Tempted…

On Iraq, I have to say I am tempted to advocate committing our military to suppressing the rebellion.  For the most part, I support keeping out of other countries problems.  Iraq is a perfect example that this rebellion is the result of what happens to  a corrupt government in that part of the world.  So why the temptation?  PINOBK!  People In Need Of being Killed.  Terminated with extreme prejudice.

If we had the ability to take out the Nigerian School Girl kidnappers without endangering innocents, who wouldn’t want that?  Should it be our problem? NO!  Should we be the worlds policeman?  NO!  But after 9/11, I can see the justification of a war on terrorism.  On Iraq or Nigeria, I would not agree with any nation building.  And with Iraq, I see an especially tempting target.  Terrorist is large groups, concentrated in US military vehicles left for the “friendly” Iraq government.  Hard to imagine a better situation where we might kill thousands of terrorists in one short exchange.

But, that is not what I would do, if it were my choice.  We are allying ourselves with Iran & Syria in fighting these terrorists?  Israel has said it is better to take no action.  In what world can it make sense to do what our enemies want and the opposite of what a close ally suggests?  And finally, with our track record in the Middle East, why would we expect any action we take to turn out good for our interests?

But yes, I am tempted.  A couple of articles with several links…

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/06/iraq_follies__what_possibly_could_go_wrong.html

 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/23/weinstein-the-iraq-silencers/

Advertisements

Comments

  1. gmanfortruth says:

    I am not tempted in the least. I wouldn’t want our troops being forced to fight for Obama and his piss poor foreign policy. More importantly, we’ve done way to much damage over there based on government lies. We should stay out, totally. 🙂

  2. gmanfortruth says:
  3. One wonders if the entire US intelligence apparatus, top to bottom, ought to be taken out and shot. They would then be replaced with about 8,000 bright, computer savvy 10 year olds.

    My question, was there a secret treasure map we didn’t find?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10910868/Iraq-crisis-Obama-may-launch-air-strikes-without-Congress-amid-calls-for-Maliki-to-go-live.html

  4. Yet, where is your anger when Israel kidnaps 250 Palestinian children?

    According to a 2013 report by the UN’s Children’s Fund, Israel is the only country in the world where children are systematically tried in military courts and subjected to “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.”

    Over the past decade, Israeli forces have arrested, interrogated, and prosecuted around 7,000 children between 12 and 17, mostly boys, at a rate of “an average of two children each day,” UNICEF said.

    • Flaggy, you and I are worlds apart on Israel/Palestine. I’m they guy that says if you go to my neighbors house and shoot at me, I will shoot back. I understand my neighbor may object, but he had better control his house guests. If a “child” throws a rock or attacks people for being Jewish, don’t expect tears from me on his treatment. If my kids tried to seriously injure or kill someone out of hate, they would face the consequences for their actions.

      “where is your anger when Israel kidnaps 250 Palestinian children?” Not aware of this. Link?

      • Black Flag® says:

        World’s apart? Not according to your dialogue.

        The Jews came and stole the Palestinians home. You claim they have a right to shoot back.

        They do. But because you are blinded by propaganda, you believe the criminal is the victim.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          To simplistic. What comes 1st, the chicken or the egg? 4,000, 2,000, 1,000 years ago. Let’s just take the start of the conflict just during our lifetime.

          https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war

          King Hussein from Jordan said it many years ago about the plight of the Palestinian peoples. Palestine is not just the area of the current State of Israel, but extends well into what are parts of the States of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Eygpt. Those States are unwilling to cede parts of what was Palestine to the Palestinians. That was said when he was sending in the troops and tanks to push out the refugees from Jordanian territory.

          I also remember the Arab States telling the Palestinians in the Jewish territories to leave and we will exterminate the Jew and when you come back you can have it all. Needless to say they lost in 1948 and gave up their rights to return. Those that stayed are citizens with their property.

          We can get into the Six Day War in 1967 and the 1973 Yom Kippur War another day.

          • It is an empty ply to reach into deep history – then give it all back to Egypt… but no surprise you won’t go there.

            No Palestinian “gave up his rights” because some Arab said so. Clue in, Palestinians are not Arabs.

            It is a war crime to seize territory by conquest since Nuremberg.

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              BF semantics….deep history…I’m talking our lifetime……THE 5 arab states, call them what you will, and the palestinians attacked the Israeli territories after the division of the british mandate into two sections in 1947…..sorrry but the attackers LOST.
              Reading that UNICEF has ruled that arresting a child is kidnapping, ergo Israel kidnapped Palestinian children, after commiting what????? How about the “children” arrested for commiting a crime here, tried and sent to jail or some incarceration……sure is a hell of a lot more then 250.

              • Your historical knowledge is flawed.

                The precursor of the Israeli Army, the Irgun, launched their assaults on the Palestinians, seizing territory throughout the area.

                I must remind you that the Jewish settlers in the region are not from that region – they were a Russian sect that moved there.

              • …as if your moral relativism is some sort of argument….
                “We do more evil, therefore, their evil is not evil…”

              • Three of the largest groups:

                (1) “Lithuanian” (i.e. non-hasidic) haredim of Ashkenazic (i.e. “Germanic” – European) origin; (2) Hasidic haredim of Ashkenazic (mostly of Eastern European) origin; and (3) Sephardic (including mizrahi) haredim, formed in the Iberian (Spain) Peninsula.

              • Between 1882 and 1903, approximately 35,000 Jews immigrated to the southwestern area of Syria, then a province of the Ottoman Empire. The majority, belonging to the Hovevei Zion and Bilu movements, came from the Russian Empire with a smaller number arriving from Yemen

                Between 1904 and 1914, 40,000 Jews immigrated mainly from Russia ….

                Between 1919 and 1923, 40,000 Jews, mainly from Eastern Europe…

                Between 1924 and 1929, 82,000 Jews arrived, many as a result of anti-Semitism in Poland and Hungary….

                Between 1929 and 1939, a new wave of 250,000 immigrants arrived.. mostly from Eastern Europe…

              • Wait…I’m confused…I thought you were all for immigration….

                🙂

              • 100%.

                But that gives no right to any man to kill or steal, no matter what religion

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                You know…..this argument can go on forever. That is why I said what comes first “the chicken or the egg” pandering to your philosophical mind, the only way to solve all these bullshit aggreavements is for everyone to vacate where we currently are and travel to Olduvai Gorge in Kenya and do a global scale “Oklahoma Land Rush”. Other than the european genetic influences on the Jewish people, a religion not a race, i’d bet that there would have been literally no genetic differences between those that are jewish and those that are palestinian. They were tribes from the same region, constantly pushing and prodding, winning and losing, just different religions or tribal beliefs. Over what 4-5 millenium. You by the way, expanded the argument beyond the 1948 criteria set for the discussion. Proving or disproving theories have to be contained to a limited set of criteria. Go back 5 years and its this, 10 its that, 20 and its a wash. And ultimately nothing is accomplished or solved and the problem becomes a circle jerk and continues without resolution.

                Honestly force and the willingness to commit violence is the one true realism in national territorial retention and control. All this legal mumbo jumbo that siezing territory by force is a war crime. To me retaining territory by force is logically the same war crime. I’ll trust you on the “legal” post WWII law, but it’s still crap. The law of nature will and alway prevail. There are any number of “International Laws” about territory. One being that if a majority of the people in a country/region want to secede and create a new country it’s legal. Just have a vote and it doesn’t have to be vote involving the whole country from which they wish to leave from. Quebec is a great example of the attempts to secede from Canada, but always just falling short. Recently several Balkan regions did it and our government instantly recognized them just to tweek Russia. China seizing Tibet. Now what do you believe will be the outcome if the vast majority of Texans voted to secede. All the wrath of the US Federal government will decend on them. Lincoln didn’t have a leg to stand on legally, but once it became an armed insurrection in Charleston, poof or should I say kaboom. England would have openly recognized the South if they had renounced slavery. The British government would have been in a hard place given their laws and efforts to erradicate the slave trade.

              • Black Flag® says:

                Dale,

                It “goes on forever” because you are steeped into an evil mythology of some Jewish claim that forgives criminal states.

                Why does 1948 “suddenly” be the point you start your argument? You mean that all the theft, murder and villainy that occurred prior should be “pushed aside” and ignored???

                So, I can kill your family and steal your house then claim “well, let’s not go back an hour ago and start here – it’s my home now and your attempt to take it back is now “evil”!!

                How obtuse….

                It is a war crime That is why they hung all the Axis leaders who survived!!

                So now you want to forgive war crimes because … “well, force always wins”.

                What majority in Israel? They were always a minority, and by the way, they were given landbut that is not the Zionist plan, Dale

                The Zionist plan has always been to seize the lands of Ersatz Israel. You better get some background before you pontificate on this region. You are – like millions of others – sadly ignorant of the background, history, and doctrine around the creation of Israel and its politics.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Flag, your example of immigration of Jews makes your reasoning for open borders here a contradiction. Sorry, that’s how I read it. Open borders bad for the Middle east in the 1900’s but great for the USA now?

              • Black Flag® says:

                Gman,

                “Flag, your example of immigration of Jews makes your reasoning for open borders here a contradiction.”

                The exact opposite.

                In all the immigration, it brought productive people to the region.

                It was when the British began to restrict the immigration that the problems began – it turned the Jews into 2nd class citizens under British Imperialism – made them criminals – and with no surprise, they turned the violence onto the British.

              • Black Flag® says:

                Dale,

                Whether a population, like the US South Independence, lose that independence by force – and then acquiescence to the threat of violence to maintain that lose does not suddenly make that violence a right or just.

                Under the principle you proscribe, a robber who takes your wallet because you did not fight back therefore had a right to take your wallet. Do you think that?

              • Black Flag® says:

                So, if you think the robber, by your acquiescence to his violence had a right to your wallet, you must equally believe that most of the violent “criminals” in society aren’t really criminals at all, and should be admired.

                But if you think otherwise, that no matter the acquiescence to violence, violence action upon the innocent is not a right, what the heck are you arguing? Just because a “State” exercises this violence that suddenly the principle changes?

              • Black Flag® says:

                Dale,
                …or, is it that you hail the barbarian creed that whatever is “good” for me is good, and be damned whatever harm to others?

              • Black Flag® says:

                I ‘woke up’ to the Palestinian issue decades ago in High School.

                I was volun-told to represent my school in a “Student UN” conference where participating schools sent students to a “Student” UN conference, which was hosted by the then Under sectary of the United Nations.

                I was given a “nation” to represent – Indonesia – and a debate topic; “the Palestinian situation” as it was back in the ’70s. Indonesia was one of the few supporters of Palestinian cause at that time.

                I, like most here, was steeped in the mythology of Israel, and I was quite disappointed and disturbed to argue against this mythology.

                But as a studious participant, I researched my position …. and found the myth that was given by rote to me to be wrong.

                It was one of the first seeds planted towards my further, later, enlightenment of the mass propaganda that dominates the mindset of so many.

                My speech to this group was spectacular. By the end of the speeches at this conference, and the weight of my presentation and argument, the body had voted in massive majority in favor of Palestinian rights where prior, its was merely a 5 to 95 against.

                At the closing dinner, I was the only student asked to sit at the head table with the Undersecretary.

                It is a horrific shame that so few actually do the research while, simultaneously, hold hard to root principles.

          • “Those that stayed have their property”

            I guess do know little of the illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank?

      • Black Flag® says:

        PS: I posted the source – go and search UNICEF

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Correct if I’m wrong, but UNICEF is an offshoot of the UN, who claims global warming is real, which most of us know is BS. I would also like a link and see some media coverage of this. The alternative media is much better that the MSM, but I have read nothing. Not saying it isn’t true, but if you want the public to raise hell, they need to know from somewhere other than the UN.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Sorry, Flag….you are not grasping at all my logic or illogic according to your point of view. Human nature is not nor ever will be driven by logic. It is driven by ones experiences and is random and reacts potentially differently at different times under seemingly similar conditions. I again say, “chicken or the egg” or Is there sound if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear it?…..Or how do 3 blind men descrbe an elephant? All philosophical logical arguments.
          My argument would ultimately have lead to a topic discussed ad-nauseum about the willingness of the government to do violence upon the people. I do not know of many laws that are not backed up with a threat of violence.

          Joe Biden in his presidential run in ’88 really advocated against the individual and how the people had to suppress and give up their will to be free or an individual for the community or collective, so to speak.
          Activist law which really took root during the 70’s stating the law can solve any wrong, not neccesarily a crime, but a wrong or percieved injustice. Preached everyone is a victim. Therefore there is a wrong to be put right. That assumes people operate logically and the same. They do not and never will and the laws keep exponentially expanding in the attempt to make people operate like a microchip and to expected designed result . Put in the given stimulus, and a right acting chip goes + an incorrect one does not. I’m over simpifying but I hope you see my point.

          I had a guy work for me that had the most logical mind I’ve ever seen. It operated like a well functioning microchip. All +’s and -‘s. He was the best electronics trouble shooter I’ve ever been around. Ultimately made a great career at AMD. Now, I kept him in a box with the label “in case of fire, break glass” but I also NEVER let him near a client. He was so demeaning to their experience and knowledge, they literally would come close to filing charges. I or some one else who understood human nature and the random effect they had on things around them, always acted as the go between. That was the only way he operated effectively. Because everyone around him that had direct contact would dig in their heels and walk away even if their problem was not solved. They’d rather have their issue unresolved that to continue their contact with him. He never could understand that you say one thing to one person, and there is no reaction, say the same thing to a black man and he may kill you. That is how people felt about him. He requested to marry an Italian lady. Back in those days you had to get approval from the command, much less a foreign national, much less having a brother who was a communist. I disapproved the chit, but he was getting out in 4 weeks so it was a moot point. He only dealt in logic, she came from pure latin emotion. The marriage lasted 6 months. I know because I had to deal with them again once I came back to the states. It turned my life upside down. And never quite got back upright and that was 35 years ago.

          All parties in the Palestine,Judea, region have legitimate grievences going back many millenium. It will not be solved, logically or by passing any law especially one passed by the UN or imposed by foreign elements. That spawns even more. The only resolution is for one to eliminate the other, cold and cruel by true.

