All states are not created equal

I found this interactive map which graphically represents how states stack up against one another with regard to how much personal freedom their citizens have in comparison with residents of other states. Not surprisingly, Maryland, my former state of residence, came in at a pathetic rating of 44 out of 50.

Where Maryland fails is the personal freedom dimension, where it is the second-worst-ranked state. Maryland boasts the seventh-strictest gun control laws in the country: carry permits are expensive and rarely issued; “assault weapons,” cheap handguns, and large-capacity magazines are banned; sales are banned unless by licensed dealers; and so on. Its marijuana laws are fairly harsh as well, except that the first offense of high-level possession is only a misdemeanor, and the state has an almost-useless medical marijuana exception. Maryland’s impositions on personal freedom also include extensive auto and road regulations, tight gambling laws, a ban on raw milk, a law allowing police to take DNA from certain felony arrestees, burdensome private and home school laws that require private school teachers to be licensed and effectively subject curricula to government approval, very high drug arrest rates (though incarceration and other victimless crimes arrest rates are low), lack of same-sex marriage or equivalent status (since enacted by the legislature and confirmed by popular vote), high tobacco taxes, and an airtight, statewide smoking ban. The only personal freedom on which Maryland is better than average is the freedom to consume alcohol: taxes on booze are low.

The low taxes on alcohol are just common sense; drinking heavily makes it easier to deal with the gross impositions on personal liberty.

How does my new state of residence, the Commonwealth of Virginia, fare? A vastly superior ranking of 8 out of 50.

What's most interesting about this survey is the direction each state is trending. Virginia went from 9th to 8th since the previous survey in 2011. Maryland, of course, went the other way - dropping from 42nd to 44th.

Looks like I made my move just in the nick of time.

New Tizona Post

While the sheeple pretend to live in the freest nation on the face of the Earth, the police state expands. TSSA - coming to a highway near you.

New Tizona Post

A huge victory for the cause of freedom: a Federal court has ruled that cops can no longer treat videoing them in the course of executing their duties as a criminal offense.

I hate being right

In my last post, I wrote about my dread about bad law resulting from a knee-jerk reaction to the Casey Anthony verdict. I hate being right.

Michelle Crowder of Durant, Oklahoma is calling for Caylee's Law, a piece of legislation that would make it a felony for a parent to fail to report a missing child to law enforcement. And people are listening. Important people.
[...]
This won't help Caylee directly. But it will help America's kids.

It will help the quarter of gay teens who are kicked out of their homes by their parents simply for admitting they love someone of the same gender, kids whose parents leave them to rot on the sidewalks. As it stands, parents CAN kick their kids out, and with rules that don't require they report them missing, abdicating their duties to love and protect their children isn't a felony.
[...]
Caylee's Law, or whatever you call it, would help us make sense of how a system will punish a parent with child abuse charges for leaving children unattended for a long period of time (and rightly so!) but let a parent skate for not reporting a child missing. It can't be one but not the other, America. That's why we need a law.

Did I not tell you? Yet another law "for the children". Ye gods!

But the law of unintended consequences always rides shotgun with these kind of emotion-laded knee-jerk laws. Exhibit A: your 16-year-old daughter runs away with a musician after trying to poison you for the insurance money. You want this back in your life? You figure, "Eh, goodbye and good riddance." But if you don't report your daughter missing and take her back with open arms when she is returned by the cops, you're guilty of child abuse. Of course, if you do take her back, you'd better sleep with one eye open.....but I digress.

And where did this statistic about one quarter of gay teens being kicked out of their homes come from? Sounds fishy to me. I'd wager they're including "boy toys" who ran off with an older man who promised them goodies in exchange for butt sex in that obviously embellished tally. But that "leaving them to rot on the sidewalks" line? Priceless.

Emotions and law make bad bedfellows. But politicians pandering for your vote don't care. They'll pass whatever ridiculous law you tell them you want.

And you wonder why you are less free every day.....

The obvious, stated

It appears that someone FINALLY gets it.  Anne Applebaum of Foreign Policy magazine says in a mainstream publication what I've been saying for years on my little blog.

HOMELAND SECURITY HASN'T MADE US SAFER

Hardly anyone has seriously scrutinized either the priorities or the spending patterns of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its junior partner, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), since their hurried creation in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Sure, they get criticized plenty. But year in, year out, they continue to grow faster and cost more -- presumably because Americans think they are being protected from terrorism by all that spending. Yet there is no evidence whatsoever that the agencies are making Americans any safer.

DHS serves only one clear purpose: to provide unimaginable bonanzas for favored congressional districts around the United States, most of which face no statistically significant security threat at all. One thinks of the $436,504 that the Blackfeet Nation of Montana received in fiscal 2010 "to help strengthen the nation against risks associated with potential terrorist attacks"; the $1,000,000 that the village of Poynette, Wisconsin (pop. 2,266) received in fiscal 2009 for an "emergency operations center"; or the $67,000 worth of surveillance equipment purchased by Marin County, California, and discovered, still in its original packaging, four years later. And indeed, every U.S. state, no matter how landlocked or underpopulated, receives, by law, a fixed percentage of homeland security spending every year.

