Conventional collectivist created authority is a deception in consciousness. You are your own Authority!

Monday, February 20, 2017

Taxing farts

I swear that the statist morons of this world would tax our farts if only they could find a way to count them. But they can’t yet so the next best thing will be to tax all the machines and technological inventions which make our lives better.

First on the statist agenda: robots.

That’s right. Bill Gates, the richest man in the world said recently that robots that “steal” human jobs should pay their fair share of taxes. “Right now, says Bill, the human worker who does, say, $50,000 worth of work in a factory, that income is taxed and you get income tax, Social  Security tax, all those things… If a robot comes in to do the same thing, you’d think that we’d tax the robot at a similar level.”

Robot taxes could help fund projects like caring for the elderly or working with children in school, Bill explained. You see, as the thinking goes, when robots can be programed to do jobs that humans do, and start doing those jobs, then the humans will not only be out of work but won’t be paying any taxes. It has been estimated that as much as 50% of human jobs are vulnerable to robots, which could result in the loss of about $2.7 trillion in the U.S. alone.

Well, I have a news flash for Mr. Gates. We’ve been paying robot taxes now ever since the invention of the wheel. How many human jobs do you think the wheel “stole” over the last few millennia? You can bet that governments everywhere have found just about every way possible to tax all the benefits to mankind resulting from wheels.

And what have all the humans done in that time after their jobs were “stolen” by wheels? Well, they’ve been forced to go out and find other jobs. When automobiles were invented, for example, all the humans working in the horse & buggy business and cleaning up horse shit in the streets had to find new jobs. And what did the governments do when they found all those new jobs? It taxed them, of course; that’s what happened. And then it taxed all the automobiles too.

Almost nothing remains untaxed in this life.

But Dr. Keith Ablow, psychiatrist, resident moron, and member of the Fox News Channel Medical A-Team, still thinks that President Trump should put a stop to robots from “stealing” jobs.

“A very simple thought occurred to me while I was scanning my own merchandise and swiping my own credit card while checking out at a Home Depot in Massachusetts this past weekend,” says Ablow:  “Why does everyone seem to be okay with this? There was no human being getting paid to ring up and bag my merchandise. Nor was there a worker at several other checkout lines. And no one was raising any red flags about the fact that machines had obviously put people out of work.”

“Why,” he muses, “does our culture seem to applaud every technological advance uncritically, without considering its impact on the employment of human beings? Sure, it will be cool and convenient when Amazon starts delivering packages by drone, within 30 minutes, but it will also put many delivery personnel and, perhaps, postal workers out of work.”

Apparently the good Dr. Ablow thinks that all advances in technology – advances which make all our lives immeasurably better -- should come to a screeching halt by order of the government if it results in some people having to find other ways to make a living.  He thinks people should still have jobs cleaning up horse shit in the streets.

So Bill Gates’ software and Michael Dell’s computers should never have been permitted because of all the many thousands, perhaps millions, of jobs they “stole” from human beings. Washing machines, refrigerators -- every technological advance you can think of -- have been responsible for putting some people out of work in one way or another. What happened to those people? They found other jobs.

There will always be plenty of jobs. There will always be plenty of opportunities for the government statists to tax all the people doing those jobs.


And when the statists can come up with a way to count them, you can bet that they’ll start taxing our farts too. 

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Beached

Hundreds of whales have died after beaching themselves at a remote beach in New Zealand recently. It happens all the time. Human volunteers often try to save the whales by attempting to refloat them into deeper water only to watch them swim right back to the beach. Eventually they have to be euthanized. Scientists are baffled by the phenomenon.

We’re equally baffled by the same phenomenon occurring in the “Golden State” of California where goofy leftist politicians are hell bent on beaching the paradise into bankruptcy with ever higher taxes and regulations.  

After decades of Democratic control, California now faces an unfunded pension liability of several hundred billion dollars brought about by voracious public sector unions and high minimum wage laws. Taxpayers and the middle class are fleeing the state in droves because of skyrocketing income and property taxes, housing costs and environmental regulations. California enjoys the highest poverty rate in the United States.