          I do believe the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during the 20’s onward actively pushed for an independant “Arab” Palestinian Islamic State. To me that implies there was NONE even at that time. That certainly preceeded any Jewish state. He actively helped the Waffen SS to recruit Bosnian Moslems in their drive to exterminate the Jews in eastern europe. Part of his grievence was not only with the planned Jewish homeland at some future time, but also with the King of Jordan, who planned on annexing the agreed upon “Arab/Palestinian” portion of the partitioned British Mandate. Which, directly ties to King Hussein’s comments, which I stated before. Who did the Israeli’s take the west bank from. Not Palestinians but the Kingdom of Jordan. Gaza was part of the agreed upon Palestinian territory. Who did Israel take it from, Eygpt. The Mufti when trying to set up a government in Gaza had to flee not from the Israeli’s but from Gamal Nassar when the mufti did not fit into Nassars plans of a pan arab league.

          If scholars who make it their life’s work to solve the Palestinian/Israeli problem can not, neither you, nor I or anyone on this blog can know anything but a minicule portion of the issue. It’s describing the elephant by holding the tail. And I hate to say any event that was sponsored by the UN who continually finds Israel at fault at all times and never finds fault with the Palestinians. A failed marriage takes TWO parties.

          Now did you truly win the debate through irrefutable logic and facts collected in a limited time span to prepare, or did you know the disposition of the crowd/jury and play to them. It is part of the strategy of winning a debate. A good lawyer by being better prepared than his or her opponant can get a guilty person off.

          • Dale
            “Sorry, Flag….you are not grasping at all my logic or illogic according to your point of view. Human nature is not nor ever will be driven by logic.”

            It has nothing to do with ‘logic’.
            It has to do with principles.

            You are supporting a set of actions based on a perverse set of principles.
            When this set of perverse principles are exposed, you run for cover claiming “human nature”.

            No, sir. Your perverse principles still apply and are not dismissed by your empty rhetoric.

          • Dale,
            “UN who continually finds Israel at fault at all times and never finds fault with the Palestinians”

            Because, sir, it is Israel who invaded, seized, and holds Palestinian territory, not the other way around.

            Since your principles are perverse, you argue “well, gee, they are angry that their families are slaughtered, pushed off their land, surrounded, cutoff from food and water by an barbarian force … they have to share the blame!

            • The Palestinians are not cut off from food and water BF. Israel works 24/7 allowing food, water, hospital and building supplies to move right on through to Gaza untouched. Your principles are a little skewed when you advocate that violence is ok by the Palestinians but shame Israel for the same thing. Israel has been a sovereign state for most of my 51 years. Talk about barbarian? Talk about grudges? Let Israel be. Let Palestine be.

              • “violence is ok by the Palestinians but shame Israel for the same thing. Israel has been a sovereign state for most of my 51 years. Talk about barbarian? Talk about grudges? Let Israel be. Let Palestine be.”

                Again, your principles are perverse.
                You blame the actions of the victim as the cause the actions are applied on the victim.

                Who cares how long a thief and murderer has continued? Do you believe if a thief and murderer has kept you at bay, he suddenly becomes “ok”?

                Hold a grudge???? You are bizarre! Your principle is time dependent, huh?

              • I can post articles that affirm my post too BF. You do hold grudges. 50+ years Israel has been sovereign. Time to accept. Or….what is your solution?

              • Tell me, Anita, if a robber kills your family and steals your house, how long will you go until “you give up”?

                Again, your perverse principles at play. Because a criminal state destroys others, you forgive the criminals and blame the victims for “not giving up”.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                One would think they would have learned to live together by now. Strange people over there.

              • How do you expect them “to live together” when the criminal state contains to slaughter, destroy and steal other people’s homes and land?

              • Anita,

                No, you can’t. There is nothing for you to post that shifts the victims into the cause of their victimization.

                You are so steeped in propaganda, and so unlearned about the circumstance. You merely parrot the well-worn lies over and over again.

                I know you will not do real research because you afraid you will find yourself wrong. You find it easier to believe lies than find the truth.

              • Ok. yours is not propaganda. Got it.

              • No, its not. It is researched – a concept that you have little understanding of.

                Look, you’re the one saying “It’s 50 years, get over it”.
                You’re the one blaming the victim.
                You’re the one turning a blind eye.
                You’re the one with confused moral principles.

                Not me.

              • So your counter argument is that a few rockets from a surrounded people whose land and homes have been destroyed shows that your position is “good”.

                And a link from … wait for it … the Israeli government about how nice they are.

                SERIOUSLY

                I guess, to you, the US giving “Iraq” $5B means the invasion, destruction and disaster caused by the US is “ok”.

                As I said, you hold badly confused morals.

              • Who is confused?…I mean who is surrounded? BF, your Palestinians are not the angels you’d like them to be. It isn’t a few rockets either. It would be nice if you would first acknowledge the evil of the Palestinians as much as you acknowledge the evil of Israel.

                Is Palestine evil for launching rockets, or not?

              • Anita

                Who is confused?…I mean who is surrounded?

                CHECK A DAMN MAP

                My God!

                BF, your Palestinians are not the angels you’d like them to be.

                You are so obtuse – necessary to hide your moral perversity.

                I did not make them angels.

                THEY ARE VICTIMS

                But I understand that your world-view, so polluted, you cannot discern.

              • The map says they’re a teeny tiny nation surrounded by hatred of Jews.

                Are your victims evil or not?

              • Black Flag® says:

                Anita,

                You JEST!

                Egypt is on fire and not even an enemy for 20 years, Syria is on fire, Jordon has never been an enemy, Lebanon is reeling, Iraq burns.

                AND IGNORANTLY you believe “they are surrounded.

                GET SOME KNOWLEDGE

              • Black Flag® says:

                Answer your own question:

                If Russia invaded Alaska, pushed its population into a corner, and this remnant, with no tanks, no air force, no navy, no army continued to fight back, would you argue they are “evil”

                You hold perverse morals, my dear.

              • Clear and Present Danger.

                Palestinians get all the humanitarian aid and supplies need in Gaza.

                They only get the supplies thru Israel…(physically)

                Palestinians fire rockets regularly into Israel

                No Clear and Present Danger

                Are your victims evil?

              • Black Flag® says:

                Palestinians get all the humanitarian aid and supplies need in Gaza.

                So I guess them starving, food shortages, water shortages, medical shortages are all a Palestinian lie?

                They only get the supplies thru Israel…(physically)
                Yep, Israel violently embargoes the Territories.

                Palestinians fire rockets regularly into Israel
                Israel occupies their land, destroys their homes, attacks the people with rockets, tanks and artillery.

                No Clear and Present Danger
                Only to those like you who would the most perverse morality.

              • Black Flag® says:

                PS: You haven’t answered my Alaskan scenario.

                Let’s hear it.
                What would you do?

              • Your Alaska scenario doesn’t make sense. Alaska is part of the USA and if it was invaded it would have the backing of the US government.

                Your victims have no army, navy, etc. You make them sound defenseless. Don’t pretend you are not aware that Iran supplies them with weapons. Your victims are Hezbollah, Hamas, etc, Terrorists. Your defenseless victims have been fighting Israel for all of Israel’s existence, for the simple reason that by UN mandate, Israel exists. Israel has given land for peace how many times now? Why is there no peace?

                You are a man of peace, yet you support your freedom fighters/victims.

                But I’m Ignorant? You jest!

              • Anita,

                “Your Alaska scenario doesn’t make sense. Alaska is part of the USA and if it was invaded it would have the backing of the US government.”

                Of course it makes sense. West Bank and Gaza are part of Palestine and it was invaded and seized.

                It matters not one wit about US government.

                You -as typical in your ilk of the morally confused – will not, on purpose, attribute the actions YOU would do and declare “right” upon others in the same situation.

                “Your victims have no army, navy, etc. You make them sound defenseless”.

                Pretty much. They are the ones pushed into small enclaves, not their oppressors, or didn’t you notice?

                “Your defenseless victims have been fighting Israel for all of Israel’s existence, for the simple reason that by UN mandate, Israel exists. Israel has given land for peace how many times now? Why is there no peace?”

                BULLSHIT.
                It has been the Zionists, from day one, fighting them.

                MORE BULLSHIT.
                So I guess the continued shrinking of Palestinian territories is a fiction???

                “You are a man of peace, yet you support your freedom fighters/victims.”

                A man of peace does not support the attack and invasion and slaughter of a people simply because they live.

                You are ignornant, and worse, morally confused

                But I’m Ignorant? You jest!

              • Anita, an explanation about which engulfs you and most Americans.

                Just-World Phenomenon

                The Just-World Phenomenon is when witnesses of an injustice, in order to rationalize it, will search for things that the victim did to deserve it.

                This eases their anxiety and allows them to feel safe; if they avoid that behavior, injustice will not happen to them. This peace of mind comes at the expense of blaming the victim.

                “To illustrate this, a research study was done by L. Carli of Wellesley College. Participants were told two versions of a story about interactions between a man and a woman. In both versions, the couple’s interactions were exactly the same, at the very end, the stories differed; in one ending, the man raped the woman and in the other, he proposed marriage. In both groups, participants described the woman’s actions as inevitably leading up to the (different) results.”

              • And I guess what I haven’t put into words, and where I stand on all things worldly and political, and it just drives me crazy…is that everyone has baggage. There is a history to everything. And it’s not like it’s even 100 years ago. There is no where to run anymore. The whole planet has been discovered and it’s either inhabited or not for reasons. So if everyone could just go to their own corner for a time, and realize that this is what we have, and to live in peace at this point requires compromise on both sides…disregarding all past history..start with now..and build relationships from now..that’s the only way I see that peace can happen. If you’re a victim, sorry. That really sucks you got the short stick. But you are not the only victim in the world. Everyone has been a victim. Do you want to stay a victim or get on with what you have and don’t be a victim anymore. If you have it all, how much do you need? Can you give away half and still survive? A third? It all comes down to individual action. I’m just tired of the victim game and I’m tired of the greed game. I’m not even hating on the greedy, mostly they come to fortune by hard work. I sort of live by …and the meek shall inherit the earth.

              • Black Flag® says:

                Anita,

                No.

                First, one must stop creating more victims. You will have no respite if you believe you can continue stealing land, destroying homes, and slaughtering people.

                That is the root problem. Zionists will not stop until Ersatz Israel is achieved.

    • LOL….Buck….Really? The 10th? Perhaps we should try it in the 5th?

      • I think you’re confusing the 10th with the 9th.

        The 10th might not be as crazy as the 5th, but it is a right-leaning circuit.

        • Well, you are right about one thing…nothing is like the 9th…..but the 10th, of late, has been pretty center/left/….at least by my reasoning.

          We need the 5th to counter act the 9th….

      • This will go to the SCOTUS…..hopefully soon so we can get this crap finished. There is more important things to worry about that who can marry whom.

  5. LOI….experience has taught me that our vehicles and equipment that we left will be dead in their tracks within 6 months. They are maintenance nightmares…..

    • Correctamundo sir as the Fonz would say. I remember the film of the Afghans operating the soviet T-55’s and BMP’s during their Civil War. They must have added a gallon of oil per mile. Soviet stuff was designed to be idiot proof. I also remember the initial problems with the M-16. S/Sgt. Castle a good ole boy from Georgia in the Cav never stopped swearing at the 16 and never stopped praising the AK. He kept making comparisons like, ” takin’ a Cadillac to a Dune buggy race.” Hope he survived, he had cerebral malaria and they were going to medically discharge him.

    • D13,

      Will take you word for that sir. I was just pointing out catching them on the highways in convoy is perfect for an air war. These are terrorist, not freedom fighters. I still say I would not attack them, but can understand the desire by some. Having a actual army to engage instead of a faceless mob, we could kill a lot of bad people with few innocents risked. Add to that the number of innocents currently being raped & killed, it would be better for the world. But, not our fight.

  6. We Just Don’t Get It

    From another who is like Sed:

    It gets a little lonely sometimes. At times I feel a little resentful, sometimes just plain angry that so few people know or care to know about economics and/or philosophy when they are so important.

    I’m sympathetic, of course, having felt similarly more than once. But, as I often say, perspective is key. We’ve all complained about people who “just don’t get it,” but the real problem is that we just haven’t gotten it.

    We have grossly underestimated the kind fight we’re in.

    We thought it was about economics and politics, but it’s much more than that. What we’re really fighting is idolatry. If that doesn’t make sense to you initially, I can’t blame you, but allow me to explain.

    All Idolatry Shares a Single Root

    We’ve all heard slogans like this one:

    Why shouldn’t we take money from a billionaire who doesn’t need it, to feed a starving child?

    After that, it’s almost impossible to make any argument without appearing heartless. And there’s a good reason for that: The slogan conveys a “first position” that is deceptive and manipulative… idolatrous, really.

    This argument starts with an unspoken assumption that the state is beyond question and that any failures must be attributed to someone else. If there are starving kids, it could never be that the state was hurting them. Such a thought wouldn’t register.

    Embedded in these questions (and in the minds that form them) is a complete certainty that the state always functions as the agent of good.

    This is idolatry, the same as ancient people worshipping their city gods or medieval people holding their Holy Church above all question. In the same way, states are idols to modern people. The lines of thought are identical; the only changes involve the names of the idols – the entities that are given every benefit of the doubt at all times.

    The state, our modern idol, steals half of what every working person makes. That means that people are stripped bare for trying to do the right thing. But there is no compassion for them.

    And why is there no compassion for these people? Because it’s the state that is stripping them bare, and the state may never be accused; it may only be the agent of good!

    It really comes down to this:

    Whatever you esteem more highly than reality is your god.

    In our time, the thing that is held above reality is the state. One may critique its parts, but the state as a whole is only questioned by crazy, dangerous people. In other words, by heretics.

    What we are fighting is a different flavor of the dogma that kept medieval minds in chains. It may even be worse now.

    Our Enemies Have Understood Better Than We Have

    We’ve all seen people who are embedded in the state system fly into a rage upon hearing our ideas. We thought we were just talking about economics, but they acted as if we were trying to destroy everything they loved.