As for the TSA, I am not aware of a single bomber or bomb plot stopped by its time-wasting procedures. In fact, TSA screeners consistently fail to spot the majority of fake "bombs" and bomb parts the agency periodically plants to test their skills. In Los Angeles, whose airport was targeted by the "millennium plot" on New Year's 2000, screeners failed some 75 percent of these tests.

Terrorists have been stopped since 2001 and plots prevented, but always by other means. After the Nigerian "underwear bomber" of Christmas Day 2009 was foiled, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano claimed "the system worked" -- but the bomber was caught by a passenger, not the feds. Richard Reid, the 2001 shoe bomber, was undone by an alert stewardess who smelled something funny. The 2006 Heathrow Airport plot was uncovered by an intelligence tip. Al Qaeda's recent attempt to explode cargo planes was caught by a human intelligence source, not an X-ray machine. Yet the TSA responds to these events by placing restrictions on shoes, liquids, and now perhaps printer cartridges.

Given this reality -- and given that 9/11 was, above all, a massive intelligence failure -- wouldn't we be safer if the vast budgets of TSA and its partners around the world were diverted away from confiscating nail scissors and toward creating better information systems and better intelligence?

Amen, sister!

Now that it's been said out loud in the mainstream, can we PLEASE have a rational debate about this colossal monstrosity Washington has created?

Keep in mind that the REAL purpose of DHSS* isn't to protect us. The real purpose of DHSS is to convince the American people to forfeit their freedoms in exchange for purported protection and safety.  As Ms. Applebaum has appropriately noted, we haven't gained a lick of enhanced security from the agencies of oppression, DHSS, and its bastard stepchild, TSSA*. 

Isn't it time to stop pretending and put an end to this mindless charade?

* You can't abbreviate Schutzstaffel without the double 'S'

Neutral? Hardly.

The lame duck (with heavy emphasis on the "lame") Congress is trying to force through all manner of ill-conceived legislation.  Gays in the military.  The DREAM act.  The START treaty.

But that stuff is merely a distraction.  There's something more sinister afoot than any of that.  Matt Drudge is posting one, after another, after another, after another, link to stories that identify a threat far more dangerous to our freedoms than anything else in the news right now.

The Federal Communications Commission will vote on Dec. 21 on whether to adopt regulations that ban the blocking of lawful traffic but allow Internet service providers to ration Web traffic on their networks.

So? What's the big deal? This is.

The fixers here are pursuing something called "net neutrality," which will change the way certain Internet providers pay for privileged rights to the Web and charge their customers accordingly. "Net neutrality" sounds good to anyone not paying attention, but it must be accomplished by a seizure of authority to do so, a seizure not by Congress (which would be scary enough), but by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Here's the skinny. The Internet is currently the last bastion of freedom. It exists, for the most part, free from interference from government or regulators. It is the one place where an American citizen can still speak his or her mind unfiltered.

While the Internet is pooh-poohed as being frivolous and "experts" insist that it is not subject to the protections in place for Big Media (the BM for short), the fact is that a number of extremely important news stories, including Matt Drudge's breaking of the Monica Lewinsky story, have had as their mode of conveyance the "frivolous" Internet.

An authoritarian government seeks to restrict freedom of the press at all costs.  Ours is becoming increasingly authoritarian.  The BM is already working under the thumb of government regulation.  They are also tied to corporate masters whose survival hinges on government's selective picking of winners and losers.  The BM is no threat to the government.  The Internet is.

If you understand government, you'll understand that the FCC won't be content with setting "fairness" rules.  They'll also want to regulate content.  Politically charged speech would most surely be restricted ("We have to stamp out hate speech!").  The writings of this particular blogger, fond of referring to the past two Presidents as King George the Dim and Il Duce, would most certainly fall under their definition of hate speech.

But, hey.  You go right on sweating gays in the military, the DREAM act, and the START treaty.  Nothing to see here.  Move along now.

Vulture Droppings: "Check your bag, sir?"

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.

---

Not content to merely annoy and harass, the TSSA (you can't spell Schutzstaffel without the double S) has moved on to actual assault.  Their new policy - submit to the nudie ray or get groped - has a lot of people in high dudgeon.

The Germans staged an innovative protest of the scanners -- you wanna see me naked?  I'll come to the airport naked!

Vox Day has opined.  So have Will Grigg and Ye Olde Journalist.

Now it's my turn.  This edition of Vulture Droppings is brought to you by the letter "G", as in "grope"

---

"What's the big deal?", I hear some so-called "conservatives" ask.  We NEED the government to keep us safe in the airports.  Even if that WERE true (I believe wholeheartedly that it isn't), how is groping 13-year-old girls for sport keeping us safe?  Yeah, you read that right - only children over the age of 12 get groped. Bet that makes all of you fathers with hot 15-year-old daughters happy.

