Saturday, February 26, 2011

Other Assorted Characters

Due to my recent interactions with one Neal Rauhauser and his various on-line allies and minions, which concluded with my unmasking of the main provocateur Brett Warren, I have been solicited to engage in more of the same.  I have no problem assisting others who have been harassed and harangued legitimately, but I'd point them in the direction of the local police and federal authorities first.  One of the more disturbing interactions I had of late occurred during a phone call, where it was alleged that the Big Bad Wolves of the Left had ganged up on the innocents to deprive them of employment and their reputations.

One example put forth was Anthony Martin.  The general thrust of the discussion was one of why a wall of separation had been put up between the American people and their justice system.  Well, that's really simple in the case of Mr. Anthony Martin: he files hundreds, if not thousands of cases, which are unique in their utter venality.  This is a man with a documented history of Anti-Semitic statements, and any operative or member of the Tea Party who attempts to hitch their wagon to Anthony Martin will be sorely disappointed with and discredited by the result.

Mr. Martin's litigious ways are well known; in fact, they are so well-documented and oft-lamented that the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut issued an injunction barring him from filing further lawsuits without first seeking the leave of that court.  In general, Mr. Martin is everything that I have heard Mr. Rauhauser and his cronies to be, with the only difference being that Mr. Martin is a Republican.  I fully expect him to sue me for this blog article, and to run afoul of the injunction in doing so.

Anthony Martin has an oft-documented and lamented proclivity for suing attorneys who perform the simplest of courtesies for others within the profession.  As a law student, I can attest to the collegial attitude exhibited by most attorneys towards their peers, and even towards students who are mere candidates studying to enter the profession.  Even when you're on the other side of the table, or the courtroom, you tend to restrain the vitriol and invective because you're part of a fraternity.  You work with these people and see them at events; and most importantly, you might need their help one day.  You represent your client to the best of your abilities, but you don't burn bridges in the process.

Anthony Martin, for whatever reason, simply hasn't understood this over the course of his long career.  Out of state attorneys often petition their in-state peers to move their admission pro hac vice, so that they can come into the state where their case has been transferred and litigate on behalf of their client.  So long as you're a generally decent guy, you can find an in-state peer who will assist you towards these ends.   That's exactly what happened in a bankruptcy case, when Martin's opposing counsel asked for this simple favor from David J. Brooks, so that he could come into New York to contest a bankruptcy proceeding.  Anthony Martin decided he wanted to be a jerk about it, and so on June 24, 1982, he sent a letter warning David J. Brooks that his assistance to Martin's opposing counsel, which was neither unusual nor unethical, but simple common courtesy from one attorney to another, would result in professional disciplinary proceedings.  To give you an idea of how Martin operates, he filed his complaint against David J. Brooks on June 24, 1982...the same date he wrote and sent the letter to David J. Brooks.  The complaint, like Martin's case, was dismissed.

You can't go through life acting like a complete ass and not suffer a few consequences.  That was more or less my point with the individuals who were bombarding my Twitter feed with insults, profanity, and clogging my email with pornographic photographs, and it's what I'd say to the individuals who have held up Anthony Martin as one of the professional Left's victims.  Anthony Martin hasn't been crucified by anyone: he assembled his own cross, climbed on it, and handed a loaded nail gun to his opponents by acting like a complete and utter buffoon.

Before Martin left law school and passed the Illinois bar exam, he had proceeded through two cases as a pro se litigant, where he had insulted the presiding judges by calling them insane, and he sought their recusal on the ground that he had sued them in other actions.  That's right: he sued the presiding judges, and then made a motion for recusal.  Not the best strategy for currying favor with the judiciary or the bar if you're a prospective attorney.

Nevertheless, Martin proceeded onward with his legal career, filing cases in such sheer volume that by 1983, the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut would note the following:

"In the annals of American pro se litigants, Anthony R. Martin-Trigona is quite special, if not unique. He may not be the most prolific such litigant in our legal history: the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has already awarded that dubious laurel to the Rev. Clovis Carl Green, said to have filed between 600 and 700 complaints. See In Re Green, 215 U.S. App. D.C. 393, 669 F.2d [**4] 779, 781 (D.C.Cir. 1981) (per curiam). A survey prepared for this court suggests that Martin-Trigona has filed at least 250 suits, though that is probably a conservative figure."  In re Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, 573 F. Supp. 1247; 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13413.

Additionally, the court noted the following:

"Failure to gain admission to the bar did not mean that Martin-Trigona became a stranger to the nation's courtrooms. On the contrary, he has engaged in litigation with zeal, energy and passion that would be the envy of any attorney, and his practice has been as variegated as that of any law firm in the country, including communications, [**7] bankruptcy, contract, environmental, Selective Service, prisoner's rights, [*1248] antitrust, civil rights, housing discrimination, Freedom of Information Act, transportation, and banking cases, among many others." Ibid., 1247-1248.

If an attorney or judge ran afoul of Anthony Martin, he faced the prospect of unraveling lawsuits and disciplinary complaints brought by Anthony Martin in retaliation.  It is not surprising that Mr. Martin has built a reputation for himself as a vituperative attorney with a zeal for using the law and the legal process to bludgeon his opponents into compliance.  Stunningly enough, that's exactly what I've heard alleged about Neal Rauhauser and his cronies.  The difference is that Mr. Martin is put forth as a victim of the Big Bad Left, and Neal Rauhauser is put forth as the Big Bad Left.  I don't agree with it no matter who does it, or to what ends they do it.  It's wrong, and what is more, it is a perversion of our legal process into a means of adjudicating every ugly, silly, and downright childish disagreement among individuals in the most expensive and time-consuming manner imaginable.

Mr. Martin is no victim.  He's a bully.  Mr. Rauhauser is no victim, either.  He's a bully.  No member of the Tea Party ought to associate themselves with the likes of Martin, and no member of the Democratic Party ought to associate themselves with the likes of Neal Rauhauser.  Civil people have no real common ground with such characters, who seek to utilize the law as a means of bludgeoning and cowing their ideological opponents and personal enemies into submission.

I listened last night to a phone call in which the entire sordid mess of the past year and a half was laid out by one of the people I've encountered on Twitter.  One of the other alleged victims of Leftist overreach was Lt. Cmdr. Walter Fitzpatrick, but Lt. Cmdr. Fitzpatrick made his own bed by  trying to storm into a closed grand jury proceeding in order to make a citizen's arrest.  Fitzpatrick argued that the grand jury pool was corrupt owing to the fact that the foreman had served 27 years.  While his assertion may have some merit, storming into a closed grand jury proceeding to make a citizen's arrest does not indicate sound judgment.  Predictably enough, the Monroe County authorities threw Fitzpatrick into jail for his troubles.

