WikiLeaks

My first reaction to the WikiLeaks story was anger. What WikiLeaks are doing is probably underhanded and self-righteous, but under the Constitution, the United States government cannot infringe on free speech. WikiLeaks is no different than a newspaper or pamphleteer from the 18th century.

The sheer number, and the nature of the leaked documents suggests incompetence, or worse. If the US government has secrets to keep, then it had better keep them well. It should prosecute anyone with a security clearance caught leaking documents, to the full extent of the law. Someone who feels inclined to leak classified documents should be prepared to face the consequences as part of the courage of their convictions (or profit motive).

Finally, my government had better be conducting itself in ways that I would not be ashamed of, should its covert operations be exposed. Unfortunately, a government as big and powerful as the current regime is frightfully likely to be doing all kinds of things that lots of people would be ashamed of.

Update: I still think shooting the messenger is the wrong approach. Assange might be an anti-American twit, but he isn't really the problem. The ineptitude of our government is the problem. As far as the leaker(s), if he (they) disagrees with our government on principle, then they should be willing to die for their convictions. Otherwise, they're not convictions, they're just preferences. And treason is the only crime that our Constitution mentions specifically. It carries the death penalty. That is to deter people who would commit treason out of preference instead of conviction. Our government should be prosecuting for treason, and executing those found guilty of it. That was the agreement.

DHS Seizes Internet Domain Names

The website TorrentFreak is reporting that the US Government just seized the domain names of dozens of websites worldwide. This is the proverbial "boot on the throat" mentality that the current regime seems to favor -- kind of a reverse "consent of the governed" sort of mindset.

This is causing an international anti-American backlash. Currently, the United States controls many of the key features of the Internet, including the Domain Name Service (DNS). DNS is the "address book" of the Internet; it converts names like www.antikakistocrat.blogspot.com into an Internet address (74.125.95.132) that computers can find. Without any advance warning, the US government just ripped several pages from that address book.

Control of the Internet by American interests has been a decided advantage for Americans for many reasons, so this action by the US Government Department of Homeland Security is not in our best interest. Especially since DHS shut down sites, not for terrorist activities, but because they were violating copyright laws.

Many of the websites shut down this week were guilty of blatant copyright infringement, which I do not support or condone. But somehow, copyright infringement doesn't seem to be as closely tied to the mission statement for the Department of Homeland Security as -- oh, I don't know -- securing the borders, deporting invaders (euphemistically known as "undocumented workers"), and finding better ways of securing air travel.

I have no problem if RIAA wants to sue everyone they can find for copyright infringement, or put stupid DRM in their products. They're a private organization, trying to protect their own interests. But when a government does it, well, that's tyranny, pure and simple.

It saddens me that the comments on this article this article at TorrentFreak are anti-American, and not anti-statist, for the most part. Most freedom-loving Americans are horrified by this as well. The usurpation of liberty is now starting to hit very close to home indeed (and worldwide at the same time)! When a super power goes rogue, that is when it no longer deserves to be a super power.

I will be updating this article as the story develops.

Oh, I almost forgot: Where in the Constitution did We the People give government the authority do do this?

Update: this article probably won't be updated. The media will flock to the WikiLeaks story.

Text-to-Speech Converter-in-Chief

Ok, this might be a cheap shot. I'm not that good without a script either. Still, the president can't give a speech from memory, and he sounds positively incomprehensible off the cuff.



Americans need to know that there are cheaper ways to get text-to-speech. A good laptop computer costs maybe $1500.00, Acrobat reader (with text-to-speech) is free. Plus, you can use the laptop to surf the web when it isn't giving speeches, and it doesn't usurp your liberty.

Nancy, Are You Serious? -- My First Attempt at Political Animation

The dialog is derived from actual quotes by Nancy Pelosi, a reporter, James Madison, with some filler thrown in by yours truly.



Why do I pick on Speaker Pelosi so much on this blog? Well, because she says such outrageously arrogant and tyrannical things, in complete disregard for the rules that are supposed to govern her. She has the whole government/governed relationship completely upside-down.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Here is the first Thanksgiving Proclamation, given by George Washington in 1789:

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to "recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d day of October, A.D. 1789. ~ G. Washington

I encourage you to read this carefully, and see what things George Washington thought we should be thankful for.

Time to Start Playing Offense

Always after the fact, the Transportation Security Administration is playing defense with the terrorists.