"You don't HAVE to get groped!  You can go through the scanner, you know!"  Yeah.  Not any better.  The scanner shows everything God gave you in graphic detail.  Think I'm kidding?  Check this out - not only can you see dude's junk, you can tell that he's not circumcised.  Again, the question to all of you fathers with hot 15-year-old daughters -- you want your little girl leered at by Tommy TSSA like she's some sort of common whore just because she's flying to see grandma?

---

"But the pictures are purged after they've been viewed! The embarrassment is only temporary!"  No, no they're not - at least not all of them.  Body scan pictures are starting to crop up in various places; one courthouse in Florida (figures!) has over 35,000 saved images!  Now, fathers, ask yourself this: how would you feel about scanned images of your hot 15-year-old daughter showing up on the internet?  Are you STILL a supporter of the scanners?  I can't see how.

---

TSSA, naturally, stands by the scanners and their new grope-down procedures.  They deny that any groping is going on, notwithstanding the growing number of complaints from the molested (see here, here, and here also).  Nor are they too happy with those who protest against being scanned or groped - this guy faces possible criminal charges.

---

The issue is apparent. So is the solution, IMO. Abolish the TSSA. Let the airlines handle their own security. You may not feel safer, but you'll feel less violated.  And you'll get back the freedom you once had to enter an airport without being molested.

Of course, if you like that sort of thing....in which case, I say - TO THE AIRPORT WITH YOU!

---

Those who fear technology hate freedom

My assertion is this: fear of technology is emblematic of a hatred of individual freedom.  To buttress this claim, I present Exhibit A.

US President Barack Obama lamented Sunday that in the iPad and Xbox era, information had become a diversion that was imposing new strains on democracy, in his latest critique of modern media.

Obama, who often chides journalists and cable news outlets for obsessing with political horse race coverage rather than serious issues, told a class of graduating university students that education was the key to progress.

"You're coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don't always rank all that high on the truth meter," Obama said at Hampton University, Virginia.

"With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, -- none of which I know how to work -- information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation," Obama said.

The key phrase in this ode to intellectual incuriousity (say, wasn't that the knock on King George the Dim?) is this: "[N]one of which I know how to work..."

It's funny - it feels like just yesterday I was lambasting Justice David Souter for this same failing.  Notice something here?  Both individuals refuse to embrace technology.  And both individuals embrace policies that are anti-individual freedom.

Oh, c'mon, Vulture!  Two examples?  That's all you can muster?

There'll be more.  How do I know?  It's like this: people who are engaged in free, productive activity in society utilize technology to make them more competitive, productive, marketable, etc.  They use technology in the free exchange of ideas.  They use technology to make their lives and the lives of others around them better.

People who stand in opposition to individual liberty disdain such activities.  The get their money the old fashioned way: they loot it.

Further proof "conservatives" don't get it

I frequently receive email advertisements from NewsMax.com.  It's what happens when you don't pay attention to checkboxes when you "register" for a website.  I could unsubscribe.  But then I'd miss gems like this.

It is remarkable that Theodore Roosevelt (TR to his friends), who has been beloved as an iconic patriot and president, would become a controversial figure today.

This unusual development is largely due to the rise of Glenn Beck.

Glenn has been right on many issues and his views are resonating with Main Street.

But he is wrong on one big issue: Theodore Roosevelt is not, as he claims, the root cause of President Obama’s intrusive, “big government” policies.

It is no accident that TR’s face is chiseled into Mount Rushmore along with those of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, as he is rightly regarded by historians as one of the greatest presidents in American history.

As TR himself might say, "Balderdash!"

TR is on Mount Rushmore because President Calvin Cooledge was adamant that, in addition to the Father of our Country, George Washington, the monument must include two additional Republicans and one additional Democrat.  Since Republican Presidents not named Reagan have been uniformly dreadful, TR was settled upon as the second Republican, the tyrant Abraham Lincoln being the first.

Notice that the two Democrats chosen for the monument had been dead in the neighborhood of 100 years at the time they were chosen.  You really do have to go back that far to find a Democrat who was worth a damn.

Back to TR.

I've been reading a book called American Progressivism.  It's a tough read; it mostly consists of the speeches and political writings of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.  Mr. Ruddy, TR was everything Glenn Beck says he was.  He may even be worse than Beck has alleged.  Roosevelt was actually proposing grander Fascist policies during the 1912 Presidential campaign than Wilson was!  While Roosevelt may not have brought about the world's first Fascist government -- that was left for Wilson to accomplish -- he was instrumental in setting the table for Wilson's abuses.

So why is Ruddy so adamant in defending Roosevelt?

A few words of disclosure here: I am an ardent Theodore Roosevelt devotee and have been a longtime member of the Theodore Roosevelt Association (the membership roster has me listed after another TRA member, Karl Rove).

And my brother, Daniel Ruddy, a historian, is the author of a new book called “Theodore Roosevelt’s History of the United States” (published by Harper Collins). It draws upon TR’s own words to construct a unique history of the United States based on Roosevelt’s colorful insights and provocative views.