This may be seen in the methods they adapt outside of the legal system as well.  Greg W. Howard, when faced with an attack by various Beandogs, a group of vulgar jokesters from Australia, chose to form a group and call it the Wrecking Crew.  The Wrecking Crew then went around Twitter and decided to employ the same tactics previously decried by Howard and others against liberals and those who simply weren't doctrinally pure enough to avoid the label of RINOs.

There are those among us who see the tell-tale hand of conspiracy and George Soros behind every bush, but the fact of the matter is this: if you want power, organize for it effectively.  Go precinct to precinct, quietly and calmly laying the groundwork for seizing county and state party organizations, and stop getting into wars on Twitter.  When the trolls come at you, block them.  Don't respond.  To those who point out the fact that the SPLC and the NAACP have a database of Tea Party figures who are allegedly racist, I say this: so what?  So they have a database of people they malign.  I'm really not deterred.

There are certain matters you shouldn't be publicly discussing, and chief among those matters are 9/11 and the Birther issues, because they are not helpful to the cause of taking America back.  Liberals who go around extolling the virtues of partial-birth abortion and CIA drug connections are rightfully told to shut up by their party, and it's high time that some form of institutionalized management appear with the Tea Party.  The question is quite simple: do you want to be right, or do you want to win?

Furthermore, there are some basic realities people in the Tea Party and Libertarian movements need to face: Glenn Beck is not a reliable source of information.  The man is looking to hawk a product, and that is all.  He has built his brand on the paranoia of gullible people for most of his career, and while he isn't entirely dishonest, the simple truth is that he does not care one whit for how matters turn out in 2012 or beyond.  He's making his money.

You can't quote Glenn Beck and expect to be taken seriously when recruiting people to the cause.  At the same time, you can't talk about social conservatism with those who aren't.  I am deeply conservative in my views towards family life, marriage, and my personal associations.  However, I don't believe that having the government arbitrate morality is the answer.  I firmly believe that a laissez-faire attitude is the answer for morality, precisely because suffering consequences works.

You don't need a law to establish a moral order.  All you need is the removal of any government institution, regulation, or intervention that obviates the natural consequences of immoral behavior.  There should be no safety net for bad behavior in life that rises to the point of incentivizing the bad behavior in question.  Yes, we have bankruptcy laws, but those laws are punitive and simply exist to provide an orderly legal process through which debts can be resolved and discharged.  You still wind up paying the price with the hit to your credit, your reputation, and your ability to do certain things financially.

It is the same with virtually every other form of human conduct.  Legalize the behavior, but don't place government in the position of backstopping or lessening the consequence.  This would have been ideal for the TARP bailout, and an orderly process to unravel and liquidate the assets of the insolvent institutions in questions would have ultimately lessened the duration of our current economic crisis.  There are those who say it would have been the end, and they are completely correct: it would have been the end of an era of financial profligacy and abuse, and we would have all been the better for it.

The Left can accomplish nothing unless you respond to their constant baiting in kind.  There will always be classless people in the world who say nasty things about you and your family, and sometimes those people will go to your employers and the institutions you are affiliated with in order to visit some form of vengeance on you.  If you've been doing your job, and you've maintained a good reputation, most of the time their efforts will be for naught.

However, if you've done what Aaron Proctor did, you'll have a problem.  Mr. Proctor wrote in one of his articles the following statement:

“CAIR is an Islamic group that forwards the false belief that Islam is a 'religion of peace' when it is simply a terroristic world-dominating political movement and not a religion at all.”

I'm from Alabama, and when we come across someone who has a gift for opening their mouth to switch feet, we have a saying: "Boy, that's just dumb."  Let's take a look at Mr. Proctor's statement on its face, and consider the utterly illogical and absurd conclusions one would draw if one took the statement as truth.  Every Muslim that you encounter, from the convenience store owner you purchase your cigarettes from to the hotelier you rent a suite from during a romantic weekend for your wife, is a member of a terroristic world-dominating political movement who means to do you and your freedoms as an American mortal harm.  That's what Aaron Proctor's statement would ultimately mean if it were true.

I have worked for Muslims, Hindus, Jews, whites, and blacks.  Of the lot, the only one I ever saw as being hell-bent on domination and hegemony were the whites.  That's not to say that every white person harbors imperial ambitions of grandeur, because that would be absurd on its face.  Each of us possesses the potential to harbor such nonsensical ambitions, owing to our innate desire to place our philosophy in a place of primacy over all other philosophies and beliefs.  Each of us wrestles daily with the realization that we can only go so far in expressing our beliefs before we become tyrannical.

One of my former employers was Hindu, and his brother and co-owner would come each night to burn incense and pray before a small statue of Ganesh.  I am a Theist who believes in Christ, and there was no offense taken at his nightly venerations in the main office.  You have to be respectful of the faiths and rituals you encounter; it's simply a matter of basic courtesy and civility.  Did we ever discuss religion?  Yes.  But I didn't interrupt his prayers to put my two-cents in on the matter.  It's called respect.

The vast majority of people who believe something different from what you or I believe as Christ-followers are not malignant individuals who seek to subvert and subjugate us.  There's no grand conspiracy to be ferreted out.  My boss's brother was just engaged in worship; for me to have read any subtext into his public veneration of Ganesh which whispered of some subliminal slap at my own beliefs would have been utterly idiotic.

Do I particularly care for CAIR?  No.  I honestly feel that CAIR is counterproductive and inept when it comes to promoting a better image of Islam.  However, I've known more than a few Muslims, and they aren't terrorists.  They don't endorse suicide bombings or dance in ecstasy when the television in their businesses relay images of the latest atrocities committed by Hamas or Hezbollah.  They don't engage in equivocation.  Most of them voice relief that they got out of the Middle East and away from a society where such acts are common occurrences.  They're good Americans, and they just want to live their lives in peace and worship freely according to their own consciences.

Reasonableness and moderation must make a return to our discourse for us to have any chance of forming the kind of broad-based coalition of individuals who can effectuate real change.  We all have common interests and desires, and we all recognize certain problems within our society.  There are, simply put, no damned jobs to be had.  We have 22% unemployment, 8% real inflation, and 12 million homes in a foreclosure overhang.  Bankruptcies are at an all time high.  There was and is rampant corporate fraud in our economy, as the accounting numbers reported by banks are simply false due to the fact that the banks don't have to report their liabilities and bad assets.  The stock market is a mirage, as is the demand for Treasury debt.  We've got rising commodities prices, and North Africa and the Middle East are on fire at the moment.

Americans by and large are not ready for revolution because they haven't felt the pain as acutely as the rest of the world, but our time is coming.  Rising food and energy prices will lead to some very difficult choices and trade-offs.

