like N.W.A (Niggaz Wit Attitudes), Eazy-E, Dr. Dre, Snoop Dogg, Compton's Most Wanted, Ice Cube, Notorious B.I.G., the Geto Boys, Too Short, Jay-Z, and Tupac. N.W.A's second album was named Efilrofzaggin which is "Niggaz for life" spelled backward. The album included the tracks "Niggaz for Life" and "Real Niggaz Don't Die". On their EP 100 Miles and Runnin', they had a track named "Real Niggaz". Eazy-E had a track on his album named "Niggaz My Height Don't Fight". Tupac had a track named "Strictly for my N.I.G.G.A.Z." and another named "Ratha Be Ya Nigga". Jay-Z had a track named "Ain't No Nigga". It was almost a rule that hardcore rap albums in the 90s must include the word "nigga" least three times per track. I also listened to several black comics back then including Paul Mooney, Chris Rock, and Dave Chappelle, all who use the word "nigger" to great comedic effect in their routines. (Apparently Paul Mooney no longer uses the word "nigger", although I remember one of his early routines in which he joked that he said the word "nigger" ten times in the morning to make his teeth white. But Chris Rock still does. And Dave Chappelle has a hilarious routine on origin of the word "nigger". NB: bad language in the Chris Rock and Dave Chappelle videos.) As such, I'm pretty much used to the word. In fact, I'm so used to it that when Quentin Tarantino, a white man, said it in Pulp Fiction, I laughed my head off.