Ah, now it becomes clear! His brother has written a "history" of Roosevelt. The word "history" is in scare quotes because we're all familiar with the kind of "histories" we get when authors with a predisposition to adulation for the subject of their work write.  They tend to produce slavering paeons that conveniently omit the subject's peccadillos.

Anyone who calls themselves a conservative but thinks that TR was peachy keen is no friend of freedom.  No one -- I repeat, NO ONE -- who loves freedom can justify the policies and pronouncements of this smug, "I know best what's good for you the sheeple" elitist a-hole.

Of course, that's the kind of disinformation we get from the Team Elephant mainstream these days.  Get used to it.  Because, notwithstanding all pronouncements to the contrary, this Elephant hasn't changed its spots.  It's every bit the Donkey Lite party in 2010 that it was in 2008.

A genuine tragedy

This past weekend a plane carrying Polish President Lech Kaczynski, his wife, the Polish Defense Minister, and a number of other Polish government officials crashed in Russia en route to the 70th anniversary commemoration of the Katyn massacre.  All aboard were killed.

This is a genuine tragedy.  Lech Kaczynski was truly one of the good guys.  He was a fervent anti-Communist in the 1970s at a time when being an anti-Communist in Poland was an act of genuine courage (or insanity).  Kaczynski's activism landed him a stint as a political prisoner.  He was a member of Solidarity almost from its inception.

This man stood bravely in the face of the ultimate destroyer of men - Totalitarianism - and came away a winner.

He was active in Polish politics from that nation's liberation from the Soviet Bloc until his death.

Genuine men of courage like President Kaczynski are to be honored, not just in death, but in all times.  They endure persecution and prison so that others might be free.

Godspeed, President Kaczynski!

Feeling like a jackass

Once upon a time a community of wild mules, donkeys, burros, and jackasses roamed free.  They lived in complete freedom.  But there were problems.  They were susceptible to predator attack.  There were no rules preventing mules from abusing donkeys (or vice-versa).  There were no protections against feeding ground encroachment.

So they formed a Pact.  This Pact established common defense against predators and rules to protect against abuses and feeding grounds violations.  Most importantly, the Pact gave assurances to each and every one of the assembled that their freedoms would never be violated.

The Pact established leaders who would represent the animals.  These leaders would have a special wagon to be pulled by the other animals from place to place so that the leaders could perform their duties.

At first, because the wagon was small and the leaders and wagon workers few, it took but a few of the beasts to pull the wagon.  This responsibility was shared by all.  The burden was light, and the demands few.

But over time the leaders started to feel that the Pact restricted them too much.  They became convinced that they could do "amazing things" if those limits were, well, limited.  They were engulfed in an awful hubris.  The "amazing things" they wanted to do were more important to them than the freedoms promised by the Pact.

The leaders were shrewd.  They knew that any overt attempt to break the Pact would result in rebellion.  So over time, bit by bit, the leaders chipped away at the Pact.  By making rules that bordered on violating the Pact without actually doing so, the leaders set precedents that made other rules that DID violate the Pact seem okay.  It was an incrementalist approach.  It was brilliant.

The leaders engaged in a "divide and conquer" strategy.  A number of the new rules were designed to create "favored" classes.  Mules had been greatly wronged in the early days of the Pact.  The leaders used this fact to make rules that allowed many of the mules to ride in the wagon with them.

Then animals without sufficient grazing lands were deemed a "favored" class and were beneficiaries of rules that allowed them to ride on the wagon as well.

The new rules required making the wagon bigger - a whole lot bigger.  Now there were large numbers of animals on the wagon - leaders, wagon workers, and "favored" classes - and many animals were required to pull the wagon.  No, required is too nice of a word.  They were compelled to do so.

Some of the animals - particularly the donkeys and jackasses - began to resent the leaders and the demands placed upon them.  They were branded as uncaring, bigoted, and evil by the leaders.  Those on the wagon certainly agreed.  And, unfortunately, there were enough donkeys, burros, and jackasses who believed the leaders were simply trying to help the "less fortunate" to prevent the donkeys and jackasses from pressuring the leaders to rescind the new rules.

More rules were created.  Some rules limited the amount of feeding ground a beast could have.  Others forced animals to cede some of their feeding ground to animals on the wagon.  The amount of time animals spent pulling the wagon was then linked to the amount of feeding ground they controlled.  More and more animals began to climb aboard the wagon, some as wagon workers, but most as "favored" classes.

Large numbers of burros began to enter the area.  Some pulled the wagon, as had the burros who had been there at the start of the Pact.  But some cried for "favored" status, and were granted seats on the wagon.  Many - WAY too many - simply took over feeding grounds and avoided pulling the wagon.

Over time the situation worsened to the point that there were nearly as many animals on the wagon as there were pulling the wagon. 

Most of those pulling the wagon were jackasses.

What prompted this little parable?  This.

Tax Day is a dreaded deadline for millions, but for nearly half of U.S. households it's simply somebody else's problem.