At the moment, however, we have a government that is seemingly blind to the reality of our economic fundamentals.  The two major parties are the problem, but rather than working to deal with that problem on the ground, many of us are consumed with on-line fights with leftists that aren't going to go anywhere.  You can sit on Twitter all day tweeting away about the Birther movement and decrying any persecution of those who are Birthers, or you can realize that doing so isn't all that prudent from a strategic standpoint.  We need practical advancement towards our goal, which is simply an electoral majority that can deal with the issues of debt, fiscal profligacy, lawlessness in our markets, and the economy at large.  To do that, the establishment of both major parties has to be utterly gutted.

We will not accomplish our goals by devoting our efforts to Neal Rauhauser and other assorted characters.  Our greatest advantage is simple enough: the radical left is devoted tons of energy, resources, and effort to chronicling and documenting the innocuous. What a coup it is to know what Greg W. Howard of Headland, AL is doing online over the course of a day.  What vital intelligence that is!  Whoo, scary stuff indeed, given that Greg W. Howard possesses little real power beyond a significant number of Twitter followers, many of whom are now leftists doing what they can to chronicle and track his every move.

This is some silly shit, people.  I don't really know any other way to put it.  I can (and have) tracked a significant number of names and identities over the past five days, but other than having a log of evidence to present to the authorities if something does occur, or a lot of documentation to defeat any civil litigation, what in God's name is the point?  I keep getting phone calls from grown adults who want to know if I know what they know about so and so who got up and spoke at Netroots in 2009 about being the tip of the spear and how these unwashed masses of Tea Partiers had never been in court for anything other than a traffic ticket.  Let me be really clear: these individuals are going to take care of themselves.

They aren't particularly intelligent or well-organized, and they don't think before they tweet, write, speak, or act.  A number of them are attorneys, which makes their performance all the more stunning, given how utterly churlish and childish their online conduct is.  You can't go around threatening people with physical harm or death, and you can't go around soliciting people to go to the home addresses of those you disagree with politically in order to do them in or harass them without possibly running afoul of your state bar and risking your license to practice law.  The biggest ammunition they've received isn't any money from George Soros or other funders and backers in the shadowy nether-regions of politics: it's from your reactions.

You can't go online or anywhere else, for that matter, lambasting all of Islam or Judaism as some concerted conspiracy without inviting your opponents to use your own words against you in order to solicit your employer to fire you.   Your employer is not bound by the First Amendment.  He or she can fire you if you behavior and conduct outside your workplace offends their sensibilities.  It may not be right, and it may offend your sense of freedom as an American, but it's entirely legal.  Watch your mouth.

There are times when you may reasonably have cause to believe something or say something, owing to the facts as you know them, and you might make a statement that later turns out to be false.  However, when you just talk out of your ass beyond the facts as you know them to draw conclusions which do not follow from the facts, you could be facing liability for defamation.  It's that simple.  As angry as you get, as outrageous and offensive as their behavior is, they only have as much power over you as you cede to them in your reaction.

Take your energies and devote them to actual productive actions which can pay off in 2012 and beyond. Every vacant precinct ought to be occupied by one of us, and every county organization for both parties ought to be held by us.  Every state level party apparatus ought to be directed and controlled by us.  And yes, there ought to be some strategic defaults.  If the nominee stinks, don't waste resources and efforts trying to get them elected.  If the wrong nominee gets the nod, stay within the apparatus and sabotage the hell out of their campaign.  Don't jump ship for a third-party campaign: set a precedent.

I'm going to be very clear about this, and I'll likely offend some of you in the process.  The following groups of individuals should never get a nomination if we have anything to say about it, much less a space on the ballot next to our brand:

1. Birthers.
2. Truthers.
3. Anyone who has ever engaged in legitimately racist speech or conduct
4. Anyone who affiliates with groups who border on racism with their commemoration of the Confederacy and the like.  The South lost.  Get over it.  I'm from Alabama, and I'm not about to sacrifice 2012 so that Hayley Barbour's truculent, corpulent idiocy can get the GOP nomination and a shovel to the face for every 24 hour news cycle between the nomination and the general election for all of his race-related gaffes and associations.  He's done.
5. Homophobes.  If you want to use the government to regulate the type of sex consenting adults have, you aren't a real proponent of small or limited government. End of story.
6. Anyone who has ever talked about the New World Order and been serious while doing so.
7. People who attend conferences or listen to programs that purport to expose the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, and any silly little owl-worshipping conclaves out in the woods of California.
8.  People who get worked up and blog, write emails, or speak out in public about connections between the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, and silly little owl-worshippers who like gay sex in the woods of California.
9.  People who think having an R next to one's name makes one good, while having a D next to one's name makes one bad.
10. People who don't want to go out and get on the ground to take Democratic Party precinct chairmanships because they aren't Republican precinct chairmanships.
11. People who think they can effect change in D.C. by going there to "kick the hell out of the place."  Dumbest advertisement ever.
12.  People who think cutting public unions is the answer, as opposed to cutting the nearly $800 billion in annual defense spending, especially when $600 billion of that defense spending has nothing to do with the War on Terror.  It's just regular operating expenses!
13. People who talk about abortion and gay marriage before the deficit and the national debt.  They'll get themselves elected, but they won't get a damn thing done.
14. People who talk about George Soros.

Here are the people who should be getting nominated and elected:

1. People who commit to cutting the size and scope of the federal government.  That means eliminating whole agencies, not just cutting spending.
2. People who can articulate the specifics of how they would go about doing number one.
3. People who commit to tax reform at the federal level.
4. People who commit to actual enforcement when it comes to the financial sector.
5. People who mean it when they say "No more bailouts, for anyone, ever."
6. People who mean it when they say "The federal government has no business defining marriage."
7. A president who agrees to pardon every single non-violent offender currently behind bars for drug possession.  Any elected official who agrees to support the President in doing so...
8. Candidates who say and mean the following: 1,000 military installments in over 160 countries is just too damn much.
9. Candidates who say and mean the following: healthcare, while not a right, is a basic human need and the government should get out of it altogether in order to ensure its availability to all at a lower cost.  No ban on drug reimportation, no anti-trust exemptions, no Medicare, Medicaid, nothing whatsoever at the federal level touching on healthcare.  If states want to erect their own Medicare, Medicaid, and public options, they have the ability under the 10th Amendment to do so.  It's not the federal government's business.
10. People who take the last sentence from number nine and repeat it over and over again where drugs, education, agriculture, and various other matters are concerned.
11. People who say that the Patriot Act ought to be repealed and the paper record of its existence should be excised completely from the United States Code.
12.  People who say that warrantless wiretaps, indefinite detentions, extraordinary renditions, and any other forms of government overreach along those lines are unconstitutional, illegal, and downright immoral.
13.  People who, once elected, make demonstrable progress on the aforementioned twelve items.

It's time to channel our energy away from distractions and towards total information domination on Twitter, Facebook, and other forms of social media.  That means that we don't merely ignore the progressives and leftists, we simply saturate social media with our articles, our blog posts, our viewpoints, and forms of media that bolster our position.  Don't debate or argue with the Left.  If a leftist tweets you or attempts to contact you, you simply block or ignore them.  Give them nothing.  In fact, tweet a link or two at them.