    In other words, our enemies thought our ideas were more powerful than we did. And they were right; we haven’t appreciated what we have.

    Governments are necessarily against human will. If they can’t make us feel that our desires and judgments are shameful, their entire operation stands in danger of collapse. Their game requires Joe Average to feel insecure and flawed. Our message rips that game wide open.

    Our enemies were right to freak out, and we should start accepting the fact that our ideas are huge.

    Big Battles Are Slow

    We’ve been looking for a “revolution,” which means that we’ve been hoping for fast change, and have been disappointed when we didn’t get it. But those hopes were wrong – we’re not going to get fast change; we’re going to get slow change. If we don’t adjust our minds to that fact, we’ll remain miserable.

    Our ideas are big, and our enemies have deep positions in the minds of our friends and neighbors. That means that most of them won’t change their minds overnight. I don’t like that any better than you do, but that’s the way it is. This is going to be slow.

    But in this slow battle, we hold the winning hand, and our winning strategy is to work and to persevere. Forget about a fast win; that was a false dream. We must build, and keep building.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      About time you posted something that makes sense to everyone! 🙂

    • Sedgewick says:

      “From another who is like Sed:”

      I can certainly understand the position of the author, but unlike him/her, I do not share the frustration that comes with giving a fuck what happens to your evil shit-hole planet.

      My priority is to leave.

      🙂

      • Black Flag® says:

        Sed,

        “Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders; no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others.

        And no one can find a safe way out for himself if society is sweeping toward destruction.

        Therefore, everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle.

        None can stand aside with unconcern; the interest of everyone hangs on the result.

        Whether he chooses or not, every man is drawn into the great historical struggle, the decisive battle into which our epoch has plunged us.”

        • Sedgewick says:

          This is not my world. I have no vested interest here, nor any foreseeable prospects. What I do have is impossible anomalous circumstances and people wasting my time playing weird sick games.

          Why bother with your world?

  7. The House Oversight Committee has been investigating the EPA and its tactics…..and wouldn’t you know it……..the EPA has now reported that……..all of its e mails and backup does not exist…..it too, has suffered an irretrievable hard drive crash. They cannot produce the documents that have been requested.

    I wonder who is next……the Attorney General’s office?

    What a sham of an organization. All of the agencies that Obama has been using through executive order has had their hard drives crash……..AND there is no backup. Amazing.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      All Conress has to do is follow through on some of their contempt of congress citations and put these bastards in jail, their collective memories will be found. Congress after all this time is going after the people she probably sent e-mail to and some memos are starting to show up. She apparently recommended that they go after Sen Grassely who is the leading Republican on the Senate oversight committee looking into the IRS. Like I’ve said before this stuff is out there in a ton of places, just not on her hard drive. If she or the agency was not under investigation for criminal wrong doing, they would have backed up her hard drive a long time ago. Holder would be history from the DOJ and Chu from the energy dept. Granted Chu resigned due to the ILLEGAL loan guarantees made to Solyndra etal. Salazar from his dept for signing off on eagle kills for wind farms, saying it will actually be good to thin them out. Indians went crazy with that. Biden for just being contempable and stupid. Dropped out of the presidential race in the 80’s after several incidents were revealed for plagerism, academic puffing up his CV. All proving he can not tell the true. 20 years later the same man is VP but I feel lying is so common today, people shrug and say huh, what are ethics.

  8. gmanfortruth says:

    Global warming data FAKED by government to fit climate change fictions

    Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/045695_global_warming_fabricated_data_scientific_fraud.html#ixzz35kdgTvIm

    While this isn’t a shock to most of us, I wonder just how many more things our Federal Government is lying to the people about. Maybe 99.9% of everything ?

  9. gmanfortruth says:

    SCOTUS rules that Obama violated Constitution in appointments made when Congress in session, claiming they were in recess. The appointments are likely voided now, along with all decisions made involving unions.

    • How about if I offer him $ 10,000 to convince me that man has caused the climate change and I get to be the judge? Seems like an interesting stunt to me where part (Offers $10,000) gets out to the general public but the part about him being the judge does not. the uninitiated would see yet another “proof”.

      Smokescreen!

    • What an idiot he is.

      No one disputes “Global Warming” since it has been happening for, oh, 100,000 years. Note: we are not buried in 3.2 km of ice. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentide_ice_sheet)

      What, of course, he does not offer is that this is “man-made”. He would lose his money in a second. Indeed, he offered $1,000 to any proof against man-made warming, was given it, but reneged by re-framing “…Keating ultimately decided that while he couldn’t refute any of the work from the scientist featured in the entry, but he did contest that it showed man-made global warming wasn’t real. Basically, Keating argued that just because historical evidence shows climate change occurred naturally “does not detract at all from the data that shows we have changed the climate today with our emissions.”

      In other words, by showing it is natural, he argues that “…well, so it is, but that doesn’t make man-made warming wrong…”

      Geez, what a moron.

      In other words, by showing that lightening makes thunder doesn’t make anyone believing it is “God’s voice” wrong!

      • He actually does say:

        ” will award prize money to anyone who uses the scientific method to prove that human activity has not been a factor leading to climate change.”

        I am not exactly sure how you could “prove” this especially with a biased judge since humans are occupying the planet at this time when the climate may be cooling/warming as is normal. Personally Flag, I think you should have a go at it. I am second to none in recognizing your research capabilities. Maybe you and a few other science types around here could call him out.

        • You can’t prove a negative.

          “Prove it isn’t God’s voice that makes thunder” – no matter what I prove that makes thunder, the answer is “that still doesn’t it mean that the next thunder clap isn’t God’s voice!”

        • The scientific method is a methodology of “disproving an hypothesis”

          The “Null” hypothesis is that human activity does not create climate change.
          The “Anthropogenic” hypothesis is that human activity DOES create climate change.

          You use the S/M, not on the “Null” hypothesis, but the “Anthropogenic” hypothesis – that is, test the assertion, not the null assertion.

          When you do that, you find, in fact, the “Anthropogenic” hypothesis fails.

        • In other words, this moron is trying to invert the S/M as if this tactic is valid. No serious scientist would give this idiot the time of day.

          • Black Flag® says:

            (Invert the S/M, that is, instead of proving the assertion, you have to prove the null hypothesis. The NULL hypothesis – by the word “null” – is the hypothesis that does not need proving; it is the “situation” – that is, “nature”) …… a bit more clarification to what “null” means when applying it to an hypothesis of human effects.

            For example, the null hypothesis is that by “nature” makes waves on water.
            An hypothesis, Man makes waves on water.

            To demonstrate this, you do not demand a proof that nature does or does not make waves on water, but how man makes waves on water (ie: boats).

            So far so good.

            But if then you hypothesis that tsunamis are caused by man and his boats, you do not need to prove that tsunamis are NOT caused by man. You have to show that boats make tsunamis. Good luck.

            • Correct me if I am wrong here but based on what you say and you have said it well, these guys are pulling this stuff out of their asses. It has been a long long time since I was in a lab (over 50 years) but I still remember the basics and that you have to be able to replicate results. Being a former smoker (pipe not cigs) I had more than a little incentive with four kids to read up on second hand smoke. I thought that was bullshit too. I was raised by two smokers, one heavy one moderate and neither myself nor my sister ever developed any problems. Small sample, but all my friends parents smoked like chimneys too and we seemed, unofficially, to be a whole lot healthier than today’s smokeless kids. ,.

              • Black Flag® says:

                Sk
                ” these guys are pulling this stuff out of their asses”

                They sure are. Its “junk science” at the highest level.

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                One of the cures for TB in the 50’s was to have the patient start smoking.

                Un scientifically I do believe we generally are not as well as in the past. Life expectancy is a calculation derived at birth. If you made it past infancy you had a pretty good chance of living a long and fruitful life, barring an accident or drinking water.
                The general sedentary life most people lead today is deadly. The processed foods, drugs both illegal and perscription. Everything has to be perfectly sanitary. No chance to get a bug, no immunity. Diabetes was rare when I grew up. At school the rate was 1/1000. Exactly 4 kids had diabetes. By 1980 it was over 6/1000 to today its over 15/1000. Going fat free to help one health problem created a far worse problem by replacing fats with sugar. Plus the huge push to eat more carbohydrates. Atheletes carb up before an even because their bodies need the metabolized sugars to burn. A normal person can not eat like that. Our metabolism creates sugars from what we eat and burns that, Excess fat was generally purged. With the influx of sugar consumption on top of the role our body does, created a confused metabolism. By the same token the poor eat more carbs to fill up. Can not afford good meat and fish, a generalization. but based on observation of where I lived in California, the peoples in old parts of Scranton and WilkesBarre and the country folks just outside of that area growing all their food.

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                Back when the Global Warming crisis was “heating” up which was after the disolution of the Soviet Bloc and Russia. A question was asked, where did all the communists go. The answer given was they went into the green parties and environmental groups.

              • Dale, there was a saying at the time about environmentalists, “They are like watermelons, Green on the outside, red on the inside”.

  10. Another reason voting is insane

    From American economist Kenneth Arrow who was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics

    He showed that under certain assumptions about people’s preferences between options, it is always impossible to find a voting rule under which one option emerges as the most preferred.

    The simplest example is Condorcet’s paradox, named after an eighteenth-century French mathematician. Condorcet’s paradox is as follows:

    There are three candidates for office; let us call them Bush (B), Clinton (C), and Perot (P).

    One-third of the voters rank them B, C, P.
    One-third rank them C, P, B.
    The final third rank them P, B, C.

    Then a majority will prefer Bush to Clinton, and a majority will prefer Clinton to Perot.
    It would seem, therefore, that a majority would prefer Bush to Perot.

    But in fact a majority prefers Perot to Bush.

    Under no case, does a vote demonstrate the “preferred” choice of any majority.

    • “On the complex questions of politics, which are calculated in themselves to task to the utmost all the powers of the strongest minds, but are in fact vaguely conceived, vaguely stated, dealt with for the most part in the most haphazard manner by the most experienced statesmen, the common determination of a multitude is a chimerical assumption; and indeed, if it were really possible to extract an opinion upon them from a great mass of men, and to shape the administrative and legislative acts of a State upon this opinion as a sovereign command, it is probable that the most ruinous blunders would be committed, and all social progress would be arrested. ”

      …and that is what happens. Government action works to arrest social progress.

  11. Gman, can we get an Amen for SCOTUS?

    President Obama’s team suffered their twelfth unanimous defeat at the Supreme Court in the legal challenge to the so-called recess appointments made when Congress was not actually in recess, a string of defeats that only represents “the tip of the iceberg,” according to Senator Mike Lee (R., Utah).
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/381302/obama-suffers-12th-unanimous-defeat-supreme-court-joel-gehrke

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Also the “free speech” zones and the police seizing and searching phones without a warrant.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        Maybe the SCOTUS is trying to make up the ground they lost in their Kaley vs The United States in Febuary and their terrible ACA ruling the other year. Does the SCOTUS have any teeth concerning their rulings? I believe Obama has said, in the past, that the government does not have to abide by the courts ruling but just take them under advisement. Can the court hand down contempt charges when the government continues or increases actions that the court found unconstitutional?

    • gmanfortruth says:

      NO, you can’t get an AMEN. They have been dead wrong on many occasions. A just group of Representatives would not need the SCOTUS.

  12. Dale A. Albrecht says:

    Ambassador to China, Max Baucus says their hacking is threatening our national security. Is that not calling the kettle “black”?

  13. gmanfortruth says:

    @Flag

    The exact opposite.

    In all the immigration, it brought productive people to the region.

    It was when the British began to restrict the immigration that the problems began – it turned the Jews into 2nd class citizens under British Imperialism – made them criminals – and with no surprise, they turned the violence onto the British.

    So the fact that the US has always had immigration laws made the Italians form the mafia, made the blacks and other immigrants turn into violent gangs? Interesting take on things. So as long as immigration laws exist, we really shouldn’t allow immigration because they become violent. Or, we open the borders and magically remove government from the equation. Sounds logical to me 🙂

    • Black Flag® says:

      GMan

      So the fact that the US has always had immigration laws made the Italians form the mafia, made the blacks and other immigrants turn into violent gangs?

      No, it was Prohibition that made the Mafia – get your historical “cause/effect” straight.

      Whenever violence is used to correct a non-violent “problem” (which, indeed, was never a problem except for a vocal minority of Christian absolutists) you always get a bigger problem.

      Same with “black” gangs. When you use violence to take money from one group to the unearned benefit of another – and the latter group becomes dependent upon this largess as an entitlement – replacing real work with do nothing and get money – you always get worse problems

      Immigration law to the extent, as already stated, to resist criminals and the infectious sick are arguable.

      To pretend that those laws somehow are the same as the current violence upon immigration is obtuse.

      • Mafia existed before Prohibition, it just got much, much bigger thanks to Prohibition. Similar to drug gangs and cartels. Probably always were there but with the money to be made, stand back! As I mentioned last week I think can’t prove that this is why Hoover left the Mafia alone. It tended to be a control on wilder elements.

        • Black Flag® says:

          SK,
          Certainly they “existed”, existed in Roman times – but as a criminal force in America the Mafia was essentially unknown before Prohibition – strictly preying upon immigrant Italians in protection rackets.

          With Prohibition, the organization we now know as The Mob was born – organized crime writ large.

          • Dale A. Albrecht says:

            The Black Hand/gangs were not organized in the sense of what they became during the prohibition and later. The gangs were well established by 1900. None the less they existed and lived by extortion, Brutal extortion. This practice was only part of the more organized southern Italian and sicilian mafias. That practice then exported to the US. By the 20’s they had really pissed off the people, but had the opportunity to morph into a service provider of prohibited substances and “harmless” vices. As long as the violence stayed amongst themselves nobody cared. Spills over and problems would ensue. In Sicily I’ve seen all the sides of the Mafia, the service provider of protection and insurance, that the State could not or would not provide. Generally good. They provided the substances and vices prohibited by the State including tax stampless tobacco and liquor. Huge business. Hurt nobody but the tax revenue of the State. which the people didn’t like anyway because Sicily was a conquered province of Rome. Anything to stick it to Rome was fair game. But I also saw the extortion side of them choking the life out of people trying to get ahead, or successful people or businesses. Just one of the reasons for the extreme poverty in the south of Italy then and now. The extortion business just followed the immigrants. One of the things they were escaping from.

