The First Amendment Weeps

By far, most of the thousands upon thousands of American laws, statutes, edicts, decrees, rules, regulations and other draconian legislative enactments of the federal government and all the 50 states are concerned with things that you and I cannot do as opposed to the few things we can. That’s the nature of our statist government.

The purpose of the American government, which was to preserve, protect and uphold individual liberty, has evolved into the primary means of restricting it.

But the first law of the new republic; the supreme law of the land; the Constitution and Bill of Rights, was intended as a short list of restrictions, that is certain things that the government can and cannot do.

One of the fundamental things the government plainly cannot do is to make any law abridging the freedom of speech. That’s what the First Amendment provides. “Congress” (the government) “shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” Period; no exceptions mentioned.

And next there is the Second Amendment which provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” It’s an individual right that the government may not contradict.

So it would certainly seem that any individual in the United States of America should be freely allowed to express himself with speech at any time and everywhere regarding his constitutional right to bear arms. That goes without saying, right?

“Absolutely not,” say the statist lawmakers down in Texas. They think they can get away with passing a law restricting an individual’s right to express his approval of the Second Amendment and gun rights if he does so within 100 feet of a polling place.

Texas resident, Chris Driskill, went to his polling place to cast his ballot in the Republican primary, but was prohibited from voting because he was wearing a black T-shirt with a logo on the front and back reading, “2nd Amendment -- America’s Original Homeland Security.”

"I heard a gentleman's voice over my shoulder say ‘he can't vote with that shirt on. You'll have to either turn it inside out or you'll have to leave,’” Driskill recalled of his encounter at the Walker County Courthouse in Hempstead, a Houston suburb. "I didn't quite understand it at first… I was thinking they just didn't like something about the Second Amendment."

Texas election law bans campaigning for any “candidate, measure or political party” within 100 feet of polling place. Violators can be charged with a misdemeanor. In other words, the statist authorities in Texas regarded Driskill’s wearing a T-shirt expressing gun rights at a polling place as a crime.

Exercising one’s First Amendment rights in Texas is a crime. It’s considered a crime because his T-shirt could be construed as campaigning in support of gun rights. The primary ballot includes a proposition asking for a yes or no vote on expanded support for the Second Amendment and the places where a concealed weapon can be legally carried.

Mercifully, the guy wasn’t charged with a crime, though he might have been under this patently unconstitutional law. The statist goons allowed him to vote after he borrowed a suit jacket from a local Republican candidate outside the courthouse and wore it over his T-shirt.

Afterward, Mr. American Sheep wasn’t even upset about what happened. "If you have to turn around and go change shirts, you know, so be it…. But get out and vote,” he meekly explained.

Right! Get out and vote while the First Amendment weeps.

Statist Flag Flying Neurosis

Most American statist politicians are chronically afflicted with that common mental disorder in consciousness, the one characterized by symptoms such as compulsive acts, hysteria, anxiety, depression, or obsessive behavior which dominates their personalities, but without objective evidence of actual underlying physical disease.

In short, they suffer with various degrees and manifestations of neurosis. Consequently they often impose their wholly irrational neurotic thoughts and compulsive behavior on their politically captive constituents.

One such typical obsessive compulsive example is their need to constantly display worship for all things American, especially the American flag, which they regard as on the level of a government deity.

These people love to wear those American flag lapel buttons on their suit jackets identifying them as Americans as if we might not know. They’d feel naked without them. They insist of forcing little school children to worship America and the American flag by mindlessly reciting the Pledge of Allegiance every day.

And they want Americans to buy stuff that’s made in America even if foreign products are cheaper and better. If rational Americans don’t share their irrational neurosis about America and all things American, they resort to passing laws in Congress requiring the sheep to conform.

Under a new law signed as part of the 2014 omnibus appropriations bill, any flag purchased by the Defense Department is required to be 100 percent made in America. So American flags made in foreign lands will no longer fly over military bases.

It’s going make the anxious hysterical lawmakers feel so much better even though such flags made in the U.S. (which look exactly the same) are far more expensive than foreign made flags. Of course, the statists know that so they didn’t go so far as to mandate American made flags at all other federal facilities – they’re just too damned expensive.

Another law, however, already requires all federal government American flags be made of at least 50 percent of materials made in the U.S. A 1941 law bans the Defense Department from buying items like food and clothing from foreign countries.