What is more, the only forms of debate that should be occurring on Twitter are the ones that we arrange. To give you an example, during the healthcare debate, we should have been posing as point/counterpoint and faking a debate for the audience on Twitter.  The inevitable result is that we control how the counterpoint is seen, because one of our guys is the counterpoint.  You can make them look as extreme as you like, or you can make it seem that our side was so effective that they converted.

Each of you should have a least a dozen email addresses, a dozen Twitter accounts, and a dozen Facebook profiles in preparation for what I'm going to call 12 for 2012.   You need to use Amplify and other forms of social media to magnify what you're doing. Delicious, Stumble, and various other forms of social media will enable us to saturate the blogosphere with our narratives on the issues of the day.  Get Tweetdeck or some other form of Twitter application that will enable you to utilize multiple accounts.  If you've got multiple laptops or home computers, use them in concert.  Put your children on them to retweet and share articles, editorials, blogs, and videos.

If you're in one of the battleground states for the 2012 elections, you need to be on the ground as a volunteer and in position to vote for the precinct chairmanships.  We need control on the ground, on the Internet, with total narrative domination being our goal.  We need a Daily Kos for our side, one that can direct the stories and put out the day's narrative for the Tea Party and libertarian side.

Moreover, the doctrinal purity attitude needs to be put to bed. Work with anarchist and minarchists, because they stand against state power and the reduction and/or elimination of government.  Stress your common commitment to getting rid of federal power, dealing with the debt and overspending, and stay away from marriage, abortion, affirmative action, and other issues that could be used to divide the consensus we're trying to build.  Anyone who tries to pin you down on those issues should be discarded altogether as a contact and a friend.  Mass block them, and excise them from herd.

Additionally, we need a realistic attitude about matters.  Change will take years, if not decades.  Seventy years of progressivism is not going to be rolled back in one two-year cycle.  We may find that the House seats we took two years ago need to be retaken or crippled in the upcoming election.  Don't get upset about the idea of kneecapping Scott Brown in an electoral sense.  Even if a Democrat wins his seat, they do so as a candidate with no seniority whatsoever.  Moreover, if we've done our job, we've put the Democrat we want up for the nomination, because we're in the Democratic Party as well as the Republican Party.  Don't underestimate the power of a third party challenge to split the vote in close districts.  Sign up the Green Party, Conservative Party, Natural Law Party, and Libertarian Party types, help them get on the ballot and draw away votes from the incumbents or the establishment picks.  If you have to, get nihilistic and just try to cripple the eventual winner by making him or her go through the mud to get to the gold.  The injuries sustained in a hard-fought election can be critical to reducing an official's ability to govern effectively even after they win.  Prolonging the narrative from that bruising campaign and developing it by magnifying every gaffe and miscue will only serve our purposes in the next election.

I'll be writing more about this in the future, but for now, we need to be developing our strategies and goals with an eye towards making ourselves as amorphous and hard to pin down as the Beandogs and Rauhauser types. Stay away from the conspiracy theories and the public ramblings!  Good night, and good luck.















                                                                    

Barney, Barney, Barney...What Were You Thinking?

Friday, February 25, 2011

Federalist Papers in Chinese 在中国联邦党人文集


联邦党人文件是有助于我们个人权利政府和有限政府的共和形式的发展这是我希望你会发现链接中有利于形成对如何实现人的自由为您自己的想法

联邦党人文集

聯邦黨人文件是有助於我們發展一個共和政體與個人權利和有限的政府。這是我希望你會發現鏈接中有利於形成自己的想法如何實現自由,你的人。

聯邦黨人文集

我离开您,从我们的独立宣言的摘录:

当在人类活动的过程,有必要一个民族必须解除其与另一个民族之间的政治并承担起地球的权力,独立与平等的站,其中自然法则与自然的意旨,接受人类的尊重,他们的意见,要求申报的原因,出于他们的分离。

我们认为这些真理是不言而喻的:人人生而平等,他们是造物主赋予他们若干不可剥夺的权利,其中包括生命权,自由权和追求幸福.--为了保障这些权利,各国政府才在人们中间产生被统治者的同意,他们的正当权力, -当任何形式的政府一旦对这些目标具破坏,这是对广大人民的改变或废除它,以建立一个新政府铺设等原则基础和组织权力的方式,因为他们才最有可能获得他们的安全和幸福。


我離開你這一點,並摘錄從我們的獨立宣言

在這一過程中人類活動,有必要一個民族必須解除政治譜帶已連接他們與他人,與假設的權力,地球,以獨立平等的站到法律自然與自然的意旨,接受意見的尊重,人類要求他們一定要把原因宣布,出於他們的分離。

我們認為這些真理是不言而喻的:人人生而平等,他們是造物主賦予他們若干不可剝奪的權利,其中包括生命權,自由權和追求幸福.--為了保障這些權利,各國政府才在人們中間產生的正當權力來自被統治者的同意-如果遇有任何形式的政府變成損害這些目的,它是人民的權利改變或廢除它,以建立一個新政府,奠定基礎,這些原則和組織其權力形式,對他們才最有可能獲得他們的安全和幸福。

Federalist Papers in Arabic الأوراق الفيدرالية باللغة العربية

على الرابط أدناه ستساعدك على الوصول إلى الإنترنت الأوراق الفيدرالية، وترجم إلى اللغة العربية. وكانت هذه الوثيقةالهامة لتنميتنا الحرية وتقرير المصير هنا في أمريكا ، وآمل أن تجد أنه من المفيد والمفيد. نصلي من أجل نجاح الخاص بك كما كنت النضال من أجل الحرية الخاصة بك.



PDK Forces Fire on Protesters in Kurdistan

في كردستان، وقد أدى الفساد وعدم الكفاءة من جانب الحكومة على الاحتجاجات والانتفاضات من أجل الديمقراطية، تماما كمارأينا في تونس، مصر، المغرب، اليمن، الامارات العربية المتحدة والبحرين. الناس تعبوا من حكوماتهم ، والخوف لا تردعيعد لهم من السعي حقهم في تقرير المصير الديمقراطي، الذي يمنحهم الله بها الرجل. الحرية لا تأتي من الحكومة ، انها تأتي من عزم الرجال الذين يرفضون أن يكونوا ونفى ما يحق لهم كما خلق الله.

في حين قد تكون على يقين من الموت على أيدي الظالمين الذين المدججين بالسلاح، والذين يطلقون النار مثل الجبناء على جموع المتظاهرين العزل، والموت المؤكد أيضا إذا كان التغيير لا يحدث. الرجل الذي لا يوجد لديه الغذاء لا يمكن ان يعيش.منذ فترة طويلة جدا، وقد استخدمت حكومات الغرب الاستقرار كمبرر لدعم الحكومات الفاسدة والأنظمة القمعية. استقراركاذبة من العقود السبعة الماضية هو التفكك، ومكانها في عزما جديدا وتصميما من بين الناس العاديين والناشئة.