About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.

Wait, it gets better.

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

Feel like a jackass yet? If you don't, you're probably part of the problem.

False rape accusation punished

On Monday I wrote a post addressing the reality of a false rape allegation being no laughing matter. I wrote that, in spite of the inherent humor in the situation described in the original story, no false criminal accusation is the least bit funny so long as our legal system is as FUBAR as it currently is.

Oh how right I was!!!

A young mother who falsely cried rape, sending an innocent man to prison for nearly four years, will experience firsthand what he suffered -- she'll spend one to three years behind bars for perjury.

"I wish her the best of luck," said William McCaffrey last night of Biurny Peguero Gonzalez.

"Jail isn't easy."

McCaffrey, 33, of The Bronx, was locked up after Gonzalez accused him of raping her at knifepoint on a Bronx street back in 2005.

It was a lie she repeated to doctors, cops, prosecutors, a grand jury and the jury that convicted McCaffrey.

"What happened in this case is one of the worst things that can possibly happen in our criminal-justice system," Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Charles Solomon said as he pronounced sentence.

Gee, Charlie. You really think so? [/sarcasm]

In light of what has been done to him, I think William McCaffrey showed a lot of class in his comments about the heinous shrew whose lies caused him to lose four years of his life and forced him to endure an unmentionable hell in prison. Even so, there is justifiable bitterness.

A person who would "lie and paint somebody as a rapist is worse than a real rapist or a real murderer," McCaffrey said

He also blamed "the arresting officers, the prosecution." Everyone, he said, "wanted to believe the lie, the ADA [assistant district attorney] first and foremost."

My advice to Mr. McCaffrey is this: sue everybody! Sue the city. Sue the District Attorney's office. Sue the hosebag who made the false accusation against you.

The police, in their usual fashion, latched onto a suspect and made no effort to do no more than absolutely necessary in order to continue to dine at the public trough. The ADA was only concerned with getting the win once the case was referred to him. This is true of most 21st century DAs. They couldn't care less if the person they convict is guilty or not. They just want the win.

While at first glance it is something of a feel good story -- lying Jezzibel gets jail time, innocent man is to be freed -- there is still an inequality that screams for remedy. Why, in the name of all that is good, did the bitch only get sentenced to 1 to 3 years? She should have -- at a minimum -- served the same number of days in prison as Mr. McCaffrey endured. At. A. Minimum.

If the courts were concerned with eliminating false accusations of this kind (hint: they're not), they would have sentenced her to 10 years. That's what I would have done if I was the judge. We've got to make it clear to lowlifes like Ms. Gonzalez that robbing a man of his freedom is an offense every bit as heinous as violently assaulting his person.

Freedom is overrated?

It's a little bit mind-blowing to consider that ANYONE would say such a thing...but such a thing was said. In a segment of The McLaughlin Group in which the panel opined on what they consider "most overrated", Mr. McLaughlin chose freedom.

"The most overrated is freedom," McLaughlin said. "When faced with economic uncertainty, people don't want freedom. When they can't see their economic future, they want the nanny state."

And you wonder why the media holds the Tea Party protesters in such low esteem. It is unthinkable to the John McLaughlin's of this world that anyone would choose freedom (including the freedom to fail) over cradle-to-grave socialist utopia.

The mind of a smug, elitist, self-important tool is an ugly, ugly thing. But at least this rare ray of honesty from our talking class is instructive of what exactly we're up against in our uphill struggle to regain our Constitutional freedoms.

Wiener of the Year - 2009

It's time for the least prestigious unknown award currently offered on the old WWW - The Vulture's Wiener of the Year.

I started with a list of potential nominees I considered to be quite deserving. Toes made some suggestions of her own.

My nomination for WotY is the Prezbo. Second is a 3 way tie between Pelosi-Reid-Nepolitano. Can't forget Al Gore or the Nobel Committee

All good candidates, all deserving of the dishonor.

Before I name the Wiener, I'd like to give appropriate "props" to the also-rans.

• President Obama, Il Duce to you regulars. What an MCF of a presidency this guy has had so far! Stimulus dollars for his well-heeled buddies. The Fascist takeover of a large portion of the financial sector and 2/3 of the Big Three auto makers. Special deals for his "friends" buried in the disastrous health care reform Fascist takeover of 1/7 of the nation's economy. And let's not forget his participation in the grotesque charade that is the AGW myth. He's awful, and most deserving of a Wiener.
  


• Al Gore and his sycophants who comprise Big Warming. Not even the smoking gun of the leaked emails of faux scientists actively perpetuating fraud in the service of One World Socialist Utopia (AKA Climategate) has slowed Mr. Gore and his ilk from pursuing new ways to destroy the economies of the West and bring about their desired One World government. He's deserving of a Wiener; hell, he's deserving of a Lifetime Achievement Wiener!
  


• Pottawattamie County, Iowa, prosecutors. As I detailed last April, these execrable slimeballs deliberately hid exculpatory evidence that might have cleared two innocent men from prosecution for killing a police officer. For these lowlifes, winning the case took precedence over justice. They deserve to spend the same 25 years in jail that the two defendants endured. Wiener worthy? You bet!
  