Flags made in China, the largest foreign importer, cost significantly less than ones produced in the United States. An estimated $3.3 million worth of American flags are imported from Beijing each year.

Foreign-made American flags became an issue in the aftermath of 9/11, when Americans were flocking to stores to purchase flags to fly on their homes or cars. U.S. manufacturers could not keep up with the demand, so China stepped in. Foreign imports of the flags were generally valued at about $1 million a year before 9/11, but surged to $52 million in the weeks that followed.

Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., a Vietnam War veteran and Purple Heart recipient, who wrote the new legislation, said he did so for economic as well as symbolic reasons. "I thought it was appalling our Department of Defense would have flags made in other countries," he whined. "But it's also important because we need to be making more in America."

Think about it for a moment. What the hell difference does it make to any healthy minded rational person where a goddamned flag was made? It’s just a symbol; a piece of cloth with stars and stripes sewn on it.

Whether it was made in Beijing or Buffalo it still looks exactly the same; one is indistinguishable from the other. If you can buy one for $50 and exactly the same quality one for $10, which one will you choose? Is it really worth an extra $40 to buy American? Not to any sane American it isn’t.

You know that if these sick pathetic folks can obsessively do it with American flags they can just as easily compulsively do it with automobiles, clothing, and every other consumer item sold at your local Wal-Mart department store – all for the stupid purpose to relieve their emotional hysterical anxiety about America and everything American.

You just can’t reason with some Americans afflicted with statist flag flying neurosis.  

Bull****!

“The sky is falling, the sky is falling,” Chicken Little cried pitifully after an acorn fell on his head. It’s the classic centuries old folk tale with a moral about a chicken who believes the world is coming to an end.

In one oft told version of this story, the chick decides to go tell the King, and on its journey meets other frightened birds that follow along in the great quest. Eventually a wily fox invites them to his lair and eats them all.

The moral, of course, is to be skeptical of people, especially politicians, who claim that disaster is upon us lest we do something drastic and extremely costly about it. The gullible fools who believe the chicken are likely to be eaten.

There are always gaggles -- often majorities -- of hysterical clowns among us who mistakenly believe that disaster is imminent. They try hard to put down those rational skeptics in the crowd who express any doubt. Eventually, after nothing happens; there is no disaster, the crowd realizes it’s been deceived, but then the next Chicken Little comes along and the crowd follows again.

It happens again and again.

And it almost always turns out to be bullshit!

Over the last two decades the “impending disaster” has been “global warming,” and when that story turned out to be essentially bullshit, the cry became “climate change.”

You see, during the past 17 years the average temperature of the Earth has not gone up; sea levels have not risen; the ice caps have not melted; there has been no “global warming” generally, so that bullshit fantasy had to be abandoned by the Chicken Little’s; but who can argue with “climate change?”

Climate change; so now it’s climate change? Well of course there is climate change; there has always been climate change and always will be climate change. So the “climate change” warnings from today’s Chicken Little’s are meaningless. I defy anyone to accurately define what “climate change” means exactly in the context of a global disaster claim. It means nothing.

The Chicken Little’s of today, a.k.a., left leaning politicians among us, have been trying to scare us about a looming climate “disaster” caused by greedy human beings burning fossil fuels in their cars, factories, and electricity plants; activity that they insist is adding carbon dioxide to the planet’s atmosphere which will cause the world to come to an end unless we do something drastic which will cost trillions of dollars.

U.S. Secretary of State, John, “Chicken Little,” Kerry took the warnings up a few notches last Sunday when he called climate change perhaps the world's "most fearsome" destructive weapon and mocked those who deny its existence or question its causes, comparing them to people who insist the Earth is flat. 

Climate change,  he warned solemnly, ranks among the world's most serious problems -- such as disease outbreaks, poverty, terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It’s "the greatest challenge of our generation."

Climate change is a weapon? Burning fossil fuel is a weapon?

Bullshit!

"We simply don't have time to let a few loud interest groups hijack the climate conversation," he cried,  referring to what he called "big companies" that "don't want to change and spend a lot of money" to act to reduce the risks. 

"And let there be no doubt in anybody’s mind that the science is absolutely certain," said Kerry. "It’s something that we understand with absolute assurance of the veracity of that science."

"We should not allow a tiny minority of shoddy scientists and extreme ideologues to compete with scientific facts… Nor should we allow any room for those who think that the costs associated with doing the right thing outweigh the benefits… The science is unequivocal, and those who refuse to believe it are simply burying their heads in the sand… We don't have time for a meeting anywhere of the Flat Earth Society."