أترككم مع ما يلي، من إعلان الاستقلال، كتعبير عن التضامن والدعم للغضب المشروعة لأولئك الذين يكافحون من أجل الحرية والبقاء على قيد الحياة ضد الأنظمة القمعية والفاسدة في جميع أنحاء شمال أفريقيا والشرق الأوسط :

عندما تكون في مسار الأحداث البشرية، يصبح من الضروري للشعب واحد بحل العصابات السياسية التي لها صلة لهم معآخر، وتحمل بين القوى من الأرض، ومحطة مستقلة وعلى قدم المساواة التي قوانين الطبيعة والطبيعة الله تؤهلهم، والاحترام اللائق لآراء البشر يتطلب أنها ينبغي أن تعلن الأسباب التي تدفع بهم إلى الانفصال.

ونحن نحمل هذه الحقائق لتكون بديهية، ان كل الناس خلقوا متساوين ، وأنهم وهبوا من خالقهم مع الحقوق غير قابل معينة، أنمن بين هذه هي الحياة والحرية والسعي وراء السعادة.-- ذلك لتأمين هذه الحقوق ، تتشكل الحكومات بين الرجال ، وتستمدسلطاتها العادلة من موافقة المحكومين، -- وهذا كلما أي شكل من أشكال الحكم لتدمير هذه الغايات، فمن حق الشعب أن يغيرهأو يلغيه، ومعهد الحكومة الجديدة ، لا يجوز وضع تأسيسه على هذه المبادئ وتنظيم سلطاته في هذا الشكل، كما يبدو لهم على الأرجح إلى تأثير السلامة والسعادة.

وهبوا لكم من قبل الله مع الحق في الإدلاء قبالة أولئك الذين لا تمنحك القدرة على إطعام أنفسكم والعيش في سلام. الحكوماتالشرعية فقط عندما تعترف وتحترم كرامة البشر ، ونشر قوتها للدفاع عن الحريات وحريات المحكومين. يلقي ظلالا منالأغلال والاستيلاء على حريتك. نصلي من أجل لكم والله ينقذكم.


PDK Fires on Protesters in Kurdistan English Version

In Kurdistan, the protests center on grievances with the PDK's corruption and the incompetence that has arisen out of that corruption. Much like the protests throughout North Africa and Yemen, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, Libya, and elsewhere, people are tired of regimes that exist only to promote the power and wealth of a few while ignoring the democratic demands of the many. Freedom is breaking out in the Arab world, and while the security forces and paramilitary thugs of corrupt regimes try in vain to stop the will of the people from being realized, people in the Middle East and North Africa can't afford to eat and live.

While death may be certain at the hands of oppressors who are heavily armed, and who shoot like cowards into crowds of unarmed protesters, death is also certain if change does not occur. A man who has no food cannot live. For far too long, the governments of the West have used stability as a justification for supporting corrupt governments and oppressive regimes. The false stability of the past seven decades is unraveling, and in its place a new and determined resolve among regular people is emerging.

I leave you with the following, from the Declaration of Independence, as an expression of solidarity and support for the legitimate outrage of those struggling for their freedom and survival against oppressive and corrupt regimes throughout North Africa and the Middle East:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


An Open Letter to Neal Rauhauser

Neal,

I don't quite know what to make of you. On the one hand, we have common ground in our concern for individual liberty and the environment. On the other hand, your methods and those methods employed by beandogs and others you send forth are something I simply find abhorrent. However, I don't agree with everything Greg W. Howard does, either. I think if you'd consider where I actually stand on issues like gay marriage, civil liberties, and race, you'd find that we're actually not too far apart. I think where we depart is in our view of those who don't agree with us. I don't consider you evil simply because you disagree with me. I just don't like being subjected to racial epithets and homophobic slurs. I don't consider being a black, Hispanic, or Asian person to be bad, and I don't think people should use language that on its face implies as much. People are people. I don't consider being homosexual, bisexual, or transgender to be bad per se, and I don't think individuals who are should be vilified through slurs and insults.

I am cognizant of the fact that someone might be watching who is gay or a minority, and that is why I hedged my protestations against the homophobic language in particular with the stipulation that if I was gay, I'd own it, because I don't think that there is anything wrong with being gay. I don't think gays should be shamed for it, or subjected to an online environment where others indirectly cause them to feel that way with the language they use. I believe in civility.

However, I also believe in the efficacy of a forceful response to deter those who would seek to employ threats against my well-being and my life. While I will not resort to physical violence unless the threat is immediate and there is no other way, I am not a pacifist. I do believe that individuals who go around online threatening others should lose their privacy and anonymity and be forced to own their actions.

However, I'd like to propose something to you. You have a great many people who re-tweet your material, or who follow your lead. Do you really want to waste that influence on doing battle with Greg W. Howard and others, or do you want to put it to use on something a little more meaningful? We have a common interest at the moment, as events in North Africa and throughout the Middle East are rapidly developing. I want to work on that issue, with the specific intent of keeping America on the sidelines to allow for homegrown democracy in those countries. I also want to tweet links to videos, articles, and documentation that traces the brutality and horrendous rights abuses of the regimes in question.

Additionally, these events have a side effect with great potential impact an area that is of great importance to you, and to me as well. I am a fan of developing the methods and infrastructure necessary to move America away from dependency on fossil fuels. I believe that this will enable the public to have greater self-determination, a higher quality of life, and most importantly, a foreign policy which doesn't center on bolstering totalitarian regimes in order to ensure our access to oil. As gasoline prices rise, we have a unique opportunity on the horizon to make the case for how critical it is to move America towards new energy sources. With the threat of skyrocketing price increases looming, the American consumer is likely to be more amendable to such alternatives.

There are promising new developments that have occurred over the past year. A team out of Purdue University has developed a means of refilling hydrogen which is fast enough to make hydrogen a viable alternative, while eliminating the heat problems that have plagued that particular technology since its inception. Additionally, I believe that there has been a quantum shift in solar power over the past six months, as Lonnie Johnson has developed a solid state heat transfer engine that has improved the energy conversion of solar panels from 30% to 60%. You know Johnson as the inventor of the Super Soaker. With Tata Motors working on a car powered by compressed air, the potential has never been higher to make our case for economically viable sustainable and renewable alternatives to fossil fuels. However, that isn't going to happen if the lot of us are consumed with internecine warfare.

You may feel that Greg W. Howard is a high value target. You may feel that I am. You're wrong. Neither of us are nationally known, and neither of us have any real potential to generate any momentum forward on the issues that matter: greater democratic self-determination throughout the world, and greater progress away from the fossil fuels that currently dominate our energy policy and arguably our defense policy.