  14. HAve any of you read past the headlines and pundit interpretation of the SCOTUS ruling on recess appointments? I suggest that you do. This has far reaching affects…..very far reaching. It is possible to take this ruling and go back decades on recess appointments to the NLRB…..and void many decisions.

    Now, who will take the recess appointments made to the EPA…….if the NLRB appointments are unconstitutional by unanimous decision…..then……………………………………………………..

    • Yes, indeed! That’s why I don’t get why GMan won’t give me an Amen. He should be thrilled.

      • Thought it was interesting today when Doc Savage brought up Andy Jackson and the SC decision regarding the relocation of the Cherokee. Jackson basically told the court, “OK you had your say, now enforce it!” Similar in its own way to Hitler asking if anyone remembered the Armenians and Stalin asking about how many divisions the Pope had. Points well taken.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Anita, Obama has been found wrong 13 times now. He is still the president, who is also claiming he will go it alone if Congress don’t on immigration. It’s great that the SCOTUS is trying to hold him in check, but they can’t enforce anything. The head of the DOJ is a criminal, the IRS are now, basically criminals, the EPA are criminals. Add the rest of the alphabet agencies to the list and explain how the SCOTUS is going to really make any difference?

        When AMEN becomes a non-corrupt government agency, then you will have a big one from me, until then, I only see this as a gnat flying around Obama’s head, soon to be swatted away like the last 12 gnats. 🙂

        It is summer, so, AMEN to that 🙂

  15. gmanfortruth says:
    • gmanfortruth says:
      • Do not fear martial law……Reading these type of rags is no different than Buck reading the Daily KOS or Huffpo……

        I have regularly and still am regularly traveling to military bases in and around the country. Especially in Texas……I have NEVER seen a UN truck anywhere nor have I seen any training camps employing Russian troops. I have never heard nor seen a reference to any of this in any briefing that I have attended.

        I have, however seen the millions of MRE’s that are being purchased and stored in disaster locations such as Texas, Florida, and North Carolina where most of the natural disasters occur. In these same locations, I have never seen ANY…not one…single round of ammunition being stored anywhere…..much less weapons. I have never seen buildings on military bases being set aside for anything EXCEPT in Fort Hood, Texas ( One of the largest military bases in the US ) where I have seen several FEMA trucks in a motor pool that are designed for emergency preparedness for gulf coast hurricanes.

        You would think that I would run across the hundreds of armored vehicles with a UN stamp on them somewhere…..I have not EXCEPT at the repair depot in Fort Worth, Texas, where there are several hundred vehicles awaiting repair and among them 6 or so UN vehicles that were brought here. One of my best friends and bowling partner runs the vehicle maintenance facility there and there is no repainting or out-fitting of vehicles for anything special…..like riot or crowd control.

        In addition, I have not seen nor witnessed at any embarkation point on the Texas gulf coast, any ships nor import facilities unloading any type of equipment that raises an alarm bell. Texas has three deep water military embarkation points. In my briefings with the US Coast Guard and the Texas Coast Guard ( Yes, Texas has its own coast guard ), the biggest problem that has been discussed are the drug running submarines that get caught on sand bars that are turning into human trafficking vehicles full of children that are being smuggled into the United States, Sometimes getting caught on sand bars and swamping and drowning everybody, or making everyone dis-embark and swim a couple of miles to shore which results in drowning and shark attacks, along with several stung to death by jelly fish and Man O Wars…….

        HOWEVER…….that is not to say, that I am unprepared for some things because I firmly believe that this government is out of control and is harmful to the citizens of the United States..But, I can tell you this……ASSUMING that any of this is true….if a UN truck shows up on an American street or martial law is declared to control citizens and consolidation of power, there will be an under ground uprising of immense proportions of the likes you can not even fathom. Trust me on this, G Man…..I can guarantee you that there are millions of people out there with hundreds of millions of guns and ammunition…. and I can guarantee you, that they/we are not puppets.

        I do not fear Russian troops…nor UN troops…I do fear this government and the abuse of power it is doing. This current administration is worse than any Hoover led FBI or McCarthy Kangaroo Court and is worse than anything Richard Nixon ever did. There is more spying and collection of data going on than anything Bush did under the Patriot Act. This administration is more corrupt than anything in my life time.

        All to say….do not fear foreign troops enacting martial law and do not fear the US military cooperating in any way…..I can tell you with almost certainty, that the US military will NOT enforce any kind of martial law that is not disaster related. Not anymore……..

        • gmanfortruth says:

          I am in total agreement Colonel 🙂 I post this stuff to get a laugh, but to also remind folks that we have an out of control government that may try anything. There are lots of reports coming out of Tennessee and way out West in Montana and Idaho, but they could just be BS. I live by the rule, “when I see it, I’ll believe it”. Just seeing one UN vehicle is not reason for concern. Seeing 1000 is another story.

          I do wonder if Obama would be dumb enough to declare Martial Law. The military, as we agree, will not fight for this fool and the people would basically wipe out any foreign troops in relatively short order. There are a lot of people like me where I live, awake and armed. We will defend our families, neighbors and our Rights, if need be. It would be one way to end the corruption in DC, so maybe Obama should go for it 🙂

          • I do not support armed insurrection but I will protect……I do not want armed over throw of our government….however, I am prepared. Obama does not have the support of the Dems, except maybe my Plutonian friend, for martial law to keep power.

            What is really funny… I thought I was being melodramatic when I claim that I am prepared. This is tornado country….we are used to power outages and things when these things come through….so, most everyone I know has little generators and at least 6 months of food and water, even in metroplex areas. If you remember, the last little hurricane that came through Texas after Katrina did not have the same lawless result that Louisiana had. It was not necessary to patrol Beaumont, Texas with National Guard because homeowners stayed home and protected them selves….we did not have the rampant looting but we had plenty of dead looters. I remember Senator Reid calling us “lawless Texans”….That is a compliment.

            Anyway, I have over 30 weapons of various sizes and uses…..and approximately 15,000 rounds of ammo combined and I thought that I was over the top…..hell….I have not even scratched the surface of some of my friends…..LOL…..so, no, no UN vehicle better show up…I would not be surprised if some of my friends have something to take out an armored vehicle……gun stores and camping stores are out of freeze dried food and ammo but not because the government is buying it all up……..we, the civilians, are buying it all up…and the government knows it.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              I’m in agreement again. It’s sad that we have to prepare like this because we don’t trust our Government. To me, this is a major problem. I can deal with weather issues and power issues etc, like you, we are used to these things. Got plenty of food and all the things to take care of business for quite some time. Plus, the garden is just exploding with all the needful veggies that we will start harvesting in a month or so (when it’s ready). I love to garden, great stress release!

        • I have been re-thinking J. Edgar Hoover a lot. Considering the power and clout he had available to him he used it judiciously. I have never had a problem with him going after Commies who, as far as I was concerned were seditious and owed their loyalty elsewhere.

          As a man he was vain, ruthless, egomaniacal and full of puffery. From his generation I can see exactly the same in FDR., Doug MacArthur, George Patton, Joseph Kennedy and a whole bunch of others. It seems to go with the territory. All things being equal though, he did a pretty good job and a huge public service by destroying his “files” before others could get their hands on them.

          Disclaimer: Nothing in what I have written above should serve as an endorsement of methodology or actions of J. Edgar Hoover. Merely pointing out that it could have been a whole lot worse had he thrown in with politicians. This guy was able to keep politicians in check. What he did was HIS interpretation of what was necessary to protect the United States against enemies foreign and domestic.

    • Do not fear UN implementation here………..

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Mornin Sir 🙂

        Thought I’d put up a little conspiracy theory and lighten the mood a bit. It’s been a little rough around here lately 🙄

        How are things down your way with the current immigrant influx?

        • gmanfortruth says:
          • Yeah…..let her come on down here…..Texas loves Democratic soothsayers……

          • She is just looking for cheap labor for her hotels and vineyards.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Considering the way the economy has been and getting worse, immigration hasn’t helped much, as far as I can tell. After reading Flag’s take on immigration, it would seem that all should be well. But…..we still have a corrupt Federal Government who is most certainly the main cause of our economic issues. These clowns in DC need removed, every single one of them. Put average citizens in with short terms and term limits. Get the rich and especially get rid of the lawyers. 🙂

              • Market place…VH…….I see it all the time…..they are willing to work for peanuts and employers are jumping all over it. Employers have figured out a way around Obamacare….first, hire only 49 employees. Form a new company and hire another 49 employees….form a new company and hire another 49 employees. Make them all contract labor. There is no need for Obamacare. Then you form a holding company that owns the separate companies and the holding company gets all the bennies of tax law and no responsibility to Obamacare or employer fees and taxes and no workmen compensation…nothing. Not even medicare nor social security nor medicaid employer taxes. All perfectly legal. It is what the market place is allowing for now.

                The employers do not care because there are 10 unemployed illegals waiting in the wings for every employed illegal. So if some one gets hurt and since they are contract labor there is no responsibility except through civil court which most illegals will not pursue and even then, as in Texas, there are jury award limits which are low enough that it is worth it IF an employer loses. Texas also has loser pays…..so you better have a good case. Most unscrupulous ambulance chasing lawyers will not take a loser pays case. There are plenty of States out there that are “employment at will” states….this means that you can fire anybody for any reason as long as it does not fall under ADA. Since everyone is being put on as contract labor, the contract will be iron clad meaning that the employer will protect itself. Since the majority of illegals do not speak English, employers have hired bi-lingual advisers. For a fee, the adviser finds the illegal, explains to him/her what is in the contract and they sign it. The Hispanic adviser does not care because the more he finds the more pay he gets……and he represents the non English speaking immigrant.

                Employers support open borders because they want undocumented illegal immigrants to lower their costs. It is what the market place is allowing at this time. No one cares.

                The people that get hurt are the law abiding middle class that pays all the taxes for hospitals emergency rooms, schools, social goodies such as food stamps, housing, etc. and the freebies that illegals get…..which is substantial…..

                And now, you have Obama, through executive order, getting ready to life the ban….watch for it. And…just so you know….in the market place, employers have figured out how to compete without lowering prices. It is really simple.

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                D13….business question, supposing a company hires an “illegal” or undocumented migrant, trying be polite, and they do collect all the taxes like Social Security etc from the workers pay, so their books are correct, dutifully sends the monies off to the State or the Feds. That money is a gift/bribe to the government because it will never be distributed to a claiment at the other end because the SSN’s used are bogus and unverifiable. The government, I believe would and does turn a blind eye to that practice. The company saves costs for all the reasons you noted, prices are not reduced so the companies margins, profits and stock prices increase, and the government gets money they will never distribute….

        • We are actually handling them just fine……we pick them up, feed them, give them water, for 72 hours. If HHR does not come and get them…we send ’em back to Mexico.

          Two days ago, we actually got a picture of a Mexican train coming from their southern border and it looked like something out of India. Box cars full of people inside and riding on top….unbelievable…..and……they have no water, no food, and no other sustenance. The so called Mexican government that people like to say is civilized….rapes, sodomizes, kills, and exploits these children….and yes, I said GOVERNMENT sponsored because that is the way it is down here.

          But Queen Pelosi and her hand picked Spanish surnamed committee…..will be given the Queen’s tour and not exposed to the brutality side of it…..as they always are. They will not talk to the real people in charge….but I can guarantee you that it has a design…..they will exploit this as a humanitarian crises….and force an immigration bill. It is no mistake that this current influx is preplanned…..and arranged. There is no doubt about it….and our current administration did it.

  16. June 27, 2014
    The sleeper case that could bust open the IRS scandals
    By Thomas Lifson

    In the absence of a special prosecutor, the best opportunity for piercing the veil of secrecy and evasion that surrounds the IRS handling of groups perceived as enemies of the Obama administration lies in civil litigation. The National Organization for Marriage has just obtained a $50,000 settlement from the IRS for its criminal release of confidential donor information to an opposition group. But so far Eric Holder’s Justice Department is not pursuing inquiries into who feloniously released that information.

    The absence of any official judicial inquiry into the inner workings of the IRS processes is why it is so important to note that yesterday saw the beginning of the discovery phase in the lawsuit by Z-Street a pro-Israel organization that was told its application for tax exempt status was being delayed because:

    …these cases are being sent to a special unit in the DC office to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the Administration’s public policies.

    Z-Street’s lawsuit alleges unlawful viewpoint discrimination, a First Amendment claim. The IRS tried several arguments to dismiss Z-Street’s lawsuit, all of which were dismissed by Washington, DC federal district court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, an Obama appointee. She noted that Z-Street was not suing to gain tax exempt status, but rather over the viewpoint discrimination evidenced by what it was told by IRS agent Diane Gentry about contradicting administration policies – the process by which the IRS made the determination on tax exempt status. In the words of the Jerusalem Post:

    The Z Street case may be what forces the IRS to pull aside its carefully constructed curtain and reveal how it made decisions regarding organizations deemed out of step with the current US administration.

    Judge Jackson gave the IRS until June 26 to respond to Z-Street. That deadline has now passed, so the case enters discovery. This means that Z-Street can subpoena IRS officials, place them under oath, and ask them questions about how they acted, and cross examine them closely. They can also subpoena documents and require their production. This is much different than a House committee hearing in which members have only a few minutes to ask questions, and when friendly Democrats have their opportunity to apologize for the impertinence of daring to ask questions of our IRS masters. Depositions taken under oath can last many hours and involve detailed questions.

    What makes the Z-Street case unique and potentially extremely damaging is that its lawsuit was filed in August 2010. That filing placed the IRS under legal obligation to preserve records. The Wall Street Journal’s Review and Outlook column explains:

    Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and legal precedent, once the suit was filed the IRS was required to preserve all evidence relevant to the viewpoint-discrimination charge. That means that no matter what dog ate Lois Lerner’s hard drive or what the IRS habit was of recycling the tapes used to back up its email records of taxpayer information, it had a legal duty not to destroy the evidence in ongoing litigation.