• Congress. Where to begin? (I believe I used those same words for last year's detailing of Congress' Wiener qualifications). Ah, the accomplishments of this Congress! Nationalization of a large percentage of our nation's financial sector. Nationalization of 2 of the Big Three automakers. Passage of Cap and Trade. Passage of health care reform the fascist takeover of 1/7 of the nation's economy, pending committee resolution of the House and Senate bills. And let's not forget H.R. 4173, the "financial reform" legislation passed by the House earlier this month, which provides for as much as $4 trillion in emergency funding the next time Wall Street crashes. God help us when these avaricious clowns are in session. Most Wiener-worthy, particularly leaders Nancy "Air Force 3" Pelosi and Harry Reid.
  


• Big Media (the BM for short). These Il Duce-worshiping tools have been most successful at ignoring news that is inconvenient to his royal worship's dismantling of our economy. They've also managed to almost completely ignore Climategate. Virtually all news related to Climategate and its particulars has come from the British press. The BM should be ashamed. As I wrote last year, they are, collectively, as pompous, imperious, and out-of-touch a group of people as anyone on this planet outside of Congress. Their Wiener-cred is unchallengeable.
  


• Judge Barbara Walther (last year's Wiener). She has done everything in her power to steamroll through convictions against FLDS men accused of crimes in the wake of the militaristic (and questionably Constitutional) raid on the Yearning for Zion ranch last year. She has shown her true colors as an authoritarian who wipes her ass with the Constitution. She is worthy of a Wiener, but more appropriately deserves prison time for judicial malpractice.
  


• The Team Elephant establishment, who insist on marginalizing populists like Ron Paul and Sarah Palin in favor of Rockefellerite losers. There will be no two party system in this country so long as elitists run the Republican party. Wieners? You betcha.
  


• The Team Donkey establishment. The party of John Kennedy, Scoop Jackson, and Hubert Humphrey is now the party of Bill Ayers, ACORN, and Nancy Pelosi. This is NOT a party interested in advancing America or American interests. They are all about establishing a One-World Socialist Utopia. The only question is whether they are more deserving of a Wiener or to be brought up on charges of treason.
  


• Janet Napolitano. What a waste of oxygen! From the minute she took her position as the head of the Department of Homeland Security (DHSS - you can't spell Schutzstaffel without the double S) she has been an epic fail. Her handling of the latest act of terrorism was epic in its incompetence. She needs to be fired. She's a walking example of what the Wiener award is all about.
  

This year's Wiener was chosen because of the harm that people like these pose to a free Constitutional republic (or, in the case of the USA, what REMAINS of a free Constitutional republic).

The 2009 Wiener of the Year is shared by two blogs: Caput Penitus Culus and FLDS Texas.

These two sites exist solely as a meeting place for bigots where they can share their bigotry in a little echo chamber.

They are openly hostile to arguments that bring their bigotry into question. They engage in the worst sort of character assassination imaginable against those whose views are different from their own. I was actually called a pedophile for simply opining on the Constitutionality of the YFZ raid!

Commenters who persist in questioning their views - particularly if those commenters match venom with venom - are banned as "trolls". There is no reaching these people with logic, reason, or even baseball bats.

So what makes them a threat to our Constitutional freedoms?

These are the very sort of people who made the Third Reich possible. They are people who are more than willing to attribute the worst sort of crimes to people different than themselves. They are people who are more than willing to see these scapegoated outsiders punished to the fullest regardless of what kind of shady actions were taken by the government to secure those convictions. All that matters to them is that the outsiders are punished (or, preferably, expelled).

They willingly sell our freedoms - particularly the 1st and 4th Amendments - just to assure that the government can "get" the outsiders. Then, as if that weren't enough, they pronounce legal justification for what has happened!

They are too caught up in their hatred and bigotry to figure out that they have imperiled anyone who is "different" in any way to be a target of voracious agents of der Staat. They're too stupid to realize that they've imperiled THEMSELVES.

You may disagree with my choice for WotY; if so, have at me via comments.

Congratulations, bastions of bigotry! You're the Wiener of the Year!

Playing fast and loose with the numbers

By now you've heard about the big Tea Party in Washington, DC last Saturday. The local media made such a big deal reporting about it in advance that I had no idea it was happening until it was over. Whatever.

I know it is SOP for protest event organizers to try to maximize the count in order to enhance the perception that their cause is highly supported. So it's not surprising that so-called "Conservatives" were reporting turnout in the 1 to 1.5 million range, with some even going as high as 2 million.

Likewise, it's SOP for those aligned in opposition to an event's purpose to minimize the count in order to diminish the perception that the opposition cause is highly supported. Hence the NY Times reporting that "thousands" had assembled in DC, and the Washington Compost reporting that "tens of thousands" were involved in the protest.