It's time to move away from dialogues where the merit is based on who can reference a penis better. Democracy, indeed republicanism and progress towards greater individual freedom and self-determination, requires broad-based consensus. You aren't going to get that with these sorts of methods. In short, you are hardening people you might have some common interests with into polarized camps. I have 750 people who regularly read what I write, and my audience beyond them stands at a potential of 150,000 based on the metrics I've seen through BackType and Klout. Your audience is even greater, and if we begin a dialogue based on mutual interests with a strategic eye towards advancing these issues forward, we can both have what we want.

I have a hard time believing that you're satisfied with the Democratic Party right now, and the reality of the matter is that the Tea Party isn't overwhelmingly happy with the Republicans. You can take a simplistic view towards mattes and lump them all into the same category, but from my conversations, the Tea Party isn't dominated by hardline social conservatives and Dominionists. I grew up with those types dominating the GOP, and I am telling you that we are on the brink of a tremendous opportunity to shift the paradigm away from the Amoral Minority and towards a more centrist sort of voter. Obama is the creature of Wall Street. It is that simple. They funded his ascendancy, and he has handed them and the pharmaceutical industry a virtual wish-list of policies, regulations, and a compliant reality that only extends the Bush Administration's laissez-faire attitude towards abuse and fraud further. Do you really believe in healthcare reform of the sort pushed through in that legislation? It's already been tried in New York in 1980s and it failed. The idea that the Heritage Foundation's proposal was the one taken up by Congress and the Administration is a joke. That legislation wasn't about fixing anything, it was about preserving a broken system and perpetuating it into the foreseeable future.

The world is in the mood for revolution, Neal. We see it in North Africa, in the Middle East, and we've seen it in Iceland and Eastern Europe in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis. With the inevitable arrival of inflation, and higher food prices due to weather, we're going to see more of it. People will endure the depredations of tyrants for a good long while, but when they can't afford to eat or live, they'll draw the line. America isn't totally uncomfortable yet, but between the rise in fuel prices, the inevitable spike in food costs that is coming, America too will be a fertile ground for protest and changes will be possible.

We've got opportunities now, and we've got opportunities arriving in the near future. Squandering those opportunities on pissing matches with each other isn't going to fix anything. You can direct the Beandogs towards getting the message out on North Africa and the Middle East, and I'm working on the #tcot and #tlot folks to do the same. This is an information war, Neal, and right now, we're battling a conceptualization of those democracy movements which posits that every single protest movement in the region will end in Islamic states. The neoconservatives are agitating for U.S. involvement, and for those nascent movements in the region to have any chance whatsoever, we have to eliminate the potential for U.S. involvement and interference. Moreover, social media gives us the opportunity to interact directly with the people on the ground, passing on resources and materials to help them develop their view of democracy and what it ought to be.

We can't work with people who are garden variety sociopaths and resort to physical threats and dick jokes. That isn't serious. Moreover, it's dangerous and stupid. The potential for one or more of them to do something idiotic is too high. I've got eighteen people documented, but what's the point? That time and effort could be spent on the issues I've outlined above. We may not agree on everything, but there are some things I believe we can agree on and work together to accomplish. It's up to you. If you want, I'll take down the posts that reference you and the events of the past week. But I want a commitment to direct the beandogs, wrecking crew, and whoever you have influence on towards a higher dialogue and a facilitation of these aims and goals for North Africa, the Middle East, and the alternative energy concerns I've outlined in this letter.

Cursing at our rivals, insulting each other, and generally denigrating the other side isn't going to work. We have common ground and we can achieve something here if we just agree to meet in the middle. The ball is in your court. I'm willing to let bygones be bygones if you're willing to let bygones be bygones.



Jay Batman

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Southern Poverty Law Center's latest rhetoric against the Constitution, activists and states rights - BlackListed News

Southern Poverty Law Center's latest rhetoric against the Constitution, activists and states rights - BlackListed News

The Philosophy of Liberty in Arabic

بالنسبة لأولئك الذين صب قبالة أغلال الاستبداد في شمال أفريقيا والشرق الأوسط، ربما هذا الفيلم تساعدك على فهم ما يعني الحرية، وكيف ينطبق عليك كأفراد، والأهم من ذلك ، العلاقة بين الحكومة والفرد و له الحريات. ونحن نؤيد هذه المحاولات لكسب الحرية والتحرر

The Philosophy of Liberty

Meeting Young Obama

Meeting Young Obama

Neal Rauhauser and Wingnut Watch

Libya Protestors Murdered By Gadhafi Regime

The following video chronicles the uprising in Libya and documents in graphic detail the murder of Libyans who are fighting for their freedom and self-determination after decades of tyranny under Moammar Gadhafi. Our prayers are with you in this time, and we hope that you prevail in your quest for freedom. We wish our own government would take more action to assist you in throwing off the chains of tyranny, but it seems as though that government is more interested in expropriating the model of Gadhafi in order to bring it here to the United States in the form of indefinite detention, warrantless wiretaps and surveillance, torture, the suspension of due process, and various other abuses against the freedoms and constitutionally protected liberties of American citizens.

May God be with the Libyan people.



Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Reagan: There Is No Such Thing As Left Or Right

The enclosed video is, in my mind, the finest oratorical moment of Ronald Reagan's career, and an indicator of what might have been had he been able to rise to power without the brokers of the GOP establishment checking his ascendancy and preventing or diluting the full implementation of his vision. Reagan was at heart a libertarian, free-market type, and his core principles, articulated throughout his life in speech, were evidenced as such time and time again.

I have at times criticized President Reagan for raising taxes six of the eight years he was in office, and for allowing his underlings to prosecute a war and arms trades in Nicaragua despite two Boland Amendments expressly prohibiting Executive action on the matter. I have also noted that under Reagan, annual average deficits quadrupled from the Carter Administration. I stand by all of these criticisms, because they are true, but I make one caveat: in nearly every area of Reagan's tenure where core principles were compromised, the fingerprints of George H.W. Bush and his backers were everywhere.

When you look to 2012, and you see that by and large, the GOP has capitulated on the presidential race by putting forth a slate of candidates with little name recognition or real national appeal; you can consider that in 2016, Jeb Bush is looming. Friends, whatever we do, we must not make that mistake again. The Bush family knows no loyalty to conservative or libertarian principles; they simply know loyalty to their own bottom line and core interests, and they have repeatedly evinced a tendency for placing those interests above the national interest.

Reagan's gift was in recognizing the enduring appeal of freedom; the Bush family's political genius has been in exploiting our fears and deep prejudices. When it comes to freedom, there is no left or right, for Americans are inherently opposed to the idea of centralized government and the surrender of even more individual self-determination. Where fear and bigotries are concerned, where petty personal prejudices are dominant and of paramount importance, there is the left and there is the right. The Bush family, and the corresponding lineages within the Democratic Party, have always constructed constituencies of resentment in order to build electoral margins of victory. It is my deepest wish to see these constituencies of resentment, rooted as they are in irrational fears, abolished by the realization that we as Americans are united in our commitment to self-determation, individual sovereignty, and liberty.