The science is absolutely certain and unequivocal?

Bullshit!

Kerry went on to blame every recent storm, blizzard, flood, tornado, drought, hurricane and typhoon, (events which have been occurring regularly on planet Earth for billions of years), on “climate change” caused by man.

"This city, this country, this region, [Indonesia] is really on the front lines of climate change… It's not an exaggeration to say that your entire way of life here is at risk," he screeched. “In a sense, climate change can now be considered the world's largest weapon of mass destruction, perhaps even, the world's most fearsome weapon of mass destruction."

Climate change is a weapon of mass destruction? Every time you get in your car and drive down the road you are wielding a weapon of mass destruction?

Not an exaggeration? 

Bullshit!

Do as we say; not as we do

Not too often, but every now and then, a politician does something refreshingly right for a change. Sometimes a politician will even call out other politicians for their gross hypocrisy. I love it when that happens.

Most politicians, for example, have a tendency to ask people to do as they say; not as they do. They like to lord it over us little people with reams of laws, statutes, rules and regulations purportedly for our own good, and the greater good of society in general, but when it comes to their own gluttonous personal behavior, they don’t like to follow their own standards.  

Congressman Rodney Davis, R-Ill., is, albeit facetiously, calling out the Obama administration on this tendency. He’s introduced a bill to require that Presidential state dinners abide by public school cafeteria food and calorie count standards for kid’s meals. In short, he wants the government fat cat political aristocracy and their high society guests forced to eat the same tasteless low calorie shit the school children have to eat.

The congressman would like to see the President and his state dinner guests live by the same strict rules and guidelines the federal government has set for school lunches. After all, it’s only fair. If it’s so good for the kids, it must also be good for the adults.

“Back home our school districts and students are frustrated and feel like their government is not listening,” Davis explained. Even though his legislation stands little chance of passage, he describes it as a message that if the government wants to dictate what children can eat, they should lead by example.

According USDA standards, which were championed by first lady Michelle Obama as part of her “Let’s Move!” anti-obesity campaign, middle school students are allowed a mere 550 calories for breakfast and 700 for lunch, and high school students 600 for breakfast and 850 for lunch.

The same rules also dictate portion sizes as well as calorie counts, limit saturated fat, sodium, and require more whole grains, fruits and vegetables. Not only are the portions and calories for the kids severely restricted in the interest of preventing obesity, but the actual food they do get tastes like cardboard.

But last Tuesday night's state dinner in honor of French President Francois Hollande boasts a menu that clearly wouldn’t meet the same guidelines. In fact, it wouldn't even come close. The fancy dinner was intended to celebrate “the best of American cuisine,” according to the White House.

First course: American Osetra caviar; Fingerling potato velouté, quail eggs, crisped chive potatoes; Second course: “The Winter Garden Salad”; petite mixed radish, baby carrots, merlot lettuce; Red wine vinaigrette; Main course: Dry-aged high fat content rib eye beef; Jasper Hill Farm blue cheese, charred shallots, oyster Mushrooms, and braised chard; Dessert: Hawaiian chocolate-malted ganache; Vanilla ice cream and tangerines.

Of course, this elegant menu, furnished entirely at taxpayer expense, consists mainly of high-fat, high-calorie foods; foods which would be routinely and systematically purged from school cafeteria trays for the kids.

Their highnesses, if they clean their royal plates, will consume 2,500 calories and 152 grams of fat in this one meal --- not counting the alcohol. Compare that to the USDA’s calorie guidelines for school kids, which allow only a maximum of 1,150 calories for both breakfast and lunch.

Add in the wine list to this expensive high fat feast: Morlet “La Proportion Doree” 2011 Napa Valley, California; Chester-Kidder Red Blend 2009 Columbia Valley, Washington; Thibaut-Janisson “Blanc de Chardonnay” Monticello, Virginia; and they’ll have a royal banquet fit for a king, queen and their court, which Barack and Michelle fancy themselves as, along with their guests.

Meanwhile all the little the serfs and peasants at public school cafeterias across the heartland of America will be eating their government mandated low fat, low calorie porridge, vegetables and gruel. To these poor urchins the President and his queen, while they enjoy their all expenses paid government feast, will be thinking:

Do as we say; not as we do.