Did I just infer that Big Media (the BM for short) is standing in opposition to the Tea Party protesters? Inferring? No. Flat out stating as fact? Yes. More on that below.

Counts have been all over the map. I've seen counts as high as 2 million and as low as 20,000. The National Park Service unofficially estimated the crowd at between 950,000 and 1.2 million. My father-in-law heard somewhere that the "official" tally was 195,000.

Here's the rub. While an event of this type is a step in the right direction in letting our rulers know that we're getting fed up, goosing the turnout numbers is NOT going to help. The Million Man March lost most of its luster once the organizers tried to intimidate the Park Service into confirming that 1 million men were there (the Park Service estimated only around 600,000 in attendance for that event).

Now, back to the BM. The NY Times hid the story on page A37, below the fold. Contrast that with a story on a much smaller rally in Minnesota in favor of the government take-over of health care. That story was on Page A-35, ABOVE the fold. You say: big deal - two pages difference! But in the Sunday paper, two pages and a location above as opposed to below the fold are factors impacting which stories are read and which stories are overlooked. The NYT established plausible deniability because both stories are essentially buried. But the story in favor of Il Duce's excellent adventure will reach a small but significant number of people who won't view the other story.

Rather than duplicate effort, I call your attention to this entry on the NewsBusters website documenting the BM's rather unbecoming treatment of the event. More and more it seems that the BM is pro-Staat, anti-freedom.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

The peacenik moonbat wing of the Far Left was absolutely beside itself following the 2008 elections. Why, with a Team Donkey majority in Congress - maybe even a SUPER-majority in the Senate! - and His Royal Holiness Barack 'Il Duce' Obama seated upon the Abraham Lincoln throne, there seemed to be no doubt that there would be Peace in Our Time.

You know what I'm talking about, right? The DoublePlusGoodHopeChange!

Maybe not so much...

The Obama administration is weighing plans to detain some terror suspects on U.S. soil -- indefinitely and without trial -- as part of a plan to retool military commission trials that were conducted for prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The proposal being floated with members of Congress is another indication of President Barack Obama's struggles to establish his counter-terrorism policies, balancing security concerns against attempts to alter Bush-administration practices he has harshly criticized.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

I was among those who hammered King George the Dim for his cavalier attitude towards due process, habeas corpus, and various suspensions of person liberty (think: TSSA). But at least he was consistent! Il Duce careens from one position to another based on which way the wind is blowing. A megalomaniac is bad enough. But a megalomaniacal economic Fascist equipped with the arbitrary powers established by King George and his Neo-Conmen?

It just keeps getting better, doesn't it.

Domestic terrorists...us?

DHSS (not a misspelling - you can't spell Schutzstaffel without the double 'S') has determined that there is a grave threat of internal terrorism in this country. This threat isn't from active, organized groups like ALF (Animal Liberation Front) or ELF (Environmental Liberation Front), groups who have an actual history of terroristic acts. No, this threat is from Right-Wing Extremists. You know, like....well, apparently, anyone to the right of Mao Tse Tung.

The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in "rightwing extremist activity," saying the economic recession, the election of America's first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias.

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines "rightwing extremism in the United States" as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.

Yep, that's right. As someone who 'reject[s] government authority in favor of state or local authority', yours truly is, according to der Staat, a domestic terrorist. Never mind that this Vulture has neither engaged in nor advocated any act of violence against the US government (or, for that matter, acts of violence against anything at all with the exception of computer keyboards). Never mind that this Vulture is a hard-working taxpayer living what's left of the American dream and whose only 'crime' is a wish to return to the founding principles of Life, Liberty, and Freedom. I oppose collectivism; I am, therefore, a thought criminal.

And it isn't just me! If you're ex-military, you're a likely terrorist! Why is that? Why, Tim McVeigh was ex-military. Ergo, all ex-miltary are suspect, according to chief DHSS asshat Janet Napolitano.

"I was briefed on the general topic, which is one that struck a nerve as someone personally involved in the Timothy McVeigh prosecution," Ms. Napolitano said.

Quod erat demonstrandum. NOT!

The White House has distanced itself from this inflamatory report (WHY does that seem to be a running theme with the Obey-me administration? One of the organs of der Staat issues a controversial 'ruling', and the White House runs for cover).

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi, a Democrat, was extremely unhappy with the report and wants answers - now!

"This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans -- including war veterans," Mr. Thompson said in the letter sent Tuesday.

"As I am certain you agree, freedom of association and freedom of speech are guaranteed to all Americans -- whether a person's beliefs, whatever their political orientation, are 'extremist' or not," Mr. Thompson said.

The report "blurred the line," and Mr. Thompson said he is "disappointed and surprised that the department would allow this report to be disseminated" to law enforcement officials nationwide.

The American Legion has slammed the report as well.

American Legion chief David Rehbein on Tuesday blasted the report as "incomplete, and, I fear, politically-biased" and took special aim at its warning that returning veterans having difficulties reintegrating society could be recruited by right-wing groups for possible terrorist attacks.

