Federalist Views

Because Picking Winners and Losers is What We Do

2014-11-14T09:22:00.000-05:00

We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas.

----

Because: Picking winners & losers ... is the role of we politicians and the bureaucrats that we appoint. The American people (millennials, in particular) depend upon our infallible judgment. Just because we (the elite political class) have given unfettered advantage to certain ISPs (that would be our major campaign contributors), doesn't mean we shouldn't tighten the noose on innovation. After all, with the rapid advance of innovative technology, we may further lose our ability to regulate information provided the serfs citizenry.

Just as "Single payer Health Insurance" is a good idea, we should be striving for PIS (Public Internet Service) provided by the government. (After all, who would not say that the Public School systems are serving our nation well?)

Comcast, Time Warner Tank After Obama Announces Net-Neutrality Support

Planned Economy or Planned Destruction

2010-08-30T10:09:00.003-04:00

This cartoon was in the Chicago Tribune in 1934.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Those who are never TAUGHT history are doomed.

Dilbert on "Hope & Change"

2009-05-04T07:52:00.003-04:00

There is so much truth to this. Our government actively encourages less education (despite the rhetoric), zero if not negative savings and basically rewards (what we would previously have called) non-productivity/advancement at the expense of the productive.

I'm sure this will all end well. Hope & Change are on the horizon.

Letter From Congressman Ron Paul

2009-04-30T21:49:00.010-04:00

As we reflect on President Obama's first 100 days in office, the hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street and the just passed budget, a staggering $3.4 trillion boondoggle, I wanted to share some good news with you.

As I write, H.R. 1207, my bill to audit the Federal Reserve, currently has 110 cosponsors in the House of Representatives. This piece of legislation is perhaps the most important of my career, and I thank you for your continued support in sending me back to Congress to fight for it.

A broad coalition of Representatives has joined with me in supporting your right to transparency at the Fed. For example, Rep. Tom Price (GA), head of the conservative Republican Study Committee, and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (CA), former head of the liberal Progressive Caucus, have both cosponsored the bill. Americans from all over the political spectrum are demanding an audit of the Federal Reserve. And with good reason!

Since its inception, the Federal Reserve has operated without sufficient transparency or accountability to the American people. In fact, current law specifically excludes the Fed from audit or real congressional oversight. No government agency has such an utter lack of sunshine.

The Federal Reserve has created and dispersed trillions of dollars in response to our current financial crisis. Of course, I am among the most outspoken critics of the bailouts, but Americans across the nation, regardless of their opinion of the TARP program, want to know where that money has gone and exactly how much has been spent.

H.R. 1207 will open up the Fed's funding facilities, such as the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, Term Securities Lending Facility, and Term Asset-Backed Securities Lending Facility to Congressional oversight.

Additionally, audits could include discount window operations, open market operations, and agreements with foreign central banks, such as the ongoing dollar swap operations with European central banks.

By opening all Fed operations to a GAO audit and calling for such an audit to be completed by the end of 2010, the H.R. 1207 would achieve much-needed transparency of the Federal Reserve.

Times are tough, and we continue to hear a stream of bad news. But I will continue to stand up for you in Congress and fight for our American traditions, to protect our Liberty and for an Audit of the Federal Reserve.

Thank you again for your support. I could not continue my fight without you.

In Liberty,

Ron Paul

Federal Agency Warns of Right Wing Radicals

2009-04-21T21:26:00.014-04:00

This is a reprint of the Department of Homeland Security's document about domestic terrorism. The original can be viewed here. The Washington Post wrote an article about it, also.

Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment
7 April 2009

Page 1

The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.

Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past.

Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.

The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the 1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers.

During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks, and infrastructure sectors.

Growth of these groups subsided in reaction to increased government scrutiny as a result of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and disrupted plots, improvements in the economy, and the continued U.S. standing
as the preeminent world power.

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.

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.

Page 2

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.

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

Current Economic and Political Climate
DHS/I&A assesses that a number of economic and political factors are driving a resurgence in rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization activity. Despite similarities to the climate of the 1990s, the threat posed by lone wolves and small terrorist cells is more pronounced than in past years. In addition, the historical election of an African American president and the prospect of policy changes are proving to be a driving force for rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization.