• When terrorists first successfully hijacked airplanes with guns and knives, our government responded by requiring all innocent citizen travelers to submit to metal detector scans.
• When terrorists first successfully hijacked airplanes with box cutters and killed 3000 innocent Americans, our government responded by requiring all innocent citizen travelers to submit to metal detector scans and surrender all sharp objects.
• When terrorists first unsuccessfully detonated a shoe bomb aboard an airplane, our government responded by requiring all innocent citizen travelers to submit to metal detector scans, surrender all sharp objects, and remove their shoes.
• When terrorists first unsuccessfully detonated a shampoo bomb aboard an airplane, our government responded by requiring all innocent citizen travelers to submit to metal detector scans, surrender all sharp objects, remove their shoes and surrender all liquids.
• When terrorists first unsuccessfully detonated an underwear bomb aboard an airplane, our government responded by requiring all innocent citizen travelers to submit to metal detector scans, surrender all sharp objects, remove their shoes, surrender all liquids, and submit to full naked-body scans or intrusive pat-downs.

If government continues this pattern without a better plan,

• When terrorists first attempt to detonate a colon bomb aboard an airplane, our government will respond by requiring all innocent citizen travelers to submit to metal detector scans, surrender all sharp objects, remove their shoes, surrender all liquids, submit to full naked-body scans or intrusive pat-downs, and rectal probes.
• When terrorists first attempt to detonate a Tampax bomb aboard an airplane, our government will respond by requiring all innocent citizen travelers to submit to metal detector scans, surrender all sharp objects, remove their shoes, surrender all liquids, submit to full naked-body scans or intrusive pat-downs, and... well... what will We the People tolerate from our government?

Those full naked body scanners cannot detect explosives inside the body.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~ Benjamin Franklin

It is time for our government to stop responding -- playing defense -- and start playing offense. We Americans protesting TSA security procedures aren't ungrateful about the agency's attempt to enhance security, we're protesting the way it is being done. We demand something better. We know better options exist. We demand an end to politically correct pandering at the expense of our liberty and safety.

The Presidency and the Constitution

Mike Pence delivered a speech at Hillsdale College on September 20, 2010:

THE PRESIDENCY is the most visible thread that runs through the tapestry of the American government. More often than not, for good or for ill, it sets the tone for the other branches and spurs the expectations of the people. Its powers are vast and consequential, its requirements impossible for mortals to fulfill without humility and insistent attention to its purpose as set forth in the Constitution of the United States.

Isn’t it amazing, given the great and momentous nature of the office, that those who seek it seldom pause to consider what they are seeking? Rather, unconstrained by principle or reflection, there is a mad rush toward something that, once its powers are seized, the new president can wield as an instrument with which to transform the nation and the people according to his highest aspirations. (Continue reading...)

With this understanding, I can only conclude that Barack Obama (and several others in recent and distant memory) are an insult to our founders, to the Constitution, and to the office of the President of the United States.

Education: The Elephant in the Room

Karen Karacsony posted this article on American Thinker:

For the first two hundred years of America's history, there was little in the way of public education. Thus, from the middle of the 17th century to the middle of the 19th century, education was most often a family affair (though churches, literary societies, and apprenticeships also contributed to the education of early America's youth).

As youngsters, our Founding Fathers were educated like most other children of early America. Of the six Founding Fathers, three were homeschooled: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison. Two were self-taught: Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin (though Franklin did attend primary school for two years). And one, John Adams, was both homeschooled and privately taught (at a very small school). (Continue reading...)

Climategate: One Year and Sixty House Seats Later

This article by Marc Sheppard on American Thinker is worth reading:

It’s been one year to the day since hero or heroes still unnamed and unrewarded bestowed upon the world a virtual dossier, the contents of which should have ended the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) debate abruptly and evermore. Remarkably, it didn’t. Despite the revelations exposed in the now public climate huckster’s handbook, one year later the specter of governance and wealth redistribution both national and international based largely, if not solely, on pseudo-scientific hocus-pocus persists. (Continue reading...)

Quantitative Easing Explained

This has become quite viral on many conservative blogs, so I figured I'd throw my hat in the ring:

"Fear the Boom and Bust" a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem

This video is amusing and informative:

I Pity the Fool!

...who says, "The Constitution is a living document"; that it means whatever -- or nothing -- and in so doing, removing all protection from tyranny and the usurpation of our natural rights. Their intention, of course, is to provide the people who will be doing the interpreting: Highly educated and nuanced progressive scholars, who will render politically-correct progressive interpretations. The actual result is that whomever happens to be in power will render whatever interpretation suits them. It's all sweetness and light when progressives happen to be in power, but watch out if that isn't the case! The only way that the Constitution can provide actual protection for everyone is, if it says what it means, and means what it says.