Cell Phone Roulette

US government chicken hawks engaging in the never ending War on Terror won’t let the Constitution stand in their way, and simply don’t give a damn if they murder innocent bystanders in their frenzied zeal to get the bad guys.

That’s exactly what happened in Yemen when they went after Anwar al-Awlaki with one of their un-manned drones. They got him alright, blew him to bits, and in the process assassinated his completely innocent 16-year-old son. Due process of law was the last thing on their criminal minds.

Now, with the latest Edward Snowden revelation, we learn that the same chicken hawks are playing cell phone roulette with their mindless drones.

That’s right. The US government is reportedly now ordering drone strikes based on cell phone location alone, without any corroborating evidence. If their hapless target, for example, happens to leave his phone at home with the wife and kids while he pops out to the local 7-11 for a pack of smokes, he might return to find his house reduced to a mound of rubble and his innocent family members vaporized into oblivion.

You see, in this War on Terror, our government just doesn’t care about hitting innocent unintended targets with missiles. If they detect the location of a cell phone they’ll order the strike without confirming the location of the intended target no matter the likely presence of innocent bystanders.

We can thank the NSA for having the ability to locate your cell phone, my cell phone; everybody’s cell phone, including the bad guys as well as the good guys. They can now locate anyone on the planet this way, and if they want to murder you, well … there’s not a lot you can do about it.

The details of this shocking development are included in a report published recently by journalist Glenn Greenwald's journal, The Intercept. Citing an unnamed former drone operator and other sources, it said the NSA uses a "complex analysis of electronic surveillance" to pinpoint drone strike targets. However, the CIA and U.S. military don't always confirm who the target is with informants on the ground.

So, obviously, the flagged phone could be in the hands of someone else -- a friend, a family member, someone who's holding the wrong phone at the wrong time -- when the missile is fired. "It's really like we're targeting a cell phone," the former drone operator was quoted as saying. "We're not going after people -- we're going after their phones."

Naturally our government goons deny their conduct is like playing roulette, and maintain that this kind of thing is perfectly fine. "For obvious reasons we can't discuss the specific sources and methods we use to establish near certainty, but our assessments are not based on a single piece of information," explains a spokesperson. "We gather and scrutinize information from a variety of sources and methods before we draw conclusions."

She declined to say whether strikes are ordered without the use of human intelligence, and both the CIA and NSA declined to comment on the report. Asked about the reports at his daily press briefing, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney declined to comment on the specific case. But said the administration has set a "high threshold" for taking lethal action against any target.

A high threshold indeed; this is cell lethal phone roulette with missiles and drones.

The Camel Clue

In my book: Authority! – Implications of Consciousness and the Reality of Existence, I debunk all conventional moral and political claims to external authority over human beings as deceptions in consciousness, especially the so-called authority of the Holy Bible as the literal word of God, the purported one and only supreme human being, creator of the universe and everything in existence -- the ultimate metaphor for human Authority!

The Abrahamic monotheistic religions, which together include Christianity, Judaism and Islam, based upon reverence for the founding father Abraham, a patriarchal character in the Holy Bible, are the greatest impediments to individual liberty and freedom ever invented by the mind of man.  

The religion of the Holy Bible is anathema to liberty. That’s why I regard it as one of my humble missions in life to prove that all religions and the Bible are not the works of a supernatural God, but entirely human inventions conceived by human beings to shackle the consciousness of other human beings and thereby deprive them of their precious liberties.  

There have been many notable religious debunkers throughout history, (not nearly enough in my opinion, however), but Charles Darwin, the father of modern biology, stands out as the greatest debunker who has ever lived in regard to conclusively proving as a myth the fantasy of creation as set forth in the book of Genesis in the Holy Bible.   

Other intellectual giants before him proved that the Earth is a sphere which orbits the sun; that our solar system is just one of trillions in a universe consisting of many billions of galaxies; that this was not all created in a span of six days, but billions of years; that mankind did not coexist with dinosaurs; and on and on.

In short, the clear and convincing evidence compiled over centuries of scientific observation is that the Holy Bible is riddled with scientific inaccuracies; that far from being the works of an omnipotent omniscient supernatural supreme being, it was obviously written in its entirety by a collection of crafty but scientifically illiterate ignorant human beings as a means to usurp Authority in the conscious minds of others.

The Holy Bible and the men who conceived and rely upon its purported political and moral Authority have been hugely successful right up to the present day. Most of the people on this planet simply do not accept the intellectual reality of existence as it actually is. They would much rather embrace and live accordingly by their own religious fantasy.