California Democrats continue to blame everyone but themselves for the state’s growing problems despite the fact that they occupy over two-thirds of the seats in both the Assembly and State Senate, as well as all eight statewide elected offices. Their solution is to just keep drifting further and further left toward the beach.

Now California lawmakers have introduced a new bill that will use taxpayer dollars to help low-income residents go on beach vacations. Can you imagine that? The huge amounts of welfare, subsidies and other freebies, such as food stamps, etc., showered upon the “needy” is not enough to satisfy these leftists. They want the taxpayers to foot the bill for their beach vacations and the like – stuff they might like but certainly don’t need.  

What’s next? Vacations to Europe; Caribbean cruises; second homes; new cars every year?  They want votes and they’re willing to use taxpayer money to buy them. 

Wiser heads have tried to rescue the people from the land of fruits and nuts; to refloat them as it were, but they just keep swimming right back to be stranded on the shore – beached. 

Sunday, February 12, 2017

ISIS idea of religious morality: torture kids to death

Islamic State morality police practice a curious form of discipline for 10-year-old little girls found outside their homes without a male escort: they’re tortured to death with iron fangs.

You see, any female regardless of age who goes outside all by herself is potentially committing a capital offence against the morals of the Islamic State. So when 10-year-old Faten, a little girl living in ISIS occupied Mosul, was helping her mother clean house she accidently stepped outside without a proper escort whereupon she was confronted by a squad of women working as hisbah (morality police) for the Islamic State’s all-woman Al-Khansaa Brigade. 

The Muslim morality goons told the child’s mother that the penalty for this egregious transgression of Islamic law would consist of being subjected to a number of “bites” by the “The Biter,” a medieval torture device shaped like a set of iron fangs.


Mother was given the option of suffering the punishment on behalf of her daughter but she declined and watched while her little girl took the abuse as the brigadiers went to work on her with the “The Biter.” Little Faten ultimately bled to death from the wounds inflicted by the sharp teeth of torture device.


So much for everyday life under the Islamic State in Mosul, Iraq – this is the kind of horror the Muslim religious fanatics plan for all the little American girls and other females after they take over our country and implement sharia law. They’ll be whipped mercilessly – sometimes to death -- for failing to wear the mandatory full-body covering and for any other transgressions of the draconian morality code, such as breast feeding a baby in public. 

That’s the official ISIS idea of religious morality: torture little girls and women to death. 

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Sex crazy

What is it about the subject of sex that makes some judges get the crazy notion that donning a black robe and ascending the bench gives them a license to exceed their legal judicial and constitutional authority? 

Twin Falls, Idaho Judge Randy Stoker, for example, thinks he has the authority to order defendants on probation in his court to either get married or remain completely celibate. The problem with that, however, is that there are absolutely no provisions in the Constitution or the laws in the United States of America which grant him that authority.

A 19-year-old pled “guilty” to the “crime” of engaging in consensual sex with his 14-year-old girlfriend. He was convicted of “statutory rape.” In other words, he was found “guilty” under a fiction invented by the legislature which labels him a “rapist.” He’s considered “guilty” of “rape” for doing what male and female human beings have been doing naturally and willingly since the origin of the species.

In fact, any believer in God and the Bible (Genesis chapter 9) who thinks that God created mankind would conclude that, as biologically mature individuals each with hormones raging in their veins, they were doing exactly what the Lord intended. After all, there is nothing whatsoever in the Holy Bible prohibiting “statutory rape.”

Never-mind that.  Judge Stoker sentenced the defendant to 5 to 15 years in prison. Fortunately for the young man, all but one year of the sentence was suspended provided he completes a so-called therapeutic rider program. Unfortunately, however, after completion of the program he’ll be released on probation under the arbitrary condition that he not engage in sex with anyone unless he gets married.

Apparently, Judge Stoker thinks that the 19-year-old man likes sex too much so he had better either get hitched or stay celibate or go the slammer for 15 years.  “If you're ever on probation with this court, a condition of that will be you will not have sexual relations with anyone except who you're married to, if you're married,” admonished the judge.