For a more concrete example, consider the following thought experiment: Instead of the Constitution, let's say we're talking about your labor union contract. Let's say it is a living document. As long as the union defines what it means, everything is fine (from the union's perspective). But let's suppose instead, that the employer gets to decide. Who decides who gets do decide? Why or why not? The union contract provides protection to both parties, and they both have a legitimate stake in a fair and consistent contract.

Let's try another thought experiment: Think of the Constitution as a specification. The US Government is the implementation of the spec. Computers, bridges, airplanes, automobiles, houses... all have specifications -- the blueprint for how the thing goes together, how it works. If an engineer or machinist decides the spec is a "living document", all hell breaks loose, resulting in a failure to operate properly, or even death. If your computer doesn't follow the spec, your games and financial software won't run, the machine won't boot, or it bursts into flame -- depending on what part doesn't follow the spec.

We can't rely on highly educated and nuanced progressive scholars, who will render politically-correct progressive interpretations. The Constitution requires popular enforcement, by ordinary people who can read it, understand it, and vote accordingly for politicians who will honestly answer the question, "Where in the Constitution did We the People give you the authority to do that?"

Letter To My Representatives

I sent the following message (with the appropriate personalization) to senators Maria Cantwell and Patti Murray and congressman Rick Larsen:

Dear Senator Cantwell,

Ok, so with herculean efforts by your party, Patti Murray and Rick Larsen managed to eke out a thin victory, despite their voting records.

You need to know that I am doing everything in my power to make it so that no politician feels safe leaving their office without a credible answer to the question, "Where in the Constitution did We the People give you the authority to do that?"

Your answer needs to be better than Nancy Pelosi's response, "Are you serious?" To an intelligent and informed electorate, there can be no more serious question.

I would like to encourage everyone to send a similar message. Contact info: [Maria Cantwell], [Patti Murray], [Rick Larsen].

The Greatest Pianist Alive Today

Every now and then, I post something about music, because I can't stand politics. I have to give my soul a rest. I was searching YouTube for the third movement of Beethoven's Appassionata Piano Sonata (yeah, I know -- what is a redneck, knuckle-dragging, unsophisticated conservative doing searching YouTube for the third movement of Beethoven's Appassionata Piano Sonata? I guess I don't fit the stereotype, do I?) and I found this:



She just nails the finale with precision and style. But if that doesn't blow you away, this rendition of Franz Liszt's Totentanz (Dies Irae) will:



She has personality, too. These outtakes from recording sessions are fun:



What a talent. Unbelieveable. I hope to see her in concert someday.

Ding-Dong! The Witch Is Dead!

You'll have to forgive me for joyously celebrating Nancy Pelosi's (political) demise. She is an arrogant, constitutionally illiterate, power-abusing tyrant. In her position of power, that equals evil.

Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. ~James Madison

When asked where she found the constitutional authority to compel citizens to purchase health insurance, Pelosi replied, "Are you serious?". Doesn't she think the Constitution applies to her? Or does she not understand it? Either way, the Constitution is the only thing standing between We the People and tyranny. We cannot depend on politicians' good behavior to protect us. Nancy Pelosi is a case-in-point.

The people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power, is derived. ~James Madison

Nancy Pelosi said, "We have to pass the bill so you can see what's in it." Excuse me? That isn't how a democratic republic works! Especially after she promised more transparency, such as posting bills for 72 hours so we can see what's in them. Not that 72 hours is sufficient for us to see what's in a 2000-page behemoth like health care reform.

It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood. ~James Madison

So Nancy, good bye, and good riddance! I hope you never darken our bath towels again!

What Do We Do Now?

We have just witnessed the most dramatic election of our lives, if not the history of our Republic. The worst thing we could do now is hit the snooze button and go back to sleep. The people that we just elected to replace the current regime will not behave if we do not watch them like hawks.

I would like to suggest that we contact our public servants early and often, on every issue that concerns us. Please remember to ask, "Where in the Constitution did We the People give you the authority to do that? " For local officials, substitute the word "constitution" with "charter". Encourage everyone you know to ask the same question. Encourage bloggers, and reporters in the mainstream media to ask the same question. Write letters to the editor asking the same question. I want this question to "go viral" nationwide.

If more and more people start asking this question, I think most of our worst political problems, in all branches and all levels of government would go away by themselves, almost overnight. When a reporter asked Nancy Pelosi that question about the healthcare bill, her deer-in-the-headlights response was, "Are you serious?" Well, we are serious, and politicians should be afraid to step out of their offices without a credible answer to that question. That is the only "litmus test" that we need.

It really takes so little effort, that it is at least worth a try. The beauty of it is, this really should appeal to honest people from anywhere on the political spectrum.