No amount of reasonable, logical and sound Biblical debunking is going to change most minds.

Not even the latest camel clue.

That’s right. Archaeologists from Israel’s top university have used radiocarbon dating to pinpoint the arrival of domestic camels in the Middle East -- and they say the science directly contradicts the Bible’s version of events.

Camel bones prove more error in the Bible.

Camels are mentioned as pack animals in the biblical stories of Abraham, Joseph and Jacob, Old Testament stories that historians peg to between 2000 and 1500 BC. But scientists at Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Cultures say camels weren’t domesticated in Israel until centuries later, more like 900 BC. 

“This anachronism is direct proof that the [Bible's] text was compiled well after the events it describes,” they explain. “In addition to challenging the Bible's historicity, this anachronism is direct proof that the text was compiled well after the events it describes.”

The bones were in archaeological layers dating from the last third of the 10th century BC or later — centuries after the patriarchs lived and decades after the Kingdom of David, according to the Bible.

The few camel bones found in earlier archaeological layers probably belonged to wild camels, which archaeologists think lived there during the Neolithic period or even earlier. All the sites active in the 9th century in the Aravah Valley had camel bones, but none of the sites that were active earlier contained them.

"The introduction of the camel to our region was a very important economic and social development,” they added. “By analyzing archaeological evidence from the copper production sites of the Aravah Valley, we were able to estimate the date of this event in terms of decades rather than centuries."

Add this small new fragment of scientific observation to the towering mountain of evidence debunking religion and the Holy Bible as political and moral human Authority! -- The camel clue.

Compulsory Education Slaves

As a committed libertarian minded American, I take the Bill of Rights and its constitutional guarantees against any government interference with individual liberty seriously. There are no constitutional exceptions to each of those guarantees. As far as I’m concerned then they are written in stone. They might be altered but only buy constitutional amendment which entails a lengthy and cumbersome procedure.

That’s what the founding fathers intended as the way to make the United States of America uniquely different than the governments of most other nations, particularly the nation of Great Britain and its tyrannical king, with whom we rebelled against and fought the Revolutionary War.

But Republicans, Democrats, and other myriad forms of statist thinkers, including many of the supposedly apolitical members of the federal and state judiciaries – yes, and even most Americans for that matter -- don’t exactly see it the same as I do.  They believe it’s perfectly OK for the state to carve out exceptions by fiat to our otherwise most precious guaranteed liberties.

It’s OK, for example, to infringe upon our constitutional rights as long as the infringements are “reasonable” they reckon. Never-mind that there are no constitutional exceptions to the First Amendment, for instance; they simply invent them and then justify the infringements on the grounds that the state has a “reasonable” compelling interest to do so.

In Britain recently there are two parents who face prison time for taking their children out of school for only a week to go on a special holiday vacation abroad. It was the first holiday the family had enjoyed together in five years. Upon their return from the Greek island of Rhodes, school officials dunned them with a fine of £360 (about $600), which they failed to pay, so now it’s jail time.

Regular attendance is paramount to a child’s educational experience and benefits the overall school community, reasons the British government. The benefit to the community outweighs the liberties of individuals; therefore they deem what these parents decided on for the benefit of their family a crime against the state.

Think again if you don’t believe that this kind of mindless government tyranny can’t happen in America where the Bill of Rights supposedly guarantees our individual liberty. Every jurisdiction in the United States of America has long ago passed compulsory education laws requiring parents and children to submit to the state’s “reasonable” interest in compelling attendance at school.

And there is a long line of precedent in the state and federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court, upholding compulsory school attendance laws as “reasonable” infringements of otherwise enforceable constitutional rights. “There is no doubt as to the power of a State, having a high responsibility for education of its citizens, to impose reasonable regulations for the control and duration of basic education,” declared SCOTUS unanimously in 1972.

But just how is it that there is no doubt?

The court never answers that question. No court ever has. The justices just blithely take it for granted that the state may compel school attendance in most situations as against individual liberty interests if such infringements are deemed “reasonable” despite the plain fact that there are no such “reasonableness” constitutional exceptions to the clear mandates of the Bill of Rights.

The sad fact is that American statists can legally make all parents and children education slaves by criminalizing non-compliance. These statists insist that a supposedly free people are not truly free, but instead owe certain individual obligations and responsibilities to the state even though the Constitution sets forth no such obligations or responsibilities.