    In private white-collar cases, companies facing a lawsuit routinely operate under what is known as a “litigation hold,” instructing employees to affirmatively retain all documents related to the potential litigation. A failure to do that and any resulting document loss amounts to what is called “willful spoliation,” or deliberate destruction of evidence if any of the destroyed documents were potentially relevant to the litigation.

    At the IRS, that requirement applied to all correspondence regarding Z Street, as well as to information related to the vetting of conservative groups whose applications for tax-exempt status were delayed during an election season. Instead, and incredibly, the IRS cancelled its contract with email-archiving firm Sonasoft shortly after Ms. Lerner’s computer “crash” in June 2011.

    In the federal District of Columbia circuit where Z Street’s case is now pending, the operating legal obligation is that “negligent or reckless spoliation of evidence is an independent and actionable tort.” In a 2011 case a D.C. district court also noted that “Once a party reasonably anticipates litigation, it must suspend its routine document retention/destruction policy and put in place a ‘litigation hold’ to ensure the preservation of relevant documents.”

    The government’s duty is equally pressing. “When the United States comes into court as a party in a civil suit, it is subject to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as any other litigant,” the Court of Federal Claims ruled in 2007. The responsibility to preserve evidence should have been a topic of conversation between the IRS chief counsel’s office and the Justice Department lawyers assigned to handle the Z Street case.

    The potential destruction of evidence, by becoming a separate tort, opens the door for judicial inquiry into the IRS destruction of evidence. Armed with subpoenas and able to examine and cross examine people under oath, Z-Street has the potential to bust open what really went on at the IRS.

    Strangely enough no major media outlet covered the opening of the discovery phase of this case. Only Gretchen Carlson of Fox News had the wit to notice, and interviewed Lori Lowenthal Marcus, head of Z-Street (and an AT contributor):

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/06/the_sleeper_case_that_could_bust_open_the_irs_scandals.html

    • gmanfortruth says:

      The emails are out there. I have no saved emails in my hard drive, but can access all the way back to 2008 on a server. I think this excuse is BS and a big fat lie!

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        Of course they are……Just think of the difference of Watergate and the current rash of government abuses. Watergate was originally put together by CREEP. Not a government organization. Nixon was still overwhelmingly re-elected. The conspiracy to cover-up grew, not denying that it happened but to protect dear friends, like Mitchell, Halderman and Ehrlichman. Very simplistic, but, Nixon stood alone and all other powers of the government, DOJ, Congress, the MSM worked to unfold the conspiracy. At no time did the Watergate break-in threaten OUR very rights as a citizen, of free speech etc. Take today’s events, NSA, IRS, DOJ, EPA, SEC, HHS, and the opposite is happening. The government is banding together to protect itself against its abuses of power against the people of the United States.

  17. HI everyone…..keep an eye on the Texas border. In the past 18 months, there have been numerous incursions by Mexican Army helicopters into US territory in support of cartel drug and human trafficking efforts. Yes, I said IN SUPPORT of these efforts. Not trying to stop anything but firing rounds into the United States in SUPPORT of these criminals. Let me be clear….support means….firing rounds at US authorities as covering fire.

    LAST NIGHT…..the Texas Guard and the Texas Department of Public Safety got the word from our governor to be weapons free. We finally get to fire back and shoot down any Mexican asset that crosses the border. No warning shots, no radio communications, no lights…..fire them up. We are totally weapons free.

    Remember, you heard it here first.

  18. These people are amazing, give them an inch and they will take a mile;

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/27/army-vets-blast-pc-police-for-attacking-apache-chi/

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Screw the PC Libtards. 🙂

    • Well you know-the melting pot is out and Multiculturalism is in. The best I can figure it out is that all the “recognized minorities” own their culture. Lots of little SEPARATE pots instead of an actual Country of people. Just another way to divide us even more.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        That’s why against ALL political correctness. It’s simple , tell them to pound sand. That will lead to having to then explain how closely they resemble the Naxi’s

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Nazi’s that is ! 🙂

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        The off shoot of the Civil Rights movement and the victimization ideas of the 70’s. Instead of Justice being blind, each identifiable minority has to be grouped so they may receive their due compensation, of the whole (FAIR SHARE) that was undoubtably stolen from them. Exempt, en-block, are White Anglo Saxon Males and other European groups.
        M.L. King I believe would be very dissatisfied on how his “Dream” turned out. Well intentioned civil rights laws and policies actually creating more racism and suspicion amongst the people.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Racist, how so…..The names honor some of the best and ferocious fighters the world has seen. Maybe the Chinooks could take an offense, given they were pretty peaceful, but a transport helicopter is appropriate.

      The people who take offense are bored and do not have enough serious things to worry about in their lives.

  19. Hmmm-Wonder which side will win-wonder if these woman are waking up to the evil they are helping to propogate.

    http://www.lifenews.com/2014/06/26/feminists-and-population-controllers-at-odds-in-rare-abortion-dispute/

  20. Remember, most of what we talk and argue about started 100 years ago today.

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/180439/great-war-immediate-response-franz-ferdinands-assassination-100-years-ago-today#

    They really had no clue about what they were unleashing!

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      More enlightening is the book “Paris 1919” Six Months That Changed The World, written by Margaret Macmillan, Great Grand Daughter of David Lloyd George, PM of Great Britain during WWI. The hash the victors made of the “peace” after the Great War. We’re not talking about the war, but the effects of the peace process, which created another complete class of victims setting up events still being dealt with today.

  21. Black Flag or Colonel… any comments as to weather you see this happening here and what’s a mom with a debit card and no debt supposed to do with cash in banks? I pay bills with a debit card, but other things like groceries, gas, car insurance, whatever possible I pay in cash. Her take is that she already can’t pay cash.
    http://www.barnhardt.biz/2014/06/26/negative-nominal-interest-rates-highway-to-a-cashless-statist-hell/

    • Anita,

      I talked about this long time ago, in reference to that excess reserves banks hold.

      When the Fed made the bailouts, the banks, instead of loaning the money, stuffed it in the Fed as excess reserves. This is why we did not see inflation after the trillions of new money was created.

      The banks are paid a nominal interest on the excess reserves – so in bank’s thinking a little interest is better then the risk of losing the loan in the terrible economic market that was, and still is, the United States.

      European banks did the same thing.

      With economies still in the tank, and rising discontent, the governments, instead of try to push the string, are going to pull it. Instead of paying interest on excess reserves, they will charge a fee.

      This will absolutely motivate banks to lend.

      What this has to do with a cashless society is … nothing. They are independent.

      Cashless society has been ongoing for decades – it is fundamental to a fractional banking system that the money in the system stays in the system. I posted a long time go about how a fractional banking system works. Taking cash out of the system interferes with a fractional reserve system.

      Take heart. No society can operate where every transaction is recorded by government. People demand privacy in their economic affairs and that is what cash delivers (and why government hates it). But in this matter the people will win.

      If the government no longer provides cash money and forces plastic and accounting, people will find something else, like gold or silver, to transact – which more undermines the Elite.

      Keep paying cash, and have no fear.

      • That’s what I wanted to hear!

        And yes I remember you going over exactly this situation but I never got a clear answer about what to do with cash, or weather we would ever get to a cashless point.

        Thanks, doesn’t mean you’re outta all trouble with me, though 😉

        • Trouble is temporary, the consequences of the Fed’s action will undermine itself.

          As always, buy a comfortable store of gold and silver.
          Buy, now, with your cash the goods you need tomorrow; do not store cash, store goods.

          This is your backup.

          Remember, Anita, this is hard work.

          Storing Money is a lazy person’s plan.

          Because it takes a lot of hard work and reasoned thinking to plan for the future – because, by its nature, it is uncertain – you have to work hard to know where you are going and your goals, and what you may need in a future that is so uncertain.

          Storing money is lazy. You do not need to do this planning. You merely store cash, and when the future becomes today, you easily convert your cash to those goods you need today. Very little planning about your future needs is necessary.

          This is why money is so powerful – it is very easy to prepare for an uncertain future, because you do not need to contemplate about the future much at all; you merely let the ability of the easy conversion of money to goods to “be your plan”.

          But when money is at risk, you can no longer be lazy.
          Those that do the hard work now will prosper. Those that are lazy, now, will suffer.

          • Right, I got that part covered. I’ve been getting rid of useless stuff, business equipment and other house stuff that I no longer use and use that cash for useful things I need. One problem I have is using all the food I have stored. I’ve been planning on being set to support a minimum of 5 with food,,planning for several years already…but now I’m looking at an awful lot of food sitting there taking up space. I’m confident about surviving with the tools and other toys I have, but this food thing has me wondering what to do. I’ll figure something out.

            • Disaster planning – you acquire food that can be stored for years, to be used in a disaster when there is no food at all.

              Economic planning – you acquire and store the food that you eat, and rotate the supply.

          • Black Flag® says:

            Anita,

            Not to infer D13 is lazy, but he is an example of what I mean about cash. Cash allows him not to have to plan for the uncertain future. He can sit back and watch and wait. Additionally, in his position, he -in my opinion- is doing absolutely the right thing for him.

            As he states, he is holding a large cash position (as well as other hard assets). Why does he do this? Because the future is incredibly uncertain for him (and all of us).

            With his somewhat vast store of money, he is not committing it – he is holding it ready, ready to move deftly when the time is right. Entrepreneurs and businessmen like him do this in uncertain times – they will not commit their resources into a future of extreme uncertainty, and will wait it out until the future becomes more clear.

            I make this point, Anita, because it is vitally important. Unless you are in a similar wealth position to D13, do not follow his tactics. His tactics are perfect for someone in his position, but you are not in his position.

            You must use tactics valid for your position – for the same reason; future uncertainty, but your tactics must be very different.

            • “Not to infer D13 is lazy”……Thank you.

              “is doing absolutely the right thing for him.”……Yes,,,,for me or the family. It may not be right for someone else.

              “he is not committing it – he is holding it ready, ready to move deftly when the time is right. Entrepreneurs and businessmen like him do this in uncertain times – they will not commit their resources into a future of extreme uncertainty, and will wait it out until the future becomes more clear.”,,,,,,Absolutely correct.

              “You must use tactics valid for your position – for the same reason; future uncertainty, but your tactics must be very different.”……..correct.

    • Anita…..it all depends on which way you determine the wind blows. Some people think this is possible….We, as a family, do not think this is possible. As I also have posted, we determined some time ago to be flush with cash and not paper assets ( stocks and bonds)…their is an inherent risk in this in that you have to be careful where you put your cash and you have to stay on top of things on a daily basis. Sticking large amounts of cash into banks that are only FDIC insure to a certain amount makes storing cash difficult. You have to manage the proper way to do this….ie: tax numbers.

      We do not subscribe to the philosophy of only gold and silver or platinum. These are good investments and trade worthy….but only trade worthy to a certain extent. For example, in Texas….water is as valuable as gold or silver. But as to the article, BF and I are on the same page…..all you have to do is look around right now and see who drives up to the nearest fast food place and hands a debit card over for a $5 purchase. We prefer cash in most of our transactions and you can get great discounts for cash…like doctors, for example. It is very easy to get 20% off services if you pay in cash and not by credit card or insurance. Concierge services are becoming very popular down here in the medical field. Cash is king, right now, and even prominent doctors are not taking Medicare nor insurance any longer….they are being priced out of the market.

      So our long term position is to remain cash solvent with some back up hard assets.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Anita, Just chiming in on the food issue part, I’ll leave the economics to those wiser than I 🙂
        A few things to know about food stores, if you canned it, it will last quite awhile, but if your like me, you will eat half of it each year and replace it after the harvest. This is a better diet anyway. I have a large food store of homegrown veggies, and we eat them all winter and replace them in the Fall. We are never short of 6 months worth of supply, but we rotate each year.

        Store bought canned goods have expiration dates, except there are no scientific reason behind them. In other words, the companies make them up. In other words, a 10 year old can of beans may be just fine, if stored correctly. However, like home canned, rotate your stocks and this will never be a problem. Boxed foods with dehydrated goods last a long time to, we have a lot that we vacuum sealed and put in plastic storage bins. These can be bought cheap at many stores. Potato, pasta and stuffing items are great side dishes when one has a hungry gut!

        If you have a full freezer or two, make sure you have a generator! To keep the food frozen, run the generator for 4 hours, turn off for 8, repeat during power outage. Gas can be had with a good pump siphoning system you can build yourself, but have cash/or barter material so as not to get shot. I’m working on a natural gas/propane convertor for ours, to have more options!

        You should learn to hunt. You fish I take it, but that leaves you in the open and subject to attack by the hungry zombie Liberals from the city 🙂 You have much less of a chance to be attacked in the woods, away from any populations. Hungry Zombie Liberal’s will not fare well in the woods, but a good hunter can harvest and move the harvest with little detection! Plus, you wear camo and carry a high caliber rifle. Bows are mostly silent, but harder to be successful. Venison is a great meat for human consumption, very lean and good for the body! 🙂

        • I’m with you GMan. I have been rotating, but I’m not eating as fast as I’m storing, so I’m in a conundrum. I’ve been storing for 5 but only eating for 2. I’ve started laying off buying just to get a little better balance.

          I’ll fish and garden my tail off. Not so sure about hunting for survival. But since my future husband will be the president of Cabelas, he can hunt for survival. I’ll just hunt for kicks. 🙂

          • gmanfortruth says:

            I don’t rotate 1 for 1, most closer to 1 for 7, but that’s OK, home canned food lasts a long time, I’ll get about 7 years of rotation on a constant basis once the first 7 years are complete, then it will be a loop

  22. To SK, Gman, and D13, regarding Immigration laws – understanding, of course, that immigration laws are prohibitions on trade.

    Man is both consumer and producer; but his interest as producer is immediate and obvious, his interest as consumer distant and diffuse.

    The two conflict sharply: the interest of consumers is to replace uneconomic coal-pits by profitable pits or by other sources of power; the interest of miners is to keep all mines working whatever their cost or efficiency.

