How Does Your Garden Grow?

Americans are lousy gardeners. Just look at our political garden plot. Overgrown with weeds, pests of all sorts (many are even foreign to our political ecosystem), a mishmash of "plants" that make for an unwholesome and increasingly ugly landscape. Good gardeners know that healthy systems need pruning, weeding and, above all a good thinning out.

Every garden needs thinning out. When there are too many things growing in one place the outcome gets ugly. Nothing grows right, pests proliferate and the entire garden goes to hell. As a country we are long overdue for a thinning. The residents of our garden are growing out of control and the health and welfare of everything else in our fragile eco-political system is endangered. You see...for too long now, the people "tending" our garden have not been thinning the plot. They have simply let most plants go to seed or replaced them with a different variety of the same thing. When we thin out our gardens we don't replace what we have decided to dispose of. We throw it out or eat it, (that's a different thing entirely, tho and not necessarily recommended where politicians are concerned. Too much fat and most are too old) but in the end the garden is much healthier for the culling.


Come November many of the folks who've been piddling about the garden will get a chance to do something. In almost every case it will be a simple matter of replacing the plants in our landscape. Sadly, most will just leave the current plant in place rather than take a chance on anything new, even if it is just a different variety of the same plant.

Do us all a favour this time around. Get into the spirit of gardening this go around and rip the weeds out by the roots. Replace them with something...hell, anything else! If there's a 3rd party running then put one of those in the garden, (don't be fooled by the "Independent", tho. Those are normally just a disgruntled weed of the Red or Blue type). If some serious changes aren't made in our landscape soon then our entire plot will be overrun by weeds we have chosen to plant and lots of folks such as myself have severe allergies to pigweed, stinging nettles and ragweed. The patent nostrums of the snake oil salesmen are anathema to us as well and we'd just as soon not have them in our corner of the garden anymore. So, if you would...please do us all a favour and let's get an early start on our gardening this year, OK?

Technorati Tags:
Politics, Libertarian, Election 2006

Creating Criminals: Your Government At Work

"The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things a crime that it becomes impossible to live without breaking laws."- Ayn Rand. "Atlas Shrugged"

And that is seemingly the case today, given the latest statistics out on the matter. Your government, both federal and state is busy, busy, busy imprisoning it's own citizens and the numbers of women languishing behind bars, especially in the west and south has risen to all time highs. Gotta love that "compassionate conservatism", huh? Many, if not most of these people are victims of the War on Drugs and its ludicrous sentencing guidelines. Others are, according to one of the people interviewed in the articles due to the lowering of the felony bar.

"In Oklahoma, we choose to make lower-level crimes felonies, therefore we stand out like a sore thumb."

Add to that the large numbers of unconvicted people who are being held at the behest of the police state government and we can easily see that there is something incredibly wrong in this country.

The report by the Justice Department agency found that 62 percent of people in jails have not been convicted, meaning many of them are awaiting trial.

Some states have as much as 1% of their population behind bars! "Land of the free", my ass! We now imprison more of our own people than the USSR did at the height of their power. And throwing our women into prisons at the rate we are is unconscionable. Since 1977 the rates of incarceration have, according to the Women's Prison Association increase by 757%!

There is no way that women have managed, as a group to become "badder". The problem lies in solely in the laps of politicians and the government. The rate of violent crime has been dropping steadily for 25 years or more so we can easily make the comparison that these women and men who are now incarcerated have been imprisoned by a lowering of the legal bar, not any increase in crime. The state, in a fit of control mongering has managed to make almost everything a crime, it seems. And, if the facts and figures are to be believed, (and I see no reason to doubt them) the so-called War on Drugs, (the War on Some Drugs or the War on People is much more correct) is almost solely to blame.

The government is creating criminals. Why? Electability of their politicians is a prime reason. Running on the "get tough on crime" platform works for these slimeballs people. They spend inordinate amounts of time and money instilling fear into their constituencies for the single purpose of using their "get tough" rhetoric to get re-elected and to further strengthen their police forces. Some people out there might be blind enough to think this false but, I would ask you how often the endorsement of the FOP or similar police organisation figures in elections. Look carefully at the candidates and you'll see the readily apparent pattern of give and take. This is a dangerous and horribly incestuous relationship. Creating crimes where none existed so the police can gain more power and money? C'mon people! What's it take to make you see the obvious? All it took Joseph Sobran was a ticket and the theft impoundment of his vehicle to realise that we would be much better off without the State and it's gun toting minions.

If this trend is allowed to continue we will see a continual rise in the numbers of people imprisoned at all levels, especially as the so-called War on Terror continues to function. Shoot, Adolph Alberto Gonzales is already talking about arresting reporters for...reporting. All in the name of national security, of course. Since this administration has already made the assertion that drugs and terrorism are inextricably linked, we could very well see victims of the War on Drugs become victims of the War on Terror, as well. Do you look forward to the day when you see someone you know face a military tribunal for simple possession? Folks....it's almost entirely too late to fix the things that are wrong in this country. If you really want this country to get on the right track then you had better start doing something and doing it right now.

Don't vote for incumbents, if you vote. That's a start. Refuse to support police organisations and let them know why. If you really care the time to act is now, not tomorrow. Drugs may harm people. But, the War on Drugs is destroying this country, families and the futures of millions of people. That is the true horror or the War on People. We have a War on Drugs, a War on Terror, a War on Iraq and numerous smaller Wars on... it's long past time that we ended the warfare state before it destroys us completely.

Thanks to Bill St. Clair for inspiration and linkage!

Technorati Tags:
War On Drugs, Politics, Libertarian, Bush
Joseph Sobran, Movement of the Libertarian Left, End the War on Freedom

So Much News, So Little Time And More Ire Than I Care To Discuss

That's the situation at the Mi Casa today and with the State of the Union being what it is the levels of my ire shall see no abatement in the near future. Thankfully, I was delayed enough today by the hail storms that battered my SUV that I managed to regain some semblance of cool.

It is news days like today that serve to reinforce my considered opinion that there is absolutely no chance in Hades that government can ever be reformed, made small, returned to Constitutional limits or just remade into something resembling a sane institution. Not gonna happen. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

Once again the spectre of an anti-Gay Marriage Amendment has managed to rear its squamous, slimy and authoritarian head from the sewers that are the Halls of Congress. This time, tho it looks to be slithering its way to the floor for a debate and a vote. The fact that this subject even came out of committee points up the deranged and dangerous nature of politics. That a proposed Constitutional Amendment which would serve to strip rights from people in this country could even be thought worthy of debate on the floor points up the mental derangement of the Republicans and their partners in crime the Democrats.

One good thing the committee considering this did manage to bring to light was the admission by Arlen Specter (Republicrat-PA) that neither he, nor Russ Feingold (Socialisticrat-Wis.) were keeping to their oaths of office and had no intentions of protecting rights or the Constitution.

"I don't need to be lectured by you. You are no more a protector of the Constitution than am I," Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., shouted after Sen. Russ Feingold declared his opposition to the amendment, his affinity for the Constitution and his intention to leave the meeting.

At last! Some form of honesty from these cretins! It's been painfully obvious to some of us, that Arlen, Russ and all their buddies have done nothing except crap on the Constitution for decades. At least now we have an admission. Too bad it holds no power with their constituencies who seem to care naught for anything but sending these people back to mis-serve them. That Red and Blue Kool Aid is some strong shiznit.

So, they've let this monstrosity out of committee, in order to pander to their moronic core core constituency of so-called Values Voters. They've even admitted that it stands no chance of passage once it's on the floor for debate and still they allow it out of committee. Too flippin' bad these idiots don't remember that the same damned thing was said about the 16th Amendment and look where we are now with that, now. If this is allowed to pass and gets out to the ballot box where anyone lacking two brain cells to rub together can vote on it, then we will have removed the civil rights from an entire segment of our populace.

The issue, which I have covered before manages to federalize marriage once and for all. By allowing politicians to set a definition in this manner the Moral Majority Values Voters are setting themselves up for a massive incursion by the State. But, it's quite possible that this is exactly what these theocrat wannabees are looking for. Blur the church state line enough and the door to a new American Theocracy flies open. When you have people like Pat Robertson and his cultists followers in favour of something like this you had better think long and hard, (or not...long and hard thinking might be a sin).

Marriage is a civil right, regardless of what the anti-gay segment of the populace thinks. Civil rights flow from the state and work on the premise of "equal before the law". This amendment is designed to create a group of people who are not equal before the law. A class of people who are being told by the federal government, (and those who are supposedly their fellow Americans) that the laws of their civic mean nothing in the eyes of the masses who are not part of their state. This is precisely why the Federal government and those who run it need to be reined in and it is precisely why the Founders crafted a document that established the rights of the states as supreme over those of the central government. Of course that was then and this is now and the Hamiltonian and Lincolnian nightmare rules supreme.

Marriage is also a universal right. Everyone is entitled marry, if they manage to find someone willing to marry. They may stand in front of their community and announce their marriage, look each other in the eyes and take one another for their spouse (as many of my non-European ancestors no doubt did) or they may find a priest or priestess of the religion of their choosing to bless their union. Said religious person may choose to marry the couple (trio, group, etc) or not, depending on their personal wishes. That's freedom of choice. Those who attempt to base their arguments on the "Sanctity" card are truly delusional. Look at how many of your "holy men" and politicians have divorced. And don't even get me started on those of us who married in front of a judge.

Allowing any "marriage amendment" to be added to the Constitution is dangerous in the extreme. Today people define a "man and a woman" based solely on their biological sex and their sexual preference...in this case a preference for heterosexuality. That could change in a heartbeat given the many and varied changes wreaked by politicians in the past. Remember the "assault weapons" ban? Like the 16th Amendment (which was crafted to tax only the "wealthy") the potential for abuse is huge. The power to regulate is the power to destroy and this abomination has more power than any WMD. You think you know what a "man or a woman" is today. That definition can be changed by legislative fiat by the stroke of a pen. Supporters rely on the "kindness of strangers" and the myth of inherent goodness of politicians which is a dangerous belief system, given the facts.

20 years from now a "man" may be defined as someone of a select race or religion, perhaps as someone meeting certain federal criteria. Perhaps a "woman" is defined by how many times she has had to please a politician or her religious leader or maybe her "purity". What supporters of any Amendment which removes freedom from one group of people fail to realise is that this not only opens a can of worms it offers no protections to anyone, which is what the first 10 Amendments do. This strips rights away from people. If you allow this to happen to homosexuals then rest assured that you have set the precedent that will allow an Amendment to be applied to you, perhaps this very one. If ever there were a time to stand up and just say no, this is it.


Technorati Tags:
Politics, Gay Marriage, Libertarian, Gay Rights
Civil Rights, Constitution, Values Voters, Congress

(special thanks to the idiots at Insight for being down all evening. Way to go morons!)

They Sure Do Love Their REAL ID, Don't They?

After seeing President Bush go on the air last night and pimp his plan lay out his strategery for "Illegal Immigration" the one thing that struck a chord with me was his mention of an internal passport "high tech, tamper proof identification card". Those of us who have consistently stood against the REAL ID can see what is being proposed here. If the "guest workers" have an internal passport then it stands to reason that Americans will also have to have the same secure ID or the "guest workers" will just obtain "insecure" ID from some source and there will be no solution at all. The call will go out for a National ID (already here, thanks to REAL ID) and all the politicians will nod their heads, seeing the "logic" behind the scheme plan and they will draft new legislation making it a done deal.

I've already seen these "guest worker" passports/ID's in action in foreign countries. Most notably in Apartheid South Africa and in Israel where their "guest workers" were required to carry their internal passports and surrender them for inspection upon demand. These documents served, and in the case of Israel still serve to create an underclass of workers who possess a social status that is only slightly above that of slave or prison trustee. This is a true abomination and should be opposed by anyone who holds this country in any esteem whatsoever.

Combine this with the inevitable call for a National ID for citizens, a must have in order to maintain the validity and "security" of the "guest worker" program and we have one more great leap in the direction of the police state. It's a bad deal all around and restricts just not liberty and our freedom of movement, but legitimate trade and travel between countries sharing a border. Trade equals jobs, just like tourism and making things difficult costs jobs and makes for losses across the board.

And let us not forget the militarisation of the border. Regardless of what Mr. Bush contends when you send troops to the border as a security measure you are militarising your border. Again, I have seen the same thing in Israel, South Africa and in the Sinai. Calling it something else and denying reality never changes the facts of the matter. For all intents and purposes the US government will be creating a Southern border DMZ, akin to that between the Koreas or between Egypt and Israel. As we have already seen before when the government used military on the border, the propensity for tragedy is magnified many fold.

The timing and content of this speech couldn't have come at a better time for Mr. Bush. With his ratings in the toilet and going down the pipes faster than a Bloomin' Onion on a Friday night and incumbent Republicrats up for re-election in the fall he had to do and say something. This subject will also serve to draw attention away from his NSA domestic spying and the appointment of his head spy at NSA as CIA director. The American public are easily distracted and the propagandists speechwriters and Rove are well aware of this. Does anyone still remember the outspoken Generals? They're not on the front page any more, are they? The outrage over the NSA spying is, even as I write this disappearing from the front page, in favour of the latest cat toy distraction...immigration.

Don't be fooled, folks. There is no easy answer for this issue and the strategery from the White House and it's supporters is more smoke and mirrors. Step back, take a breath and look at the big picture. Do you want to live in a country that has internal passports for an underclass of workers and everyone else (just to keep control of the underclass)? Do you want to live in a country with militarised borders? Do remember that a closed off border cuts both ways, it may keep people out but it also serves to keep them in. Let's revive a Reagan era concept where government is concerned, OK? Just say NO! Or better yet, give us a big..."Hell NO!"

Technorati Tags:
Bush, Immigration, Mexico, REAL ID
NSA, Politics, Libertarian, Border