The courts have used exactly the same statist reasoning with regard to many other laws, including compulsory military draft and conscription laws, tax laws, even ObamaCare laws. The state can make you its slave as long as it can convince the judges that it’s “reasonable.”

That’s why in America, as in Britain, and elsewhere, the Bill of Rights does not exist if the government wants to “reasonably” make you a compulsory education, or any other kind of slave. 

Statist Jock Itch

The United Statists of America opened up a Pandora’s treasure chest exactly 101 years ago today on February 3, 1913, when the odious 16^th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified finally allowing the government trolls to levy taxes on the income of individuals living in the former land of the free.

Ever since that fateful day more than a century ago all the greedy statists at the federal, state and local levels of government have been literally itching to grab as much loot as they can from every single voluntary transaction between individuals whether large or small.

I liken them to the ugly, stinking, hairy little trolls who reside under bridges and come out with teeth bared, waiving, screaming and shrilly demanding of hapless passersby to show them the money in their pockets, turn it over and give it up.

Not only is everyone expected to fork over a substantial share of their hard earned income to these armed gangs of extortionist trolls, in addition we must all suffer the humiliating indignity of filing a detailed report to the beasts every year signed under penalty of perjury specifying the exact amount and origin of every penny.

This is one of the worst things that have ever happened to the citizens of America in the entire history of the United States. If the founding fathers of our nation were alive today they’d all be sickened to the core over this travesty which they surely never intended when they rebelled against the king of England, fought the Revolutionary War and ultimately ratified the Constitution.

The very idea of a government tax on individual incomes was an unconstitutional anathema before 1913. It took an amendment to the Constitution in order to bring about this horrible plague upon the populace. And that was finally achieved by the statists only because they promised that such a tax would remain trifling and limited solely to the very highest earners and most wealthy citizens among the people.

Today the national income tax cancer has metastasized throughout the whole body of the republic to such an extent that there is no possibility of escaping the sticky tentacles of the statist government trolls who now reside under bridges everywhere; Washington D.C., and every state, city, town and tiny municipality across the land.

Witness, for just one example, the fact that all the football players, coaches, and staff of both the Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks, who faced off today in the Super Bowl game at MetLife Stadium in the state of in New Jersey will be required by the tax trolls to fork over a special “jock tax” levied on athletes who earn money during visits the Garden State.

There’s no escaping it. It’s going on in just about every venue in the country where professional sports is played. The statist trolls in these places have been itching for a long time to impose these jock taxes and now it’s a reality.

The state of California devised the tax on out-of-state players when Michael Jordan’s Chicago Bulls played the Los Angeles Lakers in the 1991 NBA Finals. Later, the State of Illinois enacted its own jock tax on Lakers players, calling it “Michael Jordan’s Revenge.”

Now all the professional sports franchises must provide their players and other team employees with W2 forms reflecting income, and calculating the taxes owed to each state in which they have competed during the year. It’s an administrative nightmare for the taxpayers and a bonanza for the legions of government trolls, tax lawyers and accountants.

Seahawks and Broncos players visiting New Jersey for the Super Bowl today are taxed at a rate of 8.97% on earnings earned each day they’re in the state. The loot will be considerable as each player on the winning team will be entitled to a bonus of $92,000, while the losing team’s players get $46,000. Some of the higher paid athletes will be dunned as much as $60,000 in taxes for their weeklong stay in New Jersey.

That means players, coaches, trainers, as well as the officiating crews who referee the contest, will be shaken down by the income tax trolls. Even the Super Bowl rings, awarded to the participants, and valued at between $20,000 and $25,000 each, are considered by the grasping statists as a taxable fringe benefit.

The trolls, who put the Italian mafia to shame with their tactics, don’t leave a single stone unturned when it comes to collecting their ill-gotten and extorted loot.

Those who perhaps will suffer the most by this legitimized thieving scheme will be the assistant coaches and trainers who earn the small money but will still have to hire tax accounts to sort out their own individual jock tax liability. “Everyone who travels with the team gets taxed, and they’re the ones who really get hurt,” explains Sean Packard, tax director at Interpublic Group’s (IPG) Octagon Financial Services.  

Look for the consequences of this crippling disease to spread soon to the internet and every voluntary financial transaction between innocent consenting individuals doing business everywhere. 

The government tax trolls are itching for and are going to get their cut by hook or crook.

This is the inevitable result of American government statist jock itch.