    [Or, to our topic, it is in the interest of you guys, as consumers, to replace overpaid workers with cheaper workers, but in your short term interest to maintain your overpaid jobs]

    The case for consumers’ (rather than producers’) sovereignty is that, to safeguard his interest as producer, man would be tempted to stultify change by suppressing invention, new methods and ideas; the result would be stagnation and ultimately impoverishment.

    That is the consequence you promote – by preventing the lowering of your consumer costs – which is broad; that is, this effects all your goods and services that you buy because you merely want to be overpaid, leads to your long term impoverishment, and ironically, the loss of your job since producers, who are prevented in lowering their costs in your country, will move your job to another country where the costs are lower.

    You trade a short term gain in to a permanent and devastating long term loss.

    • This is why I ridicule SK so hard.

      On one hand he wants to keep his overpaid job by stopping immigration.

      Then he rants that jobs are moving overseas.

      He cannot see that his first policy causes the second consequence.
      He wants both – overpaid jobs that stay- but they are exclusive situations.

      • A. I have no overpaid job, I am retired. B. when I had a job I was not overpaid since I produced far more income than wages received.

        As a building manager for low to moderate income housing I did three above and beyond things which brought in extra income for the company.

        1,Successful active pursuit of cell tower leases for our properties.

        2. Rentals of vacant apartments to TV and Movie productions, you see us on “Law and Order” from time to time.

        3. Successful active pursuit of subsidized “weatherization” programs to install, new windows, boilers, insulation in multi- family buildings with minimal shared cost to the owner. I would say that in the last five years of my career, I had covered all my expense to the employer by the end of April.

        Now, to tear into you once again, Making money in the type of real estate I managed is basically contingent on achieving certain rent levels to offset debt service, M & O, and the biggie, taxes. Your constantly falling labor cost leads to less money available for rent which as I have seen first hand leads to doubling up or tripling up of families/workers in apartments. To the property owner this means wildly increasing expenses. In addition to the vandalism which is normal, there are the increased expenses for maintenance, fuel, water and sewer, and ultimately fines from the local housing agency.

        Regarding employees, I tended to overpay and often fought the absentee landlord on this issue. I actually learned to do this in the largest Socialist Institution that exists in the United States, the United States Army. The Army, God bless them, taught me to lead and to supervise. It also taught me to have my people do as much as they could, to increase their knowledge base to enhance their abilities. It also taught me to reward them when appropriate. Years later, I heard something regarding a comment made to Bonnie Prince Charlie by a clan chief before the battle of Culloden.

        “If a man fears you he will fight for you, if a man loves you he will die for you”.

        OK, he lost the battle but the words have great meaning and application. I overpaid my guys and made sure that they did the work they were paid for properly and on time. In return, I got tremendous loyalty. I got loyalty that made my job ridiculously easy. We were in some really tough areas, my problems with neighborhood toughs, drug addicts, drug gangs and gang leaders were a fraction of what my neighbors on either side of me had to deal with.

        My proudest moment was when I was doing a vacant building and ACORN tried to shake me down for no show jobs. I was ready to wear a wire for the cops and DA but my thirty immigrant workers took care of the problem and never would tell me how. Money does not buy loyalty, fairness does and money can be a part, but only a part of that.

        • SK

          “A. I have no overpaid job, I am retired. B. when I had a job I was not overpaid since I produced far more income than wages received.”

          You are confused, once again, between a principle you espouse and an incident in your life.

          There is no measure to whether you were overpaid or underpaid by looking back at what you were paid. You were, simply, paid. Those that paid you saw some sort of value in your labor, and you accepted payment as the monies represented value to you.

          It is the principles you hold that I attack.

          “Your constantly falling labor cost leads to less money available for rent which as I have seen first hand leads to doubling up or tripling up of families/workers in apartments.”

          First, whatever “deal” you have as an arrangement to your rents is irrelevant.

          Second, you exhibit exactly what I argue above; you measure your short term loss of income – regardless if it is derived from labor or the invested proceeds of your labor but fail to contemplate whatsoever the reduced cost of your goods that you buy at the store.

          Since the latter is distant, you give it no measure. You only focus on the short-term, your income.

          This creates the very condition I presented above; you advocate for more short term gains for long term, and more severe, losses

        • Fifty years ago this fall I entered college. Unknown to me at the time was that I would be studying a classical curriculum which included four years of theology, philosophy, literature, history and two of music and art.In addition were the requirement of modern foreign language and of course 54 plus credits in my major.

          Anyway, the philosophy tended to give me a headache until long after I took the courses. Plato and the real vs the ideal world. You sir, seek the ideal world here and now on this planet. I live in the real, imperfect world and seek the ideal only in the next. I am man, I have faults as do you. We are not God.

          You ignore the human issues of loyalty and respect. You always do. To me they are important. You tell me of the reduced costs I have at the store. What are they, oil? Taxes? Legal fees? In my “real” world there is a bottom line the difference between you an I in part is that my bottom line involves many people. In yours it does not. I must satisfy the owner, the bank, the governmental authority, the worker, the tenant you do not.

          Free will allows you to choose to live the way you do as it allows me to live the way I do. Yours works for you, mine for me. Neither of us is “right” for the other.

    • Did not know that I followed this line of thinking unless you are taking my thoughts on the current immigration issue as a matter of economics. You and I will differ on this current trend…i still hold it has nothing to do with economics or political persecution at all….not what is happening now…..as to understanding that immigration laws are prohibitions to trade…there is some merit in that….but only as it applies to labor.

      the market place is what it is…..cheap labor is in abundance….employers want cheap labor….cheap labor increases profit both short and long term. Cheap labor does NOT increase the middle class, it weakens it but that is the market place right now. No one I know will work for $50 for 8 hour plus lunch…..( the going rate down here for yard, construction, and manual labor ). Simply drive to any Home Depot, Lowes, or any home repair business and you will find tons of labor sitting outside waiting for work. Employers can hire three for the price of one here and have no responsibilities other than pizza for lunch. ( Immigrants LOVE pizza,,,,,don’t forget the Jalapenos, (definitely no anchovies) Even illegal immigrants do not eat fish bait.., and Coca Cola ). Want heavy work done? a pool dug? A Fence put up? a new roof put on? Just get the materials and go hire the immigrant. You can get it done for 1/2 the cost or even less……

      Some of us do not hire illegal status…all of our contract labor must provide that they are in the country legally. And there are plenty of green card holders out there. I do not wish to take the chance of being raided but many wish to take the chance. Pay in cash…..they love cash. No trail. We pay by check because they are here legally and we want a proper contract with a proper paper trail so no IRS agent can come in and say we are in violation of IRS law…..We even have computers that have back up even if they do crash…..we refuse to do anything that is illegal as we do not want to suffer the consequences in the event of audit….regardless of how anyone feels, the IRS is still the 800 pound gorilla and it is gaining weight.

      Unless I am misreading you, the abundance of cheap labor will not increase GNP nor GDP…the money, most of it, is not spent here at all…it is sent out of country. The workers that are coming here, for the most part, do not want citizenship….they just want to work and send money home. Again, it is what the market place wants. And it does keep prices down…..sort of. And it does keep labor unions out. There are benefits to it. Where the system breaks down is in the schools and health areas. Employers…over 90%…maybe even 100%….who really knows………will not pay health insurance. Nor employee related taxes. Employers that hire illegal immigrants usually discharge their current employees in search of cheaper labor. Supply and demand is alive and well. Right now, there is a huge supply in cheap labor.

      But you are finding me on the principle side of law. Regardless of how you feel about the law….it is the law and it should be followed. Don’t like the law….change it. Want open borders? Change the procedure……in the meantime…enforce what is written.

      • Also, what is with this over paid/ under paid stuff….I must have missed something.

      • Black Flag® says:

        D13,

        ” it has nothing to do with economics”

        It has, is, and always will be a matter of economics. It has, is and always will be a prohibition on trade – the trade of labor.

        “cheap labor is in abundance”

        If you are saying that of Americans, you’d be wrong. The unemployment stats show this.
        If you are saying that of immigrants, you’d be right. Those same stats show this.

        “Cheap labor does NOT increase the middle class, it weakens it”

        Utter nonsense.

        Look, if your case was true, there would be no such thing as a middle class. Since middle class is not a “top down” – it is not the rich getting poor; it is bottom up – it is the poor getting richer

        All cheap labor is unskilled labor – that is why it is cheap.
        Labors, who have no skills, get a job – which teaches them skills, preparing them for better jobs. They take those better jobs, which teaches them skills, and they get better jobs.

        That is how it works, D13

        “Unless I am misreading you, the abundance of cheap labor will not increase GNP nor GDP…the money, most of it, is not spent here at all…it is sent out of country.”

        So, you believe more profitability does not increase GNP????

        Again, bizarro-economics, sir.
        Anytime – anytime – you can get something cheaper, you become more wealthy.

        You have $10. You need your lawn mowed. One guy says “$10”! You need it done, so you pay him. You have $0.

        Next week, the same thing, but another guy says “$5”! Cool! You need it done, so you pay him. You now have $5 to buy something else that will aid your life.

        Note: NOT ONE BIT OF THIS IS SUBJECT TO WHAT THE GUY HIMSELF DOES WITH YOUR MONEY – you are richer due to the lower costs.

        “But you are finding me on the principle side of law. Regardless of how you feel about the law….it is the law and it should be followed. Don’t like the law….change it.”

        Cock and Bull.
        Government Law is a farce, and utterly immoral. To make it your principle makes you a farce and immoral.

        And don’t pander the “..then change it” nonsense. None of you have any ability to “change any law” – you are absolutely excluded from the process. The stupidity of that statement you make is like saying “if you don’t like it, fly like a bird”.

        • Where to start……you are not reading me correctly, I feel, or I am not clear.

          Cheap labor in abundance is in direct relation to the immigrants…THEY are the cheap labor source. This is economics 101.

          The destroying middle class is true. It is true in that the immigrant cheap labor floods the market but they, the cheap laborer does NOT become a member of the middle class. It is actually an absent class because they do not stay here and the money for the most part does not stay here and does not add to the GNP. This is true in most of the border Texas towns that were once thriving….are no longer. The middle class person has been eliminated and has moved out. The once huge hunting industry is no longer…I used to take 40 customers to the border areas to hunt white wing dove and quail. We do this no longer because the service industry has dried up. The rental markets have dried up…..Millions of dollars no longer go to Mc Allen or Laredo or Eagle Pass or even Brownsville.

          Just keep watching,,,,the middle class is disappearing in those regions where cheap labor floods the market. Another case in point….yard and pool services are thriving but the once middle class worker that made ( pulling a figure out of the air ) say 20 bucks an hour is noe replaced by the cheap labor that makes 8 bucks per hour. That middle class family cannot find other jobs, they move on. The business thrives….and makes greater profits….but the worker, loses his job in favor of cheap labor.

          ” Anytime – anytime – you can get something cheaper, you become more wealthy.” A true statement in the aspect of the company….not true to the worker that was replaced. THere is where my point is….

          ” Government Law is a farce, and utterly immoral. Agreed only to the aspect that Government Law is a farce and some of them immoral……but you still have to follow it. You follow the law…….My principle is no different than yours….I will follow the law…that does not make me a farce nor immoral. I see it completely the opposite….a strong principled person will follow the law….to not follow it makes one a law breaker….and that makes one immoral
          ( my opinion of course ).

          ” None of you have any ability to “change any law” – you are absolutely excluded from the process. The stupidity of that statement you make is like saying “if you don’t like it, fly like a bird”. Cannot agree here, my friend. You and I both agree that the place to start is local….we can change things with the right people. But, in your world, there would be no law. That, of course, is not going to happen….but we can have influence….start locally.

          • D13,
            “Cheap labor in abundance is in direct relation to the immigrants…THEY are the cheap labor source. This is economics 101.”

            They are. They are noted for the unskilled labor, labor which the vast majority of Americans, employed or unemployed, do not wish to undertake (jobs of the low/unskilled quality).

            “The destroying middle class is true”

            Maybe, maybe not, but it is NOT because of the unskilled labor market – they are not intertwined.

            “. It is true in that the immigrant cheap labor floods the market but they, the cheap laborer does NOT become a member of the middle class.”

            Absolutely wrong. Again, go back above.
            If your claim is true, the middle class could not have risen in the first place

            Look, middle class are not the dregs of the rich class.
            Middle class are the improvement of the poverty class. It is a bottom up process, not a top fall process. Your claim is absolutely wrong.

            Irish immigrants of the past (unskilled) are now the skilled middle class.
            This is shown everywhere in history.

            The xenophobia is which is where your claim comes from. Your ilk equally made this claim about the Chinese 100 years ago and … were wrong.

            ” It is actually an absent class because they do not stay here and the money for the most part does not stay here and does not add to the GNP”

            The first is not true. The vast majority do put down roots and stay.
            Second, it matters utterly not one wit where their money goes. Again, when you buy a good, how the supplier spends his money makes not one wit of a difference to you, either.
            It is an economic fallacy to attribute something about another persons action which is independent of yours to make your action dependent on it..

            GNP is irrelevant measure – it is a made up number that is essentially meaningless.

            “This is true in most of the border Texas towns that were once thriving….are no longer”

            There is more going on then merely immigration, and to attribute “thriving” or its lack to this single issue is an error.

            Just like your belief about increase in crime. You attribute it to illegal immigrants, when in fact, it is due to the policies of immigration.

            If you are seeing a loss of “thriving”, it is not the fault of men looking for work – it is due to the policies preventing men looking for work. You are blaming a symptom of the problem to be the cause of the problem.

            . The middle class person has been eliminated and has moved out. The once huge hunting industry is no longer…I used to take 40 customers to the border areas to hunt white wing dove and quail. We do this no longer because the service industry has dried up. The rental markets have dried up…..Millions of dollars no longer go to Mc Allen or Laredo or Eagle Pass or even Brownsville.