It is time to reject fear and the notion that government is our salvation. We need no salvation beyond that which we can work out with our own hands, and that which has already been provided by our God. Government, and its expansion and growth over the past forty years, has been and will continue to be the damnation of America and the greatest threat to American exceptionalism. Our enemies do not occupy foreign lands, and we will not be undone by terrorists abroad. The enemy is here, and it seeks to profit from our fear, for fear is the business of government and those who have appropriated it to undo our liberties for their own selfish reasons. We must commit to carry our common principles into action by whatever means necessary in order to purge our nation and our government of these types. The Constitution, with its binding limits on government power, and its near-limitless articulations of individual liberty, is not a mere suggestion. It is a call to arms.

I give you Ronald Reagan, back in his youth and before the convictions and ideals gave way to the bitter cynicism of governance.



Sunday, February 20, 2011

Why Wisconsin Matters

I am on record as opposing Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and advocating the abolition of federal taxes as a whole with the establishment of a VAT tax or flat tax of 18.5%. I've advocated halving the defense budget immediately, closing down our overseas bases, and cutting our nuclear arsenal from 5,000 plus warheads to just 300 warheads. I've advocated for the abolition of the Department of Education, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Department of Agriculture, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the Department of Health and Human Services, and various other departments within our federal government. I've argued that most crimes should be left to the states to define, prosecute, and punish. I've presented a 20 year plan to phase out Social Security which would raise the retirement age and cut eligibility for those who have $25,000 or more in income from retirement savings or investment plans external to Social Security. In short, when it comes to advocating for fiscal austerity, I have bona fides that equal or exceed those of any conservative or libertarian.

I've also articulated a plan which would enable the achievement of those goals, from the president unilaterally withdrawing from various treaties which provide Congress with the power to regulate drugs, food, and various other matters that do not arise out of any enumerated power provided for by the Constitution. I've pointed to court precedents which essentially state that the president's decision to do so is a non-justiciable political question that the courts cannot adjudicate.

When I look at Wisconsin, what I see is not an attempt at fiscal austerity. It's a strike at the right of individual workers to organize in order to get a better deal for themselves and their families from employers. There is no per se right of workers to organize in the Constitution, but the fact that rights are not enumerated does not mean that they do not exist. The Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution explicitly says as much. While I don't particularly like the idea of closed shops, nor do I agree with forcing every incoming employee to join the on-site union, those employees who want to organize in order to get a better deal ought to be able to do so.

Governor Scott Walker has a long history of antagonism towards unions of all kinds, and let us be clear in saying that public unions are but one of many contributing factors to the fiscal crisis engulfing our state and municipal governments. Left out of all of the hubbub and rigamarole din that has come to define these debates is any sense of obligation and honor: state and municipal governments made promises, promises which the larger electorate did not object to in good times. Now, in the face of hard times, rather than honoring their word, state and municipal governments are looking to back out of their word. What is worse, they are building constituencies of resentment in the process. You can blame unions all you want, but nobody held a gun to the state and forced it to expand its mandate into everything from garbage collection to education to day care to conservation and many other areas and concerns.

Scott Walker isn't talking about reducing the size or the authority of state government in Wisconsin. He's talking about eliminating the ability of his state employees to effectively reply and mobilize against the elected representatives and unelected bureaucrats who set their wages and benefits. Left out of the debate is the fact that two-thirds of Wisconsin corporations get a free ride. They use the roads, the infrastructure, and the services of Wisconsin's state and local government. They just don't pay anything for the benefits they extract.

Mind you, I'm someone who has vociferously argued against corporate income taxes at the federal level as an unconscionable means of layering costs onto workers and consumers in the form of lower wages and higher prices. However, it seems to me that part of the problem with deficits at the state level throughout this country is the fact that state governments cut taxes without cutting expenditures in the early part of the decade. It was blatant mismanagement, and they created the problem which threatens to sink their bond ratings today. States knew that they had to meet this obligations, they knew that they had pledged money to pensions and taken on future commitments, and they knew that by cutting their own revenues, they'd be forcing themselves to face this day of reckoning.

I would go so far as to say that states intentionally created this mess. Unions could have been told no at any point over the past thirty years, but state governments did not do so. Local governments did not do so. Instead, local and state officials engaged in a kind of underhanded subterfuge, pursuing tax and budgetary policies that were unsustainable on their face, and today they want to act like unions and public employees are at fault. It is time to look these state officials in the eye and tell them that they aren't going to be able to shuffle the blame off on union employees. We don't elect union employees to manage our finances in government. We elect representatives, senators, and governors. We elect various commissioners and heads of departments at the state and local level. It's your fault. You made those decisions to cut taxes without corresponding cuts in expenditures, and you didn't save for a rainy day to offset the lost revenue and inevitable deficits that arise from such wanton fiscal irresponsibility.

Wisconsin matters because it is a two-step by state officials looking to sidestep the blame for their own role in the matter. It matters because an apathetic, disconnected electorate whose members deferred far too long to the bastards in charge without ever holding them to any tough standards for their accounting methodologies will evade accountability as well. Wisconsin matters because we're once again playing the politics of blame, and we're scapegoating the wrong party.

It's what we always do, and if we're ever going to have real change in this country, we need to look in the mirror at the real problem: us. We wanted something for nothing for thirty years, and we got what we wanted. We got cheap debt, easy money, and we didn't ask too many questions about how that easy money was being made and at what ultimate expense our debt fueled lifestyles were being made until it all came crashing down. Washington is merely an extension of our own fiscal profligacy.

Many of you reading this have credit card debt that is astonishing. You're drowning under a home mortgage you can't afford, for a home you shouldn't have taken on in the first place. Your values are connected to what you have rather than your core beliefs. You took the thirty pieces of silver every year in the form of earned income credits, child tax credits, and the like, and most years, you got more back in a tax refund than you ever paid in to begin with. There is no free lunch. Somebody always pays.

Americans were fine during the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush Administrations so long as somebody else was footing the bill. We knew we had two wars to prosecute, and a Medicare prescription drug benefit to pay for, but we didn't give a damn so long as China was financing the debt that resulted from such overextension. Give us our tax credits and our stimulus checks, and we won't be asking too many damn questions.

In the aftermath of what took place, we can blame everyone else, but the truth of the matter is that we made the mess. The unions were part of the issue, but it's time for Americans from every walk of life to accept their share of the credit for what happened over the past forty years of uninterrupted deficits and rapidly expanding government. You may not have supported all of the additional programs, you may have cursed your television screens when the news talked about the exploding deficits and the new government agencies, but you didn't do anything to effectively oppose and check the spread of government and the explosion of spending.