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.”

Exploiting Economic Downturn
Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures. Anti-Semitic extremists attribute these losses to a deliberate conspiracy conducted by a cabal of Jewish “financial elites.” These “accusatory” tactics are employed to draw new recruits into rightwing extremist groups and further radicalize those already subscribing to extremist beliefs. DHS/I&A assesses this trend is likely to accelerate if the economy is perceived to worsen.

Historical Presidential Election
Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms

Page 3

ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.

Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president, but stopping short of calls for violent action. In two instances in the run-up to the election, extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some threatening activity targeting the Democratic nominee, but law enforcement interceded.

Revisiting the 1990s
Paralleling the current national climate, rightwing extremists during the 1990s exploited a variety of social issues and political themes to increase group visibility and recruit new members. Prominent among these themes were the militia movement’s opposition to gun control efforts, criticism of free trade agreements (particularly those with Mexico), and highlighting perceived government infringement on civil liberties as well as white supremacists’ longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion, inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage. During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks, and infrastructure sectors.

Economic Hardship and Extremism
Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement.

Perceptions on Poverty and Radicalization
Scholars and experts disagree over poverty’s role in motivating violent radicalization or terrorist activity. High unemployment, however, has the potential to lead to alienation, thus increasing an individual’s susceptibility to extremist ideas. According to a 2007 study from the German Institute for Economic Research, there appears to be a strong association between a parent’s unemployment status and the formation of rightwing extremist beliefs in their children—specifically xenophobia and antidemocratic ideals.

Page 4

Illegal Immigration
Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages. They also opposed free trade agreements, arguing that these arrangements resulted in Americans losing jobs to countries such as Mexico.

Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point, and recruiting tool. Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent.

DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremist groups’ frustration over a perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite individuals or small groups toward violence. If such violence were to occur, it likely would be isolated, small-scale, and directed at specific immigration-related targets.

DHS/I&A notes that prominent civil rights organizations have observed an increase in anti-Hispanic crimes over the past five years.

In April 2007, six militia members were arrested for various weapons and explosives violations. Open source reporting alleged that those arrested had discussed and conducted surveillance for a machine gun attack on Hispanics.

A militia member in Wyoming was arrested in February 2007 after communicating his plans to travel to the Mexican border to kill immigrants crossing into the United States.

Legislative and Judicial Drivers
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.

Weapons rights and gun-control legislation are likely to be hotly contested subjects of political debate in light of the 2008 Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller in which the Court reaffirmed an individual’s right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but left open to debate the precise contours of that right. Because debates over constitutional rights are intense, and parties on all sides have deeply held, sincere, but vastly divergent beliefs, violent extremists may attempt to co-opt the debate and use the controversy as a radicalization tool.

Perceived Threat from Rise of Other Countries
Rightwing extremist paranoia of foreign regimes could escalate or be magnified in the event of an economic crisis or military confrontation, harkening back to the “New World Order” conspiracy theories of the 1990s. The dissolution of Communist countries in Eastern Europe and the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s led some rightwing extremists to believe that a “New World Order” would bring about a world government that would usurp the sovereignty of the United States and its Constitution, thus infringing upon their liberty. The dynamics in 2009 are somewhat similar, as other countries, including China, India, and Russia, as well as some smaller, oil-producing states, are experiencing a rise in economic power and influence.

Fear of Communist regimes and related conspiracy theories characterizing the U.S. Government’s role as either complicit in a foreign invasion or acquiescing as part of a “One World Government” plan inspired extremist members of the militia movement to target government and military facilities in past years.

Law enforcement in 1996 arrested three rightwing militia members in Battle Creek, Michigan with pipe bombs, automatic weapons, and military

Page 6

ordnance that they planned to use in attacks on nearby military and federal facilities and infrastructure targets.

Rightwing extremist views bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and have recently focused on themes such as the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability to China and India, Russia’s control of energy resources and use of these to pressure other countries, and China’s investment in U.S. real estate and corporations as a part of subversion strategy.