            ” 20 bucks an hour is noe replaced by the cheap labor that makes 8 bucks per hour. That middle class family cannot find other jobs, they move on”

            Again, economic illiteracy. As I showed above, the person with the pool is now richer – the can use that extra $12 to buy something additionally. Whenever costs go down, more problems are solved.

            When it was $20, it solved one problem – pool cleaning.
            Now at $8, it solves more then one problem for the same $20 – pool cleaning and “something else”, like a getting a hair cut.

            . The business thrives….and makes greater profits….but the worker, loses his job in favor of cheap labor.

            “.not true to the worker that was replaced. THere is where my point is….”

            The problem with your “point” is it is an economic fallacy.

            In economic problems, it is a serious fallacy to make a broad economic claim by pointing to an individual circumstance.

            SK does this a lot, using “I” and then attributing “society” to the “I”. You do the same here.

            Certainly the buggy whip makers were replaced when the car was invented. By your claim this destroyed the middle class. Fact is, it didn’t – middle class grew faster then ever in history.

            The reason you make an error here, is that you apply an economic pseudo-theory to only one side of the economics – the loser. You ignore the winner. By this myopic economic viewpoint, you will always get the wrong economic answer.

            For more info about this, google the “Unknown man” problem in economic theory, also known as the “Broken window fallacy”.

          • D13, new thread due to different topic

            ” Government Law is a farce, and utterly immoral. Agreed only to the aspect that Government Law is a farce and some of them immoral……but you still have to follow it. ”

            Absolutely NOT!
            I utterly refuse to follow farce and immoral law.

            If the law said “Kill Jews”, would you follow it? Why or why not?
            IF your principle is “I will follow the law”, you would have performed well in Nazi Germany.

            If you, however, say “Well, not that law” then “I will follow the law” can’t be your principle.

            So which is it?

  23. @ Dale…..

    First, reputable companies will verify social security numbers. For the most part, they can be verified. To take your hypothetical above, what would be the incentive for a company to send employee taxes (deductions) to the government? Without an identifiable SSN, it would make no sense. There would be no tax deduction incentive because without a verifiable SSN, any payment to the government would be disqualified.

    When companies hire illegal immigrants, it is not with the intention of being a nice guy. It is with the sole intention of making more money and keeping it under the radar.

    It is too easy to avoid employee taxes with contracts….and you still do not have to pay. But, legal contract labor does come at a higher cost.

  24. Seems choice is out-Now it is a “decision” ” not to become a parent”. Seems a little late to make that decision.

    And I don’t have a 3 P’s argument -so lets go with these letters–LIE=lie, ignore, and evade. I think it’s kind of catchy -“LIE”

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/06/29/Texas-Democratic-Convention-Dont-Use-Fetus-Use-More-Complex-Words-Like-Baby

    • Yes..this is Wendy Davis…..crazy, huh.

      • Something for you VH……Wendy Davis, trying to follow the lead of Ann Richards trying to look Texan by holding a shotgun……..but something that you will not see on the MSM>……while trying to pose for electioneering pics……she does not engage the safety on a shotgun and shoots the window out of her car…..BOOM………..she did not check to see if the weapon was loaded, she did not check to see if the safety was on…..AND she pulled the trigger while posing. Sigh…….

        • Trying not to laugh because that was dangerous but as long as no one was hurt ROTFL!

          • It is. of course, all over local tv’s……It is funny as hell…..because you see the weapon go off and since it is a shotgun. the recoil kicked it out of her hands………..she jumps back with the classic look of shock on her face ( you know the look…both hands covering her face with an “oh my god ” expression….but the funniest thing was that no one paid much attention to the shotgun….some aide runs over and picks the weapon up ( and he is obviously not from Texas because of the way he handled the shotgun by grabbing it mid length around the magazine ) obviously forgetting that it is a semi automatic 12 gauge that immediately chambered a second round and was laying on the ground with the safety still off…..carrying it around and pointing it at people with his hand wrapped around the trigger guard……………………………….Wendy Davis’ first question was…..How much damage was there to her limo…not…Did I hurt anyone.

            Funny as hell……

    • I’d like to point out one specific thing- This “They also claimed that conservatives were calling miscarriages “spontaneous abortion” which was a “tragedy compounded by the criminal investigation stigma.”

      Now I had a miscarriage 30 odd years ago and they called it a spontaneous abortion way back then. It isn’t a made up term-it’s a medical term.

  25. gmanfortruth says:

    When people say it like it needs to be said, it might come out like this: http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/bill-whittle-get-work

  26. @ Anita….BF posted this…..”“he is not committing it – he is holding it ready, ready to move deftly when the time is right. Entrepreneurs and businessmen like him do this in uncertain times – they will not commit their resources into a future of extreme uncertainty, and will wait it out until the future becomes more clear.”,

    Let me explain this a little further as it relates directly to a false premise that many assume. People have a tendency to forget about risk…..most live in the “now”….I see it, I want it, debt be damned, I want it now.” They have not been taught different. Therein lies a false premise of…it becomes a right.

    Businessmen/women that have been around for awhile and that study economics understand what is called risk. Risk is very easily defined. It is exposure to the chance of injury or loss. Do not take it any further than that. You take a “risk” everyday that you get into your car and drive away. You determine that it is worth the risk of your life and your car when you pull out of the driveway to go to the store or go to the hair dresser or go to the movie

    Business is no different. If you are fortunate enough to have some money, you determine the same risk of your money. You determine it on a daily basis and you categorize it to need at the time or your perceived need at the time. It is a calculation. What do I need today and what do I “THINK” I will need in the future. What is unfortunately lost, in my opinion, is most people do not think of the future past one year. They live under the false premise that I do not have enough money or assets to plan for the future. We make calculations every day, week, month, and year as to need and as to future need. Business makes long term calculations as well as short term calculations. ( Short term equals current needs and long term equals future needs and future needs will be based on what is needed for future short and long term. )

    As BF has stated….it is very hard to do and takes thought and time. Today’s generation has always grown up with computers, internet, and wi-fi. To them, the norm is instant gratification. To them, if it is not on the internet, it ain’t so. A great example…..used to, in the investment world, when you invested in the stock or bond market, trading took place over a period of days. When disaster hits, it took weeks for news to get around or when a drought happened and supply and demand became affected it took weeks for stock markets and bond markets to respond and the response was measured and thought out because men/women sat back and made decisions. Today, decisions are made by computer. Bond markets, hedge funds, stock markets all have “models” built into them supposedly based on some analogy or history. If “A” happens, then “B” will always happen and computers trigger buy and sell arrangements without any thought process…..just some model. This is why you have false inflation and then “market” corrections. Some major earthquake happens in Sri Lanka….in 5 seconds we know about it. Some people call this technology and faster information means better calculations. Some people discount this…such as we do. The computer is nothing more than a tool and anyone who makes decisions based solely on computer models..needs their head examined.

    As a family, we made the decision a long time ago, after learning a lesson during the early 80’s and again in the 90’s, that computer driven models that trigger sell, buy, and put options are not a good thing. It moves too fast and leaves NO ROOM for reason. The millennium kids today rely on computers to do their thinking. Go to the stock exchange today and watch the floor. It is horrific….everyone is running around with I Pads and watching things……when there is a burp in the market or a tsunami happens somewhere, the computer automatically plugs in some model and “VOILA” some projection is slammed out there. Joe Diode on the floor hits his button and so on and so on and so on. Decisions are made based on computer models and not reasoned through. For this reason, we have decided to rid ourselves of investments in the stock and bond markets and we have significantly outpaced the market over the last 15 years…by double digit margins.

    Business will also not invest in long term opportunities today because of laws that are passed. For example, the 3.8 percent surcharge on capital returns. why do we wish to give away money? We simply invest in things that compensate for the 3.8%….but this does hurt the country in that investments are not lining up……do away with this 3.8% and watch the money line up. So we make decisions on the basis of laws and things that are passed and this affects future…..so that is why we are sitting on cash right now and watching and waiting. Smart money does this. It is better to invest off shore today because of the laws and taxes that the future is going to bring in 2015 – 2018. Who knows what will be passed later….So, we make decisions on investments based on what we can turn quickly and do not make long term investments for awhile. It is too volatile out there.

    Now, can this apply to people who are on minimum wage…..yes. It is a matter of perspective. You determine your risk and you determine need on now and future and make decisions accordingly. But you have to rid yourself of the ” I want it now ” mentality. Creature comforts, vacations, the kid’s bible school, cars….are all deemed important….but are they? It is a decision and decisions costs money. Just look at people with EBT cards. Everyone of them has a new smart phone, or drives a new car, or has a 50 inch TV set. Go to a store and watch who renders an EBT card and then follow them out into the parking lot and see what they drive. Look at the clothes they wear……Unfortunately, incentive in this country is on welfare programs and “what can I get today”….it is not on saving money and planning on the future. And the ones that do plan and save…well, we are ridiculed and labeled. Pennies and dimes make dollars and dollars make more dollars. I would venture a guess that when most people get a bonus….the first thing on their mind is a tv or car or vacation….not what can I do with this to plan for something in the future.

    So, we, as a family, made a decision a long time ago to only use computers as a tool and not rely on computer models to make our decisions. We look at how the law holds for investment….a person that can only invest $100 is no different than a Warren Buffet who invests $100 million….the numbers are bigger. That is all. The risk to your $100 is the same as the risk to $100 million.

    I know that this is a long explanation of risk and why we plan the way we do….your risk is different but the basics are the same….only the numbers change.

    • Anita and others,

      More on dissecting D13’s mind here.

      Money, in economic theory, is perfectly fungible for any good or service you want. The dollar you hold can buy a million different things that you may want. But you can only spend that dollar once, that is, buy one thing.

      You will here this economic theory by this title “Opportunity costs” – that is, “doing this thing disavows doing another thing – thus, doing this thing cost you the opportunity to do another thing. Going to New York cost you the opportunity of going to Paris, that is, what you gained in New York cost you any gain in Paris.

      So money in hand gives you the ability to buy from a long list of choices, but once used you no longer have that long list of things to buy – it suddenly is just one thing

      So before you spend that money, you must be sure that thing you buy is what you need and want – if you err, and you really needed “this other thing” after you spent your money, you’re in a bit of trouble.

      But because the future is uncertain, you can never know the purchase you made today was exactly the right one for tomorrow. The more uncertain the future is (typically, uncertain in a bad way), the more risk you have that the purchase today will be wrong for the future.

      So D13’s ilk tend to delay unnecessary purchases so to allow the future to unfold into more certainty, which means holding more fungible cash. This allows them to still hold on to “New York” OR “Paris” – and wait and see which one will be more gainful.

      The more uncertain the future, the more you need to hold onto choices.

      However the game warps when it is money that becomes uncertain as well as the future. This is where it is much, much more dangerous by orders of magnitude. Money in hand suddenly becomes no longer fungible – that is, today your dollar buys two apples, but in the future, maybe only one.

      That is the world we live in today.

      Now, the richer you are, the less this money uncertainty affects you. If you have a million dollars, apples doubling in price will not deprive you of apples to eat. But if you only have a dollar, apples doubling in price is a serious threat.

      Whereas D13’s ilk have more flexibility, you do not.

      So you have to work even harder then he to overcome money uncertainty

      • Drat!..Was typing mine up..haven’t read this yet..hope I didn’t just put my foot in my mouth.

      • The only thing you left out my friend…..is that in the warp,,,,THAT is the RISK that we take. We understand dollar value but, again, are in a position to change the landscape pretty much on a moment’s notice. Which is a reason, that we watch world currency evaluations and inflation rates very closely. The other thing that we watch with a microscope are transportation costs world wide. Great indicator.

        • For those interested, we watch world currency rates and inflation as indicators. Even though the EURO is still valued at $1.37, it is still not going to replace the dollar on the world market….now when the EURO starts rivaling the dollar, that changes the landscape. However, we do not see that happening in the near future despite the best efforts of Obama to undermine the dollar. We still see the USA as being the best compared to the EURO, the Sterling, or the Yuan….everybody is worried about China….in the last three quarters, investors had a negative return on the Yuan. So, the dollar remains strong despite its weakened condition.

          The main reason that the Euro will not replace the dollar is availability and the fact that Europe, despite the ECM…is still fractured.

          Transportation costs….great indicator of inflation and the impact on the world wide economy.

    • I gotcha Colonel and Flag and appreciate your comments. Colonel, I’m very happy that you are also ‘utterly whatever he called you up top’. Since you too are ‘utterly whatever’ that put me in good company. I’ll take that. 😉

      My situation is different than both of yours. I made the decision to close my business only months before my mom passed. I had some cash, the business ended up with cash, and mom left me some cash. No where near the kind of cash you guys have, but an awful lot of cash for me. I was already debt free at the time. I decided two things at the time..that I was not going to work that hard ever again, and that I wanted to give some years to my family, son was only 11 still at the time. So I purchased a fair amount of metals, have been living off some for 5 years now, and I still have some in a mutual fund. I do not do stocks since I was burned hard in 08/09. The plan continues for another 2 years where my son will graduate HS, I’ll sell my buildings (I live above them) and buy a small secluded home and still have cash on hand. I plan to go back to work full time then..or possibly part time..and only for about 10 years, then I’ll retire for real. I’ve been fortunate in that I’m frugal (been called all kinds of names for that) and my plan seems to be working. Son is dead set on the Marines so college on me is not in question. I hope that my biggest expense for the rest of my years, beside a home which is covered, will be gas for roadtrips. I’ve second guessed my plan a couple times. I could have been working these years and retired early for real, but losing both my parents before I was even 50 made me want to just slow down and enjoy a few years with my kids. So I’m a saver not a spender, which is where my original question came about. What to do with cash. Your replies make me feel that I’ll be fine.

  27. Two horrible decisions out of SCOTUS this morning….though I’m sure most here will disagree with my take….haven’t read the decisions yet so I’m still hoping the majority at least limited the scope some…

    • Seems the Harris v. Quinn case was limited in scope (the way it was limited doesn’t seem to make much sense – my assumption is that it was a political compromise to get Kennedy on board; though again, haven’t waded through the entire decision yet…)

      • I have waded through it on a cursory basis…..it is limited in scope to the 8 workers and the fact that since those workers were hired by individual patients, they did not fall under the scope of Illinois Law even though Illinois pays part of the fees.