How many 19-year-old males do you know who aren’t obsessed with sex?


And Judge Stoker is sex crazy. 

Saturday, February 4, 2017

Pulpit politics

President Trump is not a particularly religious man but he likes to pander to the evangelical Christians who helped get him elected. He tells them what they love to hear – that their religious freedom is “under threat,” and he’s going to eliminate the threat.

Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Religious liberty is alive and well in the United States of America. The First Amendment guarantees free exercise of religion and speech to all and those fundamental constitutional freedoms are not under any threat.

Nowhere in the Constitution, however, is there any guarantee that churches and religious institutions enjoy tax exempt status.  Ordinary individuals and business entities are forced to pay taxes. If you or I own a home we have to pay property taxes. If we earn income we have to pay income taxes. All businesses, partnerships and corporations are obligated to pay taxes whether we like it or not – but not churches – they’re allowed to compete unfairly.

Where, if not in the Constitution, do churches and religious institutions claim any unfettered right to be free from paying their fair share of taxes on property and income just like all other individuals and entities? The fact is that tax exemption is a privilege, a gift allowed them under the laws of all 50 states and the federal government.

Tax exemption is not a fundamental constitutional right; it’s a privilege. As with any legally recognized privilege there might be reasonable rules and restrictions which must be complied with if the privileged entity wishes to retain the privilege. On the federal level, for example, there is an IRS rule (rarely invoked) which provides that the tax exempt status privilege can be lost if the privileged entity, a church for instance, crosses the line from religion into partisan politics.

In theory then, if a church or religious institution engages in partisan politics such as endorsing candidates from the pulpit and actively participating in elections – activities with which it enjoys a fundamental Constitutional right -- it should be required to pay taxes just like the rest of us peons. It enjoys a constitutional right to engage in pulpit politics, but no right to be free from taxation.

Not surprisingly, many churches and religious institutions don’t like the remote possibility that their privileged tax exemption status might be lost if they engage in partisan politics. They insist on eating their cake and having it too. So this week President Trump promised at the National Prayer Breakfast to give them free reign to engage in partisan pulpit politics without fear of losing their generous gift of tax exempt status. He vowed to get rid of any restrictions on their privilege.

Can you imagine situations in which religious institutions can continue to enjoy the privilege of not paying any taxes while at the same time spending their considerable resources to create Political Action Committees (PAC’s), openly engaging in influencing partisan elections, and permitting their donors to get tax breaks for political contributions? Talk about mixing partisan politics with religion – this would take it to the absolute limit.

Why not just eliminate all tax exempt status privileges, Mr. President? Or why not give the privilege of tax exempt status to everyone? It’s not fair that churches can avoid paying their fair share of taxes while the rest of us are paying through the nose. Why should the religious businesses get special treatment that makes them filthy rich while the rest of us are forced to struggle under the yolk of taxation?


I, and most of my fellow Americans,  say that loss of the unfair tax exempt status privilege is a proper consequence for churches engaging in partisan pulpit politics. 

Saturday, January 28, 2017

If torture works…

Torture is a despicable practice. As a general rule I don’t believe that torture interrogation techniques work as well as one might think. Yes, torture victims will often sing like canaries. They’ll tell their torturers anything they want to hear. But too often it’s unreliable. It won’t necessarily lead to the truth. 

So I’m gratified that our newly confirmed Secretary of Defense, General Mad Dog Mattis, and Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Mike Pompeo, agree with me – torture doesn’t work and it’s against the law.  Americans don’t resort to torture. If the President ordered them to do it, they wouldn’t do it. That’s good.

But sadly, President Trump is still convinced that torture works. He has said repeatedly on the campaign trail, and recently since his inauguration, that he would employ waterboarding and worse on suspected terrorists if it were solely up to him. Fortunately, however, he also says that he’ll defer to General Mattis, CIA Director Pompeo, and the law.

Last Wednesday Trump said it again. He declared that torture works. And his administration intends to conduct a sweeping review of how America conducts the war on terror. He’s considering a resumption of previously banned interrogation methods and reopening CIA-run "black site" prisons outside the United States.  "We have to fight fire with fire," he said. But at the same time, he added that we want to do: "everything within the bounds of what you're allowed to do legally."