Somebody else always has to pay or sacrifice, and look at where that attitude has gotten us: we're all going to pay or sacrifice in a few years, because in a few years, when interest rates do inevitably go up, the cost of servicing a $15-$18 trillion national debt is going to explode in ways you can't even fathom. Tax hikes are going to be imperative when that day comes. You're not going to have a choice, or the choice you have will be as follows:

1. Print more money and issue more Treasuries to pay old debts off, and in the process devalue your existing money supply, thereby raising prices for basic goods sky high; or,
2. Raise taxes, thereby siphoning money from private investment and the purchase of private sector goods so vital to a consumer economy to pay off public debt.

You don't have time to entertain the stupidity that's taking place in Washington or Wisconsin. I cannot stress this enough: you might feel that you can afford to sit by while government shuts down and our elected leaders play their game, and you might feel that by doing so, Obama is really being shown something. Obama is too stupid to get the point. Moreover, most of your GOP leadership is too stupid to get the point.

They don't know the Constitution; otherwise, we wouldn't have just spent over a trillion dollars in treasure on two undeclared wars. They don't give a damn about the free market or the long-term economy, nor do they understand simple arithmetic, because they just gave out over $23 trillion in bailouts, loans, and guarantees to bail out a mortgage market worth a total of $21.5 trillion. They don't have enough common sense between 537 elected officials to come to the conclusion that $1.4 quadrillion in derivatives is simply paper and ink that cannot possibly be redeemed or salvaged. It's time to call those supposed assets that they are: absolutely worthless in real terms.

Whether you're a Republican, a Democrat, or an Independent...even a libertarian, anarchist, or minarchist, no matter what you are, as an American, you have sacrificed the luxury of time with forty years of fecklessness, apathy, and ineffectiveness that enabled your country's leaders to compromise American greatness. It's time for you to start realizing that 2012 is irrelevant. We need change now, and our current slate of leaders isn't going to give us the change we need. They're just going to find a scapegoat to bear the blame.

Let me be very clear: you need to be out in the streets. We have 22% real unemployment, we've got 8% real inflation, and we've got a rigged stock market driven by low participation and liquidity injections by the Federal Reserve. No one is buying our debt besides the Federal Reserve and the foreign and domestic financial institutions the Federal Reserve is handing money to in order to hide the fact that America, like every other country around the world, is insolvent. We have price shocks on the way in wheat, sugar, and energy due to monetary policy mismanagement and weather events around the world. Unions didn't do this. Our government did it, and to a degree, we did it because we didn't hold government to an account for the past forty years of profligate spending and overreach at all levels of government.

Wisconsin matters because the same tired patterns are emerging: people are angry and looking for somebody to blame, and the government understands that if it doesn't give the electorate someone to blame, the government itself will bear the blame. Don't buy into this. Suck it up, and realize that there is still time to act. America isn't dead, despite the best efforts of her government to kill her off. We don't have time to play tea party and cavort around with cute slogans. Every last elected official in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere has to go. They have to go before 2012, and we need open elections that are not under the control of the Republican and Democrats.

What is more, when the smoke clears, and you have to choose between candidates, make them show you how they are going to implement their solutions. It's one thing to have a goal, but most candidates don't have anything resembling a real roadmap to get to that goal. When I authored The Blueprint, I specifically spelled out a 20 year plan to eliminate Social Security by raising the retirement age, cutting eligibility to those who had no other means, and gradually moving Social Security onto the general budget in order to eliminate withholding. I said what I wanted to do, and how I would do it.

When I advocated eliminating specific government agencies, I specifically said how to do it through the Executive Branch by unilaterally withdrawing from the treaties and agreements which gave the federal government the legal foundation for authority over the areas or concerns in question. I said what I wanted to do, and how I would go about doing it. Moreover, I put forth a legal foundation for doing it that has been upheld in the courts.

We can brook no further churlish debates or exchanges. America is on the brink. It is that simple. We have come to a place where forty years of fiscal overreach, government expansion, and outright profligacy at all levels of our society have led us to the current day: the bill has come due. We can't afford to stand around pointing the finger at each other, or exchanging bitter recriminations. Actions have to be undertaken, and when our fiscal house is set in order, you can go back to being Republicans and Democrats. But for now, you need to realize that every American man, woman, and child is going to feel the brunt of what is to come if we don't start getting something done within the next two years. The unique advantages and, yes, privileges that make America what it is for her citizens are being sacrificed and immolated to the narcissism and nihilism of partisans in Washington, D.C., many of whom have had their entire careers to get something done. They didn't do anything beyond extending the status quo with obstructionist tactics and shutdowns. It doesn't work to solve the structural issues at the heart of our problem: government has done too much for too long, and it didn't adopt as a pay as you go strategy for the roles it undertook over the past forty years.

We can solve these problems without demanding that workers sacrifice their right to assemble and organize in order to gain a better deal. Unions across this nation are making unprecedented concessions, because they understand that their survival depends on it. However, the idea that we're going to hand $23.7 trillion in loans, guarantees, and outright giveaways to the financial sector while demanding that public employees sacrifice collective bargaining is an obscenity. Even as someone who opposes public unions and can rattle off a litany of their sins over the past forty years, I can see the fundamental unfairness at play here. We gave the financial sector a bailout without once demanding that Goldman Sachs and others cut a better deal with municipal governments staggering under the derivatives deals offered to them in good times by Goldman and other institutions, and now, as municipal and state governments are taxed to pay for the "shitty deals" brokered by banks that are only alive as a result of public assistance, you want to eliminate the right of public employees to organize and bargain collectively? Are you serious?

You can argue that Goldman and its traders are the John Galts if you're a Randian, but the fact of the matter is that Goldman and its traders only produce ever greater blizzards of paper securities that aren't worth a damn thing. It's a mirage, and it isn't the kind of production that builds jobs or maintains economies. Why would we pour tens of trillions of dollars after that type of malinvestment?

Get real. Get in the streets, and realize that there are more important things in life than your own narrow interests. If you love your country, and you care about its future course, get out in the streets this week and fight for that country. Demand change in the streets. Start organizing amongst yourselves, and start fighting for real change rather than the cosmetic nonsense being offered in D.C. and various state capitols. Forget shutting the government down; show your elected representatives that you are prepared to shut the entire country down in order to effectuate real change with open ballots that aren't controlled by the Republicrat regimes.

The problem is, and has always been, our government. Do not fall for the games in Wisconsin and elsewhere. No public union handed $23.7 trillion in loans, guarantees, and giveaways to the financial sector. No public unions expended $1 trillion to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan while our own infrastructure was corroding. Stop misallocating the blame. Wisconsin matters because it is an indicator of whether or not the American people can get snowed again by their leaders. Don't fall for it.