Disgruntled Military Veterans
DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups.

A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”

The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

Lone Wolves and Small Terrorist Cells
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.

DHS/I&A has concluded that white supremacist lone wolves pose the most significant domestic terrorist threat because of their low profile and autonomy—separate from any formalized group—which hampers warning efforts.

Similarly, recent state and municipal law enforcement reporting has warned of the dangers of rightwing extremists embracing the tactics of “leaderless resistance” and of lone wolves carrying out acts of violence.

Arrests in the past several years of radical militia members in Alabama, Arkansas, and Pennsylvania on firearms, explosives, and other related violations indicates the emergence of small, well-armed extremist groups in some rural areas.

Page 7

Outlook
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.

A number of law enforcement actions and external factors were effective in limiting the militia movement during the 1990s and could be utilized in today’s climate.

Following the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City, the militia movement declined in total membership and in the number of organized groups because many members distanced themselves from the movement as a result of the intense scrutiny militias received after the bombing.

Militia membership continued to decline after the turn of the millennium as a result of law enforcement disruptions of multiple terrorist plots linked to violent rightwing extremists, new legislation banning paramilitary training, and militia frustration that the “revolution” never materialized.

Although the U.S. economy experienced a significant recovery and many perceived a concomitant rise in U.S. standing in the world, white supremacist groups continued to experience slight growth.

DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.

Gun Activism

2009-04-20T08:59:00.003-04:00

Texas Tech Econ Professor Performs Socialism Experiment

2009-04-16T20:43:00.006-04:00

An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but once had failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, "Okay. We will have an experiment in this class on Socialism." All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

After the first test, the grades were averaged, and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset, and the students who studied little were happy. But as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less, and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little. The second test average was a D. No one was happy.

When the third test rolled around, the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name-calling all resulted in hard feelings, and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. All failed to their great surprise, and the professor told them that Socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Could not be any simpler than that.... tho there are still some that say: "Ours will be different."

UNC wins NCAA

2009-03-31T09:04:00.004-04:00

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

[Gillnet Wire News, March 30, 2009]

President Barack Obama today ordered the University of North Carolina to win the NCAA men's basketball tournament. "The state of North Carolina has received over $6 billion of federal stimulus funds. Part of that money will go to the University of North Carolina. I think it is in the best interest of the State of North Carolina, UNC and my March Madness bracket for UNC to win the tournament."

The President, who publicly picked UNC to win the tournament on March 19, went on to say that "...as President, it is important that I am always right. Forcing UNC to win the tournament will ensure that."

Vice President Joe Biden said "The US taxpayers have been very generous to North Carolina. Now it is time for North Carolina to repay the favor. It is UNC's patriotic duty to win the tournament and fill the President's bracket."

UNC secured a stake in the final four with a 84 to 70 win over LSU onSaturday. UNC head coach Roy Williams said "We are pleased to have made it this far. Now, with the help of the President, it looks like we will be the NCAA champions."

To ensure a UNC victory in the tournament, President Obama has threatened the other final four seeds, Michigan State, Villanova and Connecticut, with 90% tax rates and forcing star players to return their Mercedes' purchased with Alumni funds. "These cars are esentially bonuses paid during a time of economic crisis by alumni of universities in states collecting billions in federal money. It is unacceptable for these bonuses to be paid without a taxpayer benefit. Since millions of people do everything I say, countless people have placed large wagers on their March Madness brackets, following my lead in selecting North Carolina to win. Forcing UNC to win will be of huge benefit to these working families." said the President.

In a related story, the House today passed a bill renaming "March Madness" to the more accurate and politically correct "March/April Mental Illness". Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said "It is insensitive to people with mental illness to use the word "madness" in such a high profile event. It also makes no sense to call something "March Madness" when part of it occurs in April. In this era of accountability and integrity, government needs to ensure that tournaments are named appropriately, and that the correct team wins."

