Government Intimidation Is Protected By Law

Reblogged from Asylum Watch:

Many of us, at one time or another, have seen the truth of the adage: You can't fight City Hall.  And, too many of our fellow citizens ave learned the hard way that fighting abuse of power by some federal bureaucrats is even worse than trying to fight City Hall.

Judge Andrew Napolitano is famous for asking the question: Does the government work for us, or do we work for the government?

Read more… 630 more words

Our system of governance was not initially intended to foster and protect the intimidation of private citizens by their – our – “public servants.” It was initially intended to do the opposite. However, it was not initially intended to do many if not most of the other things it now does either.

Jim quite rightly assigns much of the blame to the Administrative Procedure Act. However, the effects of the APA are greatly enhanced by many subsequent acts of Congress (and even some Executive Decrees Orders that have given too many Federal agencies too much discretion to do too many inadequately specified things. Congress tends to assign to agencies the tasks of implementing ill thought-out legislation with such language as “taking such other actions and adopting such other regulations as the Administrator may deem appropriate.” The mass of HHS ObamaCare regulations continues to become greater, already reaching, I understand, ten thousand pages. The Internal Revenue Service has been charged with implementing much of ObamaCare not to be implemented directly by HHS. Binding IRS interpretations of IRS regulations will follow as those regulations are adopted and implemented.

I offered a small example of the nature of the beast in an article about The Safe Teen and Novice Driver Uniform Protection Act. If enacted (it died in committee) it would have authorized

Any other requirement adopted by the Secretary of Transportation, including learner’s permit holding period at least 6 months; intermediate stage at least 6 months; at least 30 hours behind-the-wheel, supervised driving by licensed driver 21 years of age or older; automatic delay of full licensure if permit holder commits an offense, such as DWI, misrepresentation of true age, reckless driving, unbelted driving, speeding, or other violations as determined by the Secretary. (Emphasis added)

When I practiced communications law in Washington, I was often involved in Federal Communications Commission cases before the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, charged by statute with hearing appeals from most FCC rulings. That court, which I still regard as one of the best in the nation, had no choice but to defer to findings of fact by “experts” at the FCC as well as to the expansive but inadequately defined authority granted to them by legislation.

Occasionally, I glance at Yahoo News to learn what's happening outside the sadly lunatic world of politics. There was recently an article titled Why is there so much poop in swimming pools? Swimming pools were not intended to serve as toilets or septic tanks but it seems that too many do. It strikes me that our Federal Government has promoted more growth of dangerous bacteria that dine upon our freedoms than all swimming pools have become infested with “E. Coli, the bacteria most commonly associated with fecal matter.”

We've come a long way baby, and it's getting pretty dark and scary. Shouldn't we stop going “forward” and head on home?

David Axelrod is Right: Government is too Big and Uncontrollable

President Obama, as usual, is blameless for any misfeasance and malfeasance of the Government he allegedly leads.
Let’s make it easier for him by making it simpler and smaller.

Due to the complexity and multiplicity of scandals increasingly enveloping the Obama Administration, I became too bogged down with constantly emerging new stuff to write about it. Sadly, President Obama also has to rely on media reports, so I can easily understand his problems. Indeed, even this little bit about the Justice Department almost escaped me:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department failed to provide the names of some terrorists in the witness protection program to the center that maintains the government’s watch list used to keep dangerous people off airline flights, the department’s inspector general said in a report Thursday.

As a result of the department’s failure to properly share information, some in the witness protection program who were on the “no-fly” list were allowed to travel on commercial flights, the federal watchdog said.

“It was possible for known or suspected terrorists to fly on commercial airplanes in or over the United States and evade one of the government’s primary means of identifying and tracking terrorists’ movements and actions,” the report said.

At first, I wondered whether the Justice Department just needs more funding and more employees. That has been the traditional solution to our problems. Then, a better idea came to my attention. It involves a brilliant new solution that nobody had ever suggested before David Axelrod thought of it. As loyal subjects citizens, it behooves all of us to help President Obama and his friends out. 

According to Mr. Axelrod on May 15th, things are far too complex these days.

“Part of being president is there’s so much underneath you because the government is so vast,” he added. “You go through these [controversies] all because of this stuff that is impossible to know if you’re the president or working in the White House, and yet you’re responsible for it and it’s a difficult situation.”

That must be the problem as well as explanation for all of the recent scandals and more that will arise unless we do something.

It is shameful – shameful — that no Republican or even conservative has ever suggested that the Government should cease growing and even be reduced in size and scope. It is doubly shameful that dear Mr. Axelrod had to be the first person in history ever to summon the courage to say it, but he did. His wise words should serve as game changers, helping Republicans and more vocal conservatives to recognize that they alone have failed us completely.

ObamaCare is probably the most inefficient, but therefore nevertheless most highly effective, expansion mechanism ever devised by Government. Why did no Republican or conservative bother to oppose it? What? There was? In 2010? But why has there been no opposition or even one effort to repeal it? Huh? Well, OK. But it must have been done incompetently.  

Ditto enhanced borrowing and spending authority for the Government. Deafening silence. Wasn’t there? Oh. Yeah, there’s that but it’s probably our fault anyway. Besides, with Government growing as fast as it does, it obviously needs lots of horse manure yummy stuff from the ObamaStash to feed it; providing that is the President’s only principal job. Isn’t it? It takes a big brave man to nurture a monster of that size!

The ever growing nature of the Federal Government is, of course, not the fault of The Brilliant Light Bringer for whom we had long been waiting. His legacies of screwing medical care and helping al Qaeda to thrive have preoccupied him to the extent that he can no longer even come in out of the rain.

I missed a hole in one by just this much!

He had had difficulty with rain before, but now the paralysis has progressed and he can’t even manage to get the podium moved a few feet back under the overhang. In simpler times, a President could have managed that with just a whisper to one obtuse underling; no longer. There are too many of them. Now it would require drafts and multiple revisions of talking points and policy statements from and by many bureaus and agencies. Legal review by the diligent protectors of our laws and Constitution at the Department of Justice would be necessary as well. Their workloads are already overwhelming so it would take at least until after the 2014 elections to get the podium moved a couple of feet. President Obama has no choice but to stand in the rain for us, protected by a lowly Marine corporal.

We must all pitch in and help to get the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal under control. Should we fail, it might eat our beloved President and members of the Congress. How could the nation possibly survive without them? Surely, we need their vast wisdom and unparalleled experience to survive. Perish any thought of feeding the Beast!

Let’s all ask Big Bird for the help we so desperately need and which he alone can easily provide.

Big Bird for President in 2016!

The Leftist Lexicon

Reblogged from makeaneffort:

I've written previously regarding the language of the Left.
Many of us realize the battle to control the language is fought in order to control the argument.
An easy example of this is the use of the words "Ask", "Rich" and "Fair Share".
When you hear a Progressive make the statement "I don't think it is unreasonable to ask the…

Read more… 387 more words

It is said that “fish rot from the head down.” President Obama is now the biggest of all the national rotting fish. As he and “his” presidency rot, the stench and the rot spiral downward; "his” multiple federal departments and agencies are rotting along with him. As they do, their stench also spirals downward while further polluting our political and social atmosphere. That probably does not cause “the catastrophic horrors" of man-caused global warming climate change, but it does produce substantial chilling of our political freedom and discourse.

Shouldn't President Obama "simply" do the "only fair,” “just,” “reasonable,” “equitable” and plainly “common sense” thing by resigning “his” presidency and taking voluntary exile in Kenya, Somalia or some other place better suited to his governance? Shouldn't he “ask” some of his colleagues to accompany him? Doing so would promote the "social welfare" in our far more populous nation (to be "perfectly clear," and "make no mistake about it," I refer to the United States). Considering the situations in Kenya and Somalia, that might also promote the "social welfare" there.

If just one un-aborted and not murdered at birth small child can be saved, shouldn't he try? For "the common good?"