        However, in relation to Abood…..I see this decision being a very definite stepping stone to overturn closed shop and compulsory dues. I also read the AFL/CIO Amicus Brief…..it was not compelling.

        • The limitation to the 8 workers based on that fact really makes no sense to me. I agree this is one quick case away from abolishing compulsory dues…

          • In the Amicus briefs ( there were several as you know ) I think that they screwed themselves…..the briefs kept bringing up the Abood case which gave Alito the open door writing in support, to bring up that perhaps it is time to revisit Abood in light of the 1st Amendment. I can see this as being, like you said, one short case away of fighting Abood on the 1st Amendment…and since this court and past courts have been almost sacrosanct on the 1st………interesting times ahead.

            • Don’t believe it was they ‘screwed themselves’ with the briefs — Alito didn’t need the open door; he was ready to barge straight through it regardless of any perceived opening.

              While we’re discussing SCOTUS — what did you think of the decision re buffer zones around abortion clinics?

              • I think that SCOTUS made the correct decisions. There are other ways to locally enforce buffer zones……

              • On the subject of Abood…..Alito may have been ready to barge through the door but the Amicus briefs were simply not compelling to me at all….lame in fact and the fact that they, the briefs so heavily relied on Abood, opened the door for more ammunition for striking down Abood…..which I would agree with anyway. I do not believe that compulsory dues are constitutional at all and the way that Abood was written was dubious at best and I am surprised it has taken this long.

              • My main issue with compulsory dues (first off, let’s agree they aren’t really ‘dues’ so to speak as the non-member is not being made a member; they are fees associated with the costs expended by the union in arguing on behalf of all workers and not just union members) stems from the requirement, by law, that in negotiation with employers, the same benefit must accrue to union members and non-members alike. Non union members should not be benefiting from the union’s actions for free.

                Do you believe this law should be changed so that non-union members do not reap the benefits negotiated for by the unions?

              • “Non union members should not be benefiting from the union’s actions for free.”

                Ah, just because you assert a “benefit” does not make it so.

                They do not want your “benefit” so they do not want to pay for it, even if you still shove it down their throats.

              • On the buffer zone issue, a lot has been written about the court’s own 250 foot buffer zone….

              • “They do not want your “benefit” so they do not want to pay for it”

                Not sure how a raise is not deemed a benefit, but fine – they don’t want the benefit, they shouldn’t have to pay for it….but they also shouldn’t be entitled to receive the so-called ‘benefit’.

              • Buck,

                Everything has a cost – hidden and unhidden. But I know you like the “get stuff for free” model in your politics, so you always and only look at one side.

                Absolutely! As soon as that becomes reality – that is, only those who pay into the union get the union – the union will collapse.

              • I would think the union would collapse once those who do not pay reap the benefits of the union.

              • Buck,

                Why would it?

                If you pay for a cab and I take a ride with you, why would you suddenly go bankrupt? Or the cabbie? He is already transporting you and my presence does not change the destination, nor the cost, nor anything.

                Same here. The cost of the Union is “X” no matter who pays. If the Union can survive on “Y” dollars, adding more people…. changes nothing of what the Union does. Contracts are not costed on a “per person basis”.

              • Because non-union workers never get raises?

                I don’t get these silly arguments and we hear them all the time due to Act 10. “Class sizes will jump to 75-100 kids, there will be no maternity leave, blah, blah, blah…..” All because the union told them so.

                What nonsense. We’re not in The Jungle anymore.

              • BF,

                If as a non-union member I will reap the same benefits as a union member and not have to pay a dime, why be part of the union? Therefore, I drop my membership along with x% of the rest of the union members. Now, the union has less funds coming in to use….so the union raises dues on members….so more members decide to decline membership (remember, they still get the same benefits anyway!)….and so begins the death spiral.

              • Buck,

                Yep, that works!
                (though the union doesn’t “need to” raise its dues, either.)

                But no matter how the cake is cut, unions are dead.

    • Yes, only to a true Statist/Collectivist like Buck would be a ruling that “allows” people freedom to join or not join a union be a “bad decision”.

      To Buck, freedom is a bad thing.

      • Yup, I just hate freedom! You got me there…

        The ruling isn’t about ‘joining’ a union per se; it is about the ability of the union to collect fees based upon work done that must (by law) benefit the non-union members.

        • Buck,

          No, its a choice of people to decide the merits of whether the union, regardless of what it does or does not do, benefits those people or not.

        • I know you just luv when others pay for your goodies and when those goodies are forced on people who do not want them.

          You can then proclaim, “look we are ‘giving’ this to you, so you must pay” and utterly ignore that people simply do not want those goodies.

          But you want that stuff. So the little twist “you are getting something for free then!” is your call.

          • Your post makes no sense.

            • Of course it does, you just don’t like it.

              You often rant against those who avoid suffering imposed fees or taxes as those “who are getting something for free!” – such as those that avoid highway taxes whilst using highways, etc.

      • Recently listened to a radio program about “freedom” and how the left vs right interpret what freedom is. I think they may be onto something. (I know, I know – except for you anarchists, we are all statists, just in varying degrees. Just go with this.)

        To the right, freedom is tied to individual rights, being free from government intrusion, make our own decisions. Minimal regulations, minimal taxes, etc. It takes work to research, understand and make logical decisions.

        To the left, freedom means “free from” having to make decisions as to their own individual rights. They want government to tell them when, where and how. They are then free from having to understand, be responsible for, or fight back. The can just plod along “freely” in their life, because their beloved government is taking care of things. They can thrive on the emotional aspects, because the facts are left to their government and if the government says so, it must be.

        I’ve started asking my friends on the left and right what freedom means to them and not surprisingly, in most cases, the above is true in varying degrees. Ask how a government program works, like social security or medicaid and the liberals often have no idea, because, well government. I ask about global warming and again often have no idea, but government. Ask for examples on how women’s rights are being stripped and they can’t, but hey, government. On a local issue I’ll ask to explain Gov. Walker’s Act 10 and how it impacts our local school districts —- nothing.

        It really might explain our inability to understand each other.

        • “To the right, freedom is tied to individual rights, being free from government intrusion, make our own decisions.”

          Yet the right argues against gay marriage, for instance. How do you square that one away?

          I’m not going to even touch on the absurdity of the commentator’s obviously skewed argument as to the left’s definition of freedom.

  28. Happy Monday to all! Great decisions from SCOTUS today! Religious liberty and freedom of choice to participate or not in a union are great things! Need to take victories wherever we can find them!

    Have a great week SUFAites!

    • This isn’t religious liberty, it is the perversion of the concept.

      • Yep, more liberty is a perversion of liberty – that’s the ticket!!

      • The ruling is also limited to “closely held” corporations…..

        • That’s the Roberts Court MO….this may appear to limit the ruling, but not by all that much. There are plenty of closely held corporations out there meeting the definition.

          It is absolutely perverse to argue that a corporation – a legal entity distinct from its owners – has the capability of religious belief.

          • Would you say the same if it was a Muslim that owned the corporation?

          • It seems to me that they are ruling that closely held…say within a family, even though publicly traded, is one and the same even though a corporation is a legal entity. I have several corporations, for tax and liability reasons, that are closely held…..closely held meaning that I or three or four members of the family are the only stock holders……If we held a strict belief that was religious based, I think the ruling is correct because the decisions are made by the board and since it is closely held and that there are no differences in opinions of the board…..I think this ruling was correct. Many times the IRS has held that liabilities of closely held corporations flow through to the owners…..why not religious beliefs flowing through?

  29. gmanfortruth says:

    @Buck, You obviously have never been in a union and conducted union business. From my own experience, 1) it’s the Unions that actually screw the workers by limiting via contract their ability to earn more based on the performance, but rather, they are stuck all boggled up with the rest on the union members. 2) Unions will always add a “me too” clause to contracts, because employers have paid non union good performing workers more than those that fall within the contract, why, you ask, because a non union worker isn’t bound by a contract that limits their pay options. 3) To claim that non-union workers benefit from union representation is total BS and nothing more than Liberal talking points with NO basis of fact. It is, in fact, just the opposite, as I have stated above.

    Unions have outlived their usefulness in our current society. They have been a large part of bankrupting cities and States, due to ridiculous demands that can never be met. While they have done good in the past, they are actually holding people from making the proper money that equals their ability and keeping bad employees from getting canned.

    Hope today finds you and yours healthy and happy these days 🙂

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Do you believe this law should be changed so that non-union members do not reap the benefits negotiated for by the unions?” YES, it should outlaw “Me Too” clauses and let people make the money they earn and keep it. “Me Too” clause are nothing more than compulsory rules that affect non-union employees, which, if I’m a non-Union employee and a clause in a union contract makes it impossible for me to negotiate MY wages and benefits as an individual employee, I would consider a lawsuit to remove the clause, because it unfairly puts me at the mercy of the Union negotiators and contracts that I don’t have any ties with 🙂

  30. BUCKSTER……..I love Labor Law,,,,,my forte’ so to speak.

    Well, a rose by any other name is still a rose…..fees, dues….what the hell. I think that it is high time that the labor laws need to be re-written or actually done away with since mot of what it is about is covered under so many different laws now. ( ACA< ADA<EEOC ) but as it pertains to labor unions and the lawful right to form a union.

    I will throw back your stance that majority rues until the majority tramples the rights of a minority or the one. For a state to be a union shop state wherein a union (collective bargaining) agreement that requires all employees to become members of the union (association) usually within 30 days of hiring, and to retain their membership as a condition of employment in the firm. Also called association shop. If, under an NLRB certified election, the majority of employees want a union, I am cool with this. However, to force a company to recognize that union as the sole bargaining unit even over those that wish to be non union, is dead ass wrong, in my opinion. If a company wishes to negotiate separately with non union employees, it should be free to do so and not be a violation of Labor Law. An individual that wishes to work for a unionized company but not be a part of the union should also be free to do so and not have to pay compulsory dues (fees) because someone else has been "forced" upon him.

    You asked. "" Do you believe this law should be changed so that non-union members do not reap the benefits negotiated for by the unions?" My answer to that is yes, I do believe this and you should also if you wish to stick by the majority/minority position you espouse. There should be an inherent right to join or not join a union and state laws that require such should be unconstitutional and void. That is my opinion.

    Now having said this, there is a very simple way to beat unions…..Very simple and I do not know why more don't do it.

    You can defeat a union very simply by refusing to agree to the Dues Check Off language. While it is a mandatory subject of bargaining, all it requires is good faith effort. Simply agree to the terms and conditions of employment. Negotiate and bargain all the wage, hours and working conditions. Dues check off is not a wage issue, nor a working condition issue, nor a condition of employment issue. It is strictly a union issue. Simply adopt the attitude that you have several employees that do not wish to have dues deducted and, therefore, none will be deducted. It is a matter of the union collecting individually the dues. If a strike is called over the check off, it is classed as an economic strike and therefore, becomes an illegal strike. Permanent replacements can be hired.

    The minute a union has to collect for themselves the dues….it starts to fail. Takes about two years but the unions leave.

    • You and G are correct – labor law (especially as it applies to unions) is not my forte and I don’t pretend to know all of the ins and outs here.

      If you both remember, I was the one that suggested, based on this ruling, to stop the practice of requiring the benefits negotiated for by the unions to accrue to non-union members. Based on my current (albeit, limited) knowledge on the topic, you have no argument from me here.

      • Rats, I was looking forward to some banter today….but agreed. The nonmember can negotiate their own benefits. I do not know of many employers that wish to do this…when we had the teamsters Union for awhile in an Illinois company we had, it was very simple. We separated Illinois from the rest of our holdings…..made it a separate company. The Illinois employees at the time wanted a union…cool beans with us. Since it was a separate company with its own identity, it had to stand own its own. It was real easy to sit down with the representative and say all we want is a 10% after tax profit…you can have the rest however you want it and we will be happy for you to hire your own certified accountant and audit the books each and every year. They agreed to the profit side of the issue and the rest was very easy…..negotiating certain rules. That was it……..but we did not agree to the dues checkoff…..so the union agreed to the profit side and tried to collect their own dues…it did not work and they declined to hang around after the contract ran out. It was not profitable for them.

  31. gmanfortruth says:

    The bodies of three Israeli teens kidnapped have been found in Hebron in West Bank

    • BEEE EFFF! Those peaceful Palestinians………..

      • Anita – you’re barking up the wrong tree…

        🙂

        • I’m a gluton for punishment.

          • The key, in my very humble opinion, to BF’s argument lies in where he decides to draw the line as to when this all started.

            To my knowledge (and BF, please please correct me if I’m wrong), BF has never argued why he draws the line where he does as opposed to drawing the line at some other point. But he is quick to state that it is ridiculous when you try to drawn the line 500 or even 1,000 years ago. Go figure.

            The whole situation really is a ‘chicken or the egg’ type problem with the ‘correct’ answer depending entirely on when the line is drawn…

            • I tend to think that when all the principals involved are dead. Time is up. Slavery is over, slaves and slave masters are all dead. It is a non issue. All the Turks that killed all the Armenians are dead, non-issue. In a few more years , all the founders and fighters for Israeli independence will be dead as will the last of the Nazi bastards. Then those things will become non-issues. They do not lose their cautionary historical value but we have to stop punishing people for the sins of their fathers and at the same time tell the descendents of the formerly aggrieved , “Get a life”. .

              • SK,

                That works if the atrocities stop.

                But they have no stopped in Armenia, nor Palestine, nor on the Kurds, etc.

                What has stopped is your thinking.

            • It is not a chicken/Egg issue.

              From day one, Zionists have been seizing the land of Palestine – and they continue today unabated. How do you suddenly believe this is a chicken/egg situation?

              I do not draw any lines anywhere – I argue such lines are idiotic by pointing out – when someone makes some ridiculous claim of who owned what when, that we give it all back to the very original “owners” – the Egyptians. But since they are “Arabs”, suddenly everyone abandons that argument line (until it pops up again).

      • Who claimed they were peaceful?

%d bloggers like this: