Immigration

The lawsuit brought by the general government in Federal Court against the State of Arizona is puzzling to say the least. Arizona's SB 1070 (the "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act") is meticulous to stipulate that every aspect of the bill will comply with the United States Code regarding illegal immigration. So, how will the solicitors argue the case of the general government against Arizona? Will they object that Arizona has elected to enforce federal laws where federal agencies have chosen not to do so? It's difficult to imagine how any substantial part of Arizona's law could be found to be in violation of Federal Statutes in a fair court hearing. But in my view there is a problem with the Arizona and the Federal Immigration Statutes, both.

How can it be ethical to enforce by threat of violence, any law where the basis of that law is "legal status" rather than a violation of person or property? The existing immigration law can prohibit our citizens from inviting a non-violent person who might have the wrong "legal status", on to our property or to engage with them in mutually beneficial commerce. Sounds like the "land of the free" may have migrated from reality to wishful thinking.

The implication of our immigration law is that every person regardless of their status, age, etc. must consent to be a resource to be plundered by every level of government and that only those who allow themselves to be subject to government theft are worthy of being allowed to physically occupy any point in space that government claims as its jurisdiction. How else can this be interpreted but that government claims ownership of all property and all people within its territory? And since government claims to be the ultimate owner of everything and everyone in their jurisdiction, a logical objection to "illegal immigration" is that the immigrants will try to receive government benefits without paying into the system that provides them. So, naturally our citizens believe that "illegal aliens" are encroaching on benefits that they could have received otherwise. This is like the slave who objects to the beggar because the slave might have received the master's gift to the beggar for himself. We are in a bad way when we argue over the benefit of goods that were stolen from us in the first place. One solution to our current immigration difficulty is to stop all government theft and transfer payment schemes. Then with no dole for anyone to lust after, we could honestly welcome every peaceful and productive person to join us in a free market and create an increasingly prosperous and peaceful society. Our immigration policy could then be "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free", as it once was.

But, until we the people of the united States begin to resist the culture of public theft and redistribution we will accelerate in circling this toilet, and proceed down the sewer to socialism.

Census not forgotten

I'm still angry about the census. The federal government had no right to ask most of the questions that were asked on the census forms, and if anyone were to refuse or, heaven forbid, not tell the truth in their answers, he would be subject to the full body slam of the King Kong Code of Federal Regulations. I, for one, answered all of their questions, even the illegal ones, but noted on each one that was not explicitly authorized by the Constitution that the question was illegal and they had no right to ask that question.

I have no intention of sacrificing myself before the runaway freight train of the general government, but I did write to my State Congresswoman and State Senator. I told them that they had a responsibility to defend the civil rights of the citizens of our State and to defend us from illegal encroachments by the general government. I got a 50% favorable response, which is very encouraging.

Then today I read an article by Michael Rozeff (here) and I had an idea:

What if the following were sent Fed Ex Overnight to the Congress of the United States from every State in the Union?

Were-as, the general government of the States united in the North American Union has violated the terms of the Constitution forming that government by forcing the citizens of the States to answer unauthorized questions in pursuit of the decennial census, and

Where-as the States retain their right to refuse their consent to actions by the general government which violate the agreement by which the general government was formed by the States,

Therefore, the States of the North American Union withhold their permission for the general government to conduct the census of 2020 and all census thereafter, and

The States pledge to conduct a legal census in compliance with the Constitution which formed the North American Union, asking such questions as the several States shall decide to be appropriate for their own purposes, and

The States shall withhold annually from the general government's tax general levies an amount adequate for the purpose of conducting such legal census.


What a delight that would be:
1. The States would be standing up for the Constitutional rights of their citizens
2. The general government would be slapped down by the only ones capable of doing so
3. The States would exercise their right to resist illegal acts by the general government and
4. The precedent would be set that the States could control the general levies (Income Tax) to the extent that they believe the general government has violated the Constitution.

And if you didn't like how a State treated you, you could move to a better State, at your preference.

The Colorado State Petition is here.

Feel free to create one for your own State!

Baseball Umpires

07/16/2010, Rockies vs. Cincinnati Reds. Top of the ninth, Batter hit by a pitch (not called) and two obvious balls called strikes. Seriously, they were inside by a good foot.

Umpires in professional baseball are either incompetent, or they are on the take.

Choose your poison...

And I hate when the officials decide the game with bad calls, either way.

Apple's App Store

Maybe I'm being too sensitive, but can someone explain to me why I am badgered by Apple's App Store to validate my credit card number and validation code so I can download a FREE APP?

The aggravation factor of owning Apple hardware is making me rethink the total monetary and non-monetary cost of ownership.

Knowledge

Epistemology is the philosophical study of knowledge, and although I will not wax philosophical here today, it is interesting to read what Wikipedia has to say on this subject. One important aspect of knowledge is "how do we know what we think we know?".

As simple as knowledge might seem, it's not simple. There are numerous ways of obtaining knowledge, some of which are more reliable than others while some sources are outright propaganda intended to deceive with false information. And there can be false knowledge, even self deception. People also tend to become invested in what they think they know to the point where contradictory information is routinely disregarded because they already "know" the truth. Mass delusions are common in human history and these delusions are the foundation of despotic rulers, empires, cults and a host of evils throughout history; all perpetrated by people with knowledge of the truth and accepted by the masses who believed the lie.

Give some thought to what you "know" and be willing to debate it, to listen to contradictory evidence, and if you can't defend what you "know", find out how to do so or change your mind and accept the truth no matter how heavily invested you are in the alternative.

Wealth

I have said before that wealth is not money. The wealth of a nation is the goods available for consumption, and it is the producer of goods that creates wealth; government creates nothing good. Consumption is necessary, but it always destroys wealth. Savers on the other hand are a great blessing to any nation because they do not consume all that they could, and the goods they save are available for someone like an entrepreneur to borrow, allowing him to develop new or improved lines of production. The result of saving is an increase in goods and in prosperity. When any nation produces more than it consumes, its prosperity increases. Why is this simple truth so difficult for the pinheads in control of the economies of this world to understand?

When the glorious leaders hand out counterfeit money to encourage consumption, they encourage the destruction of wealth and an increase in poverty. When savings are squandered, there are fewer saved goods for the entrepreneur to borrow, and production declines. The enemies of real wealth and prosperity disguise themselves as our saviors and benefactors, but they are like an all consuming fire devouring the future for the sake of pleasure today.

Look to the ant you sluggard! Save, and prepare for the winter ahead, and when winter is over your savings will be a blessing to the nation.

Don't ask about don't ask don't tell.

This is a non-issue. The real question is "Should we have a standing army?"
George Washington said no. http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/revolution/banister.html
Thomas Jefferson said no. http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1480.htm

Whether it's an army of men, women, heterosexuals, homosexuals or eunuchs is irrelevant. When they invade your home, you won't care.