Well then, perhaps President Trump ought to read the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution which plainly provides that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Perhaps he should consider the Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination?

Note that our Constitution does not provide any exceptions for suspected terrorists. As far as our founding fathers were concerned, torture is cruel and unusual punishment and the government may not force an accused to incriminate himself. 

But let’s suppose for the purpose of argument that the Bill of Rights is not applicable to torture interrogation techniques; that American law allows torture, and that torture works…

If torture works… then why should we limit the sickening and disgusting practice to interrogating terrorist suspects? Why not torture all criminal suspects to find out what they know? Let’s say the cops arrest a suspected bank robber and they want to know the identity of his accomplices. Why not just torture the suspect – water board him perhaps – to coerce the information out of him? Why not simply whisk all criminal suspects off to Gitmo or some other “black site” prison where they can be tortured at leisure?

If torture works… and torture is legal… why not allow parents to employ enhanced interrogation techniques – torture – on their children in order to find out what mischief they’ve been up to? Suppose, for example, that a parent suspects her kid is doing illegal drugs. Why not let her water board the lad in order to get to the truth of the matter? Why not bring back the rack? After all, we have to fight fire with fire, right?


If torture works… where does it end? 

Monday, January 23, 2017

Our heavenly Department of Indoctrination

Lovers of liberty know that the entire American nationwide system of compulsory government education is unconstitutional. Forcing parents and their children to participate by law in a lengthy compulsory government indoctrination scheme violates at a minimum the First, Fifth, Tenth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments. 

The United States Constitution does not provide our government with any authority to dictate to individuals in matters of education, just as it enjoys no authority to dictate to individuals in matters of religion, or politics, or any other aspect of our precious private personal individual liberty.

The federal Department of Education should therefore never have come into existence in the first place, but now that it has, it and the cabinet Secretary position that goes with it should be abolished forthwith from existence.

Of course, we all know that is not going to happen anytime soon; and just to make matters even worse, the new President of the United States has appointed a new Secretary of Education who will, if confirmed by the Senate, not only carry on the constitutional abomination of compulsory government education, but will attempt the make the matter of religion in public schools compulsory as well. The main problem with schools is their secularization, she maintains.

Betsy DeVos, the lady whom President Trump has chosen to lead the Department of Education, openly compares her work in education reform to a biblical battleground with the intent to “advance God’s Kingdom.”  "Our desire is to confront the culture in ways that will continue to advance God's kingdom," she says. She wants Christian prayers back in the public schools, and intends to implement public taxpayer funding of private religious schools.

In short, Betsy DeVos will seek to employ our federal government to force Christians and non-Christians alike; believers and non-believers alike, to pay the tab for all American children to be indoctrinated with her Christian beliefs in both public and private schools; and the doctrine of separation between church and state enshrined in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution may be damned.

"We could run away and just go back up in the hills and live very safely and very comfortably — or are we going to exist in the Shephelah and try to impact the view of the community around us with the ideas we believe are more powerful ideas of a better way to live one’s life and a more meaningful and a more rewarding way to live one’s life as a Christian,” declared her billionaire husband, Dick DeVos. "Our job is to figure out in the contemporary context — how do we get the pig bones out of our culture?"

The DeVoses candidly admit that they adhere to the Calvinist perspective of Christianity. They view it as the work of Christians to influence culture. They dream of turning the United States into a Christian theocracy subject to “biblical laws.” .That’s why, when Jerry Falwell Jr., the president of Liberty University, the largest Christian university in the nation, turned down President Trump’s offer that he be appointed Secretary of Education, Trump offered the post to Betsy DeVos.

Now, of course, Betsy DeVos enjoys a fundamental constitutional right to her religious beliefs. No one argues that point; least of all me.  But she certainly does not enjoy the right to impose those beliefs upon all Americans as Secretary of the Department of Education. If that is truly her intention, then she is not qualified for that job and should not be confirmed.


The last thing America needs is a religious fanatic boss of our heavenly Department of Indoctrination.