Obama: IRS Targeting Political Opponents "Outrageous"

Reblogged from Bring the heat, Bring the Stupid:

From NBC News:

Amid outcry over revelations that Internal Revenue Service specialists specifically targeted conservative groups for scrutiny before the 2012 elections, President Barack Obama said Monday that the tax agency employees' reported conduct was "outrageous" and "contrary to our traditions."

I spose it is a matter of which traditions.   Socialist-communist regimes have a long history of such things.   Sounding…

Read more… 199 more words

President Obama is shocked! Absolutely shocked! It is outrageous that a distraction like this could happen during his very own administration of the nation of which he and his charming First Lady are immensely proud. The facts must be discovered quickly but with all deliberate speed and very carefully so that no wrongs might be done to possibly innocent people and so this distraction and the other long ago distraction due to Benghazi bumps in the road that interfere with his agenda are not permitted to continue.

Anyone at an appropriately low level who, based on all available and credible evidence, is conclusively determined to have been involved may be severely reprimanded! An adverse efficiency report for getting caught for less than exemplary management style may be placed in his, her or its personnel file and any bonus that might otherwise have been given may even be reduced!

President Obama's legacy of Zero tolerance for corruption and other forms of misconduct during his administration must be enhanced and preserved so that the actions of a few isolated, low level Government employees cannot be fodder for partisan political sideshows now, during the next election or even in 2016.

Daniel Greenfield and Wild Bill for America: With Blood on Their Hands

Reblogged from We the People:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

Hillary Clinton is a psychopath and pathological liar. 

Both maladies  are incongruous with feeling regret, pain or knowing the difference between the two.

White House Photo in anticipation of her ending.

If Hillary is not put in jail when the facts are finally known, then the only reasonable alternative would have her swing from a rope. 

Read more… 1,883 more words

An excellent article, well worth reading in its entirety. Perhaps a bit tangential, I really liked appreciated these short paragraphs:

Muslim hearts and minds are the obsession of the policymakers of the dying West, but who cares about the hearts and minds of the men and women who ride Chinooks into danger zones, run marathons in cities where aspiring Chechen boxers feel marginalized and work in skyscrapers that Muslim students fly past on the way from Boston, except on Election Day? “Under the current Rules of Engagement, if the enemy fires on you then runs behind a rock,” Karen Vaughn told a press that was busy pressing its fingers into its ears as deep as they could go, “when he pops his head out from behind the rock, you’re not allowed to engage him unless you can verify that he has not laid his gun down… in other words you must be fired on twice.”

It's all a sad commentary on America's current situation. The article speaks of the blood on Lady Macbeth's hands that could not be washed away. What about the blood also on the hands of our “low information voters?” Do they – will they – realize it's there? That it reeks of their shame? If they do, will they care?

Does Modern Academia Encourage Unthinking Acceptance of Authority?

This post is based in large part on an article titled
Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill

Is there a current tendency to consider those who cherish and seek to preserve our rights, including those under the First and Second Amendments, mentally ill for that reason? Interesting for the focused question it poses directly, the article should raise broader but similar questions about the current nature of academia in general.

I have had no direct contact with academia since my years in undergraduate school (1959 – 63) and in law school (1963 – 66). “Back in the good old days,” we were encouraged toward independent thought and away from authoritarian notions that discourage it.

One of my favorite teachers at Yale, John Morton Blum, was an academic and a liberal (not a “librul” as I have come to use the word) in the classical sense. A student of both Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt, he had recently done much research at Hyde Park reviewing FDR’s papers and discussing them with his widow, Eleanor. On the day following her death, he asked whether we would object if, rather than cover his intended subject matter, he extemporized about Mrs. Roosevelt, whom he had got to know quite well. We approved and he did.

Mr. Blum’s twice weekly lectures on American political history were very popular and were therefore taught in the largest auditorium available. They were attended by several hundred students. We were divided into seminars of fifteen or so taught weekly by post doctoral teaching assistants. The TA who led my seminar, previously a labor organizer, once gave me a bad grade on an essay he had told us to write on “whether slavery was a good preparation for democracy.” A one word response, “no,” would not have served and it was evident that he wanted us to criticize slavery on the ground that it was not; I decided not to do so. Instead, I took and supported the position that it had not been intended for that purpose — much as an automobile, not intended for the purpose, would be an inadequate means of transport across the Atlantic Ocean. There were many valid grounds for criticizing slavery. That slavery did not fulfill a propose for which it had not been intended was not among them. When I challenged him, he seemed initially hostile but nevertheless rethought the matter and within a day or two gave me a much better grade. I do not know whether he consulted Mr. Blum on what to do, but suspect that he did.

Others in various fields also sought to encourage independent thought. Brand Blanshard, for example, taught an undergraduate philosophy course. A rationalist, he “espoused and defended a strong conception of reason during a century when reason came under philosophical attack.” Reason is the antithesis of ideological conformity and of its beloved cousin, political correctness. Mr. Blanshard’s lectures were simultaneously entertaining and designed to encourage us to think independently. He retired at the end of the school year during which I attended his classes and we gave him a standing ovation. Emotionally overwhelmed or joking (I never knew for sure which), he walked off stage into a broom closet (where he remained until after we had left) rather than through the door he had customarily used.

My major field of study was economics. Authur Okun, my honors thesis adviser, adhered to the same traditions. He encouraged me to pursue the subject of my paper (impact of the Robinson-Patman Act on the automotive replacement parts market) without preconceptions as to where it should lead and seemed pleased that I had done so.

Viewing modern academia, including even public primary and secondary education —  only from a distance and mainly by reading — it strikes me that those who encourage the questioning of authority and independent thought may now be exceptions. Zero tolerance policies in primary and secondary schools — which themselves discourage rational thought by teachers and administrators in favor of reliance on overly broad applications of inflexible policies — may be symptoms of this decline. To the extent that their own rational thought processes are discouraged, might they be unlikely to encourage them in their students as well?

Toward the end of the article on which this post is substantially predicated, the author says

Why Mental Health Professionals Diagnose Anti-Authoritarians with Mental Illness? Gaining acceptance into graduate school or medical school and achieving a PhD or MD and becoming a psychologist or psychiatrist means jumping through many hoops, all of which require much behavioral and attentional compliance to authorities, even to those authorities that one lacks respect for. The selection and socialization of mental health professionals tends to breed out many anti-authoritarians. Having steered the higher-education terrain for a decade of my life, I know that degrees and credentials are primarily badges of compliance. Those with extended schooling have lived for many years in a world where one routinely conforms to the demands of authorities. Thus for many MDs and PhDs, people different from them who reject this attentional and behavioral compliance appear to be from another world—a diagnosable one. [Emphasis added.]

Please read the entire article.

Do comparable attitudes now prevail generally in other fields of academia? If so, are they recent phenomena or have they been progressing steadily downward for many years? It occurs to me that the now commonly sycophantic “legitimate media” acceptance and regurgitation of (currently) leftist or librul political talking points may have roots pointing downward to the education received by many journalists. (I used the passive word, “received,” rather than the active word, “taken,” purposely.)  The recent questioning — even by some in the “legitimate media” — of the Obama Administration Benghazi talking points is a refreshing change. I wonder how long it will last, how far it will go, in what directions with what consequences.

Many factors that the linked article suggests plague the study of psychology and psychiatry seem likely to operate broadly as well in the “social sciences” in general. They could provide fields for potentially fascinating research should anyone competent chose to pursue them.

GOP Re-brands as the New Coke

Here is an excellent YouTube video by Bill Whittle of PJTV Afterburner.

Mr. Whittle makes quite valid points and we — as well as the Grand Obsolete Party (GOP) — should take them (and him) seriously. Will the GOP do so, or simply continue doing more of what hasn’t worked and won’t work again? I expect the latter but would very much like to be pleasantly surprised. Tip of the hat to Geneb527.