Follow the Money

2009-03-25T13:57:00.004-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

"...No wonder Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn) went wobbly last week when asked about his February amendment ratifying hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses to executives at insurance giant AIG. Dodd has been one of the company's favorite recipients of campaign contributions. But it turns out that Senator Dodd's wife has also benefited from past connections to AIG as well.

From 2001-2004, Jackie Clegg Dodd served as an "outside" director of IPC Holdings, Ltd., a Bermuda-based company controlled by AIG. IPC, which provides property casualty catastrophe insurance coverage, was formed in 1993 and currently has a market cap of $1.4 billion and trades on the NASDAQ under the ticker symbol IPCR. In 2001, in addition to a public offering of 15 million shares of stock that raised $380 million, IPC raised more than $109 million through a simultaneous private placement sale of 5.6 million shares of stock to AIG - giving AIG a 20% stake in IPC. (AIG sold its 13.397 million shares in IPC in August, 2006.)..."

Did anyone wonder ... I know the media never asked BHO or any of the Congressman pushing to save AIG ... but I was wondering - Just what was it that made AIG "to big to fail"? And can anyone explain to me why it's collapes would be the end of civilization-as-we-know-it? There were a LOT of Senators and Reps that were saying this. It must have been true.

Who will bet me that Sens. Dodd & Reid and Reps. Frank & Pelosi will NOT be re-elected? Who doesn't believe that those who vote for them are either profiting from the bailouts or are just too stupid to know when they are being raped?

Increased Oversight of Executive Pay

2009-03-21T22:29:00.001-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

"The Obama administration will call for increased oversight of executive pay at all banks, Wall Street firms and possibly other companies as part of a sweeping plan to overhaul financial regulation, government officials said." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/us/politics/22regulate.html

The next step will be for Obama to announce that 'executives at all banks, Wall Street firms and other companies' will not be allowed to leave their jobs - except, of course, with government approval for each specific case. We will have to create a new Dept. of Employment where all decisions will be made concerning what job each citizen will be required to do and at what level of compensation.

The only jobs where compensation will be greater than $100K per year will, of course, be government (Politburo) positions.

No one will actually NEED any compensation anyway since all the needs will be provided by the government - food, housing, health-care, etc.

Steelers to Lose Super Bowl Trophies

2009-03-18T09:22:00.014-04:00

Steelers must now share their wealth and fruits of their success and hard work.

Updated March 32, 2009

The Super Bowl XLIII Champion Pittsburgh Steelers, the only team to win six titles, will soon be loosing half of those trophies. After a meeting between NFL Commissioner Rodger Gadel and President Barack Hussain Obama, Obama decided to redistribute half of their Steeler Super Bowl victories and trophies to less fortunate teams in the league.

“We live everyday in the country that invented the Super Bowl,” said Obama “We are not about to lose this Great American tradition in the wake of these difficult times.” Obama’s plan calls for the Steelers, who are a successful NFL team, to give half of their Super Bowl trophies to teams that are not successful or have not been as successful as the Steelers. “The Detroit Loins are just as much a part of the same fiber of the NFL as the Steelers and they should, no rather will, be entitled to a Super Bowl Trophy as well.” Obama explains in his plan that he has imposed on Godel and the NFL.

The Pittsburgh Steelers, who by virtue of hard work, excellent team play, stellar draft choices, responsible investing of free agents, careful hiring of coaches and excellent community service and commitment to their fans, has prospered greatly during the past 30 years and have won six Super Bowl Trophies. But President Barack Hussain Obama’s plan calls for the Pittsburgh Steelers to carry the larger burden of the NFL’s less successful teams. Obama went on to further proclaim, “In these difficult times we are all in this to work together. We must reclaim the NFL Championship Dream for every team, for every city and for every fan.”

“My plan will not affect 31 of the 32 teams in the league.” Obama assures. That’s over 95 percent of the teams in the NFL will not have to worry about loosing any Super Bowl Trophies. “The worst teams in the NFL and the teams that can’t seem to get a break and win a championship will no longer have to worry about going without a title.” Obama promises. “We are a country and league of hope. We all need to make a change.
It does not matter the color of the teams uniforms, the personal decisions that the teams make or their performance but rather if they are a member of this great American league.”

The Super Bowl XLIII trophy will be redistributed to the 0-16 Detroit Lions. Through no fault of their own incompetence, the Lions could not manage a victory all season and this trophy will help ease the pain of their lack of performance and give them hope once again. The redistribution of Super Bowl XL trophy will go directly to the Steeler’s division rival the Cincinnati Bengals. The Bengals who also have fallen on hard times have never won a Super Bowl. This victory will bring a smile to hundreds of Bengal fans all over the world as they can now celebrate. Finally, one of the Steeler’s two Super Bowl victories over the Dallas Cowboys will go back to the Cowboys since the league needs to provide hope in the face of difficulty and provide hope in the face of uncertainty. This is a heavy burden for the Steelers but together we can all prosper.

Obama provides hope to NFL teams.

All hope is not lost for Pittsburgh fans, Barack Hussain Obama has another plan in place. Obama has meet with MLB and commissioner Bud Selig on a similar plan. The New York Yankees will redistribute two of their world series trophies to the Pittsburgh Pirates as a supplement to their loosing 16 straight seasons and counting. This plan will help stimulate the Pirates and enable them to regain the American Dream. Barack Hussain Obama will be meeting with the NHL and Michael Phelps in the upcoming weeks as this issue is high on his agenda for “Hope and Change.”

Modeling Open Source Government: Part I

2008-02-27T00:11:00.006-05:00

The government is very frustrating sometimes because it is hard to see change taking place from where we (well, most of us) sit. What makes it even more difficult is how helpless we feel to change it. The computer science field may have a solution. Open Source has been around since 1987 and maybe it's the answer we've been looking for.

You can think of source code like this: if a computer program were a building the computer source code would be the blueprints. It is how the software is constructed. It is also important to note if one has the blueprints it is easy to produce the building but if one has the building it is extremely difficult to produce the blueprints.

The conventional method for developing software and marketing it is closed. The development of this kind of software is kept in house and only employees of that company work on it. The output from this is the "building" in the above example. The source code is not available to outsiders and the company maintains ownership of it.

On the contrary, with the open model, the source code is freely distributed with the software. So instead of just the building you get the blueprints as well.

What if there was a way to apply this development model to our government? More to follow ...

A Chip Off the ol' Block

2008-02-05T23:52:00.003-05:00

If you had to guess someone's political affiliation but could only know one fact about the person what would you want to know? Their race? Their age? What you should want to know is what were their parent's affiliations. That is the number one indicator of a person's political affiliation.

Trying to be objective I took the following list from another web site and substituted government for children and individual for teen and got the following:

The government is clearly in charge.
The individual, over time, learns and earns the ability to be more in charge of their self.
There is a clear map for continually building trust and responsibility.
The government has a way to monitor the progress of the individual.
There are clear consequences when the individual demonstrates that he cannot be in charge of their self.
There is a map for how to earn back trust and responsibility when it is lost.

We can summarize by saying the government (parent) instills a sense of self worth, individualism, and self sustainability in its people. Parents do this by letting their children learn the consequences of their actions and to take responsibility for those actions, whether the outcome is positive or negative.

What kind of parents would we be if we protected our children by isolating them, not letting them try new things for fear they may fail, or teaching them to be dependent on us hence crippling them for life? Government keeps it's children safe, not from themselves, but from others. Keeping them safe from themselves cripples them, makes them dependent, and strips away the joy of success by providing too much help along the way.

You have the ability to choose the type of government you want for your children; which will it be?

Influencing the Two Party System

2008-01-28T17:45:00.000-05:00

Voting for the candidate of your choice is important even if you think there is little chance he or she could win. There are several reasons for this:

It sends a positive message. Anytime you spend money on something, you are endorsing that product; whether it be a person, place, object, or more importantly an idea. Your vote sends the same message.
At the same time, it sends an anti-message. It also works in reverse by not endorsing the things you don't spend your money on. Your "un"-vote sends the same message.
It's honest. You're not letting the majority influence your decision by settling for someone who you really don't want to be elected. Think for a minute what it would be like to never see any poll numbers before an election. Imagine that the candidates campaign but no one reports/computes any statistics about who is leading the race, etc. Think of how that one simple fact would influence your decision. My guess is without the "bandwagon" you would vote more honestly.
Your not "opting" out. Let's face it no one is perfect, so therefore no candidate is perfect. Someone will be elected whether you vote or not. It might as well be the person you would endorse with your vote. When I go the the grocery store to buy jelly, I don't leave without buying any jelly at all because I don't see any jelly made in Georgia. I pick the best jelly that I can based on my options. If I really want Georgia jelly, I need to be more aggressive and maybe start calling or writing letters to manufacturers to start making GA jelly.

DNA of "Big" Government

2008-01-27T22:57:00.001-05:00

Image by ynse via Flickr

Darwin, modern scientists, and science fiction writers (George Wells, The War of the Worlds) have all discussed the topic of genetic diversity. Darwin talked about how a species needed a certain amount of diversity to survive various extinction events such as a virus, genetic disorders, and natural events like drought. Modern scientists have warned against the use of antibacterial soaps and other products because the antibacterial agent ends up in the water supply in very minute concentrations. At these low concentrations, the bacteria is able to develop resistance. We saw what happened to the aliens in The War of the Worlds. Plot spoiler ... they died from a virus. In the movie the narrator says "...we [humans] have earned the right to be here." Meaning we have developed resistance to these types of things by being one of Darwin's fittest.

So, what does this have to do with government? Let's look at the U.S. in 2 different ways. The first, imagine each state in the U.S. were a person. But these 50 people were "born" from the same mold. Each state have the same ideals, same laws, same tax, same education system, and the same welfare system. Second, take the same 50 people but this time they have the same ideals and a very small number of laws in common. Some of the 50 have other things in common but not all 50 have all things in common. A state (person) now gets sick. Some new law has overstepped its bounds. Some new radical idea has swept the state. A new form of education has been adopted.

In the first case, all 50 states share so much in common that all 50 states are infected. This could be a good thing and the country continues on. But it could be something detrimental and maybe not overtly so. It might be something like the HIV virus that takes a long time to become detectable and an even longer time to affect the life of its host. And in the end it is incurable and fatal. On the other hand, if only one state were infected this creates a putry dish for the rest of us to watch and learn from while not being affected ourselves.

We need the vaccine. In the first case we could inject ourselves and wait 20 years to figure out, "Nope that is not what we wanted." or "Oops, that didn't work like I thought it would." Make a change and start all over. Instead, what about trying 50 different vaccines at one time. Better yet, let each state come up with their own vaccine. The idea of having 50 "individuals" working on this problem creates competition and competition creates better products (vaccines).

The key is survival. If we want to survive we have to adapt and to adapt is to be genetically diverse. Our founding fathers knew this and loosely bound this Republic together with a common set of ideals, the Constitution, but allowed each state to be its own individual.

Aninimity

2008-01-25T16:44:00.000-05:00

To have an open and unbiased discussion I think it is important for me to remain anonymous. This way it is more difficult for people to "read in" meaning to my posts. Of course meaning may be there, but hopefully it directs the commentator to narrow their focus a little. Think of me as a student, your humble student. Also, I am going to allow anonymous posts because it makes it much easier for someone to post a comment without having to jump through lots of hoops.

Introduction

2008-01-24T16:49:00.000-05:00

First, let me introduce myself and tell you who I am and most importantly, who I am not.

I am someone who likes to think about things that others do not; at least that has been my impression. I like asking questions like who am I? Where did I come from? Why am I here? Where am I going? What is justice? What is liberty? What is governments role in my life? What should it be? These thoughts could pop into my head any time of the day; when I am driving in the car, washing the dishes, doing my job, or watching tv.

Plato said the best way to do philosophy is through dialog. I don't think I get enough of that. So, I am starting this blog to get a chance to see other peoples points of view on those topics and to learn from them...to dialog.

I am neither a writer nor speller so do not criticize me for those short coming instead criticize the content of my posts.