In a letter to Napolitano, Rehbein underlined the document's mention of Oklahoma City bombing author Timothy McVeigh's US Army background and called it "as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam."

"The American Legion is well aware and horrified at the pain inflicted during the Oklahoma City bombing, but Timothy McVeigh was only one of more than 42 million veterans who have worn this nation's uniform during wartime," said Rehbein, who group comprises some 2.6 million members.

So what's my take on it? It's simple, really. When King Obey-me took office, he appointed former Clinton administration cronies to head key federal agencies and cabinet positions. Hearken back with me to those halcyon days of yesteryear, when Clinton administration paranoia about Right-Wing Extremists ran amok. For the nostalgic among you, this is just like going back to 1993 all over again...except without the dreadful Mariah Carey soundtrack.

This is DoublePlusGoodHopeChange. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

Update: William Norman Grigg hits it out of the park. Seriously, if you haven't checked him out, do so! He's positively brilliant.

Obama gets one right

King Obama, Lord and Savior of Big Media (the BM for short), finally got one right. After weeks of misstep after pratfall after faux pas after f-up, Obama finally enacted a policy that is Constitutional.

Raids by the federal government on legally sanctioned medical marijuana facilities will become a thing of the past. President Obama is averse to using federal funds for this purpose, particularly when state law provides for medicinal marijuana use. Moving forward, decisions on medical marijuana raids will be left up to state government.

FINALLY, a reversal of the ridiculous and patently unconstitutional policy of King George the Dim! Our Constitution explicitly provides for states to make their own laws and for those laws to supercede Federal law except in cases where it directly violates the Constitution or the Constitutional rights of the citizens of that state. This is the first step towards more individual freedom undertaken by this administration. Hell, it's the first step toward more individual freedom that I can remember in a very, very long time.

Regardless of how you may personally feel about drugs and drug abuse, there's one true unassailable fact: the Drug War is an absolute failure. It's a cluster eff on a biblical scale. It's done nothing but ruin lives, both here in the US as well as in the drug producing and drug importing countries. Look at Mexico. Mexico may erupt in civil war at any moment - drogistas against federales. And for what? Did we learn nothing from Prohibition? Absolutely nothing?

Apparently.

So give credit where credit is due. Obama scores major libertarian points with this new policy. It's a start.

The treatment of GW Bush

Pappy Bush is in the news today. He is pimping Jeb as a future presidential candidate. He's also not happy with the treatment his dimwitted son King George has received from the media. Boo frickin' hoo!

Just after the election, this clown lamented the way his champion had been maligned.

Mr. Bush has endured relentless attacks from the left while facing abandonment from the right.

This is the price Mr. Bush is paying for trying to work with both Democrats and Republicans.

---

It seems that no matter what Mr. Bush does, he is blamed for everything. He remains despised by the left while continuously disappointing the right.

---

The treatment President Bush has received from this country is nothing less than a disgrace. The attacks launched against him have been cruel and slanderous, proving to the world what little character and resolve we have. The president is not to blame for all these problems. He never lost faith in America or her people, and has tried his hardest to continue leading our nation during a very difficult time.

Our failure to stand by the one person who continued to stand by us has not gone unnoticed by our enemies. It has shown to the world how disloyal we can be when our president needed loyalty -- a shameful display of arrogance and weakness that will haunt this nation long after Mr. Bush has left the White House.

Pardon me while I barf!

Are we talking about the same GWB, Mr. Shapiro? The one who routinely wipes his ass with the Constitution? The one who sold out the Republican party? The one who gives away billions of tax dollars against the will of the American people after a similar give-away was rejected by the Senate? The one who has us entangled in foreign wars without end? The one who, worst of all, saddled us with the Department of Homeland SSecurity (der Shutzstaffel).

Mistreatment? How about HIS mistreatment of this country? King George the Dim is one of the foremost enemies of personal freedom this nation has ever seen, and it's seen a few. His "treatment" may have been harsh. But, aside from the moonbat contingency who hate the mere fact that he breathes, nearly all of the criticism of King George has been, if anything, too little, too light, too unfocused.

Our Founders would have strung him up. Instead, we the taxpayers will pay him a handsome retirement pension, provide him with a praetorian guard 24x7, and pay much of the price for his future Presidential library (to include both books he's ever read).

You've got to put down the pipe, Mr. Shapiro. Put it down. Step away from it. Join us back here in reality land.

Sore Toes and a Bleeding Heart

I'm a firm believer in pointing out writers and bloggers who are doing a commendable job of drawing attention to the issues of freedom and government corruption that are the predominant theme of this blog. Anyone who's ever read this blog knows that I have a major man-crush on Vox Day and Steve Czaban. I've always enjoyed the wit and wisdom of Der Hausfraurer, Nate. In the past year, I've added William Grigg (Pro Libertate) and Andrew Bolt to my list of those who "get it" and are fighters against over-grasping government.

Today I'd like to call your attention to a lady who is fighting the good fight against a singularly corrupt and evil organ of government -- Child Protective Services (CPS). I'd like to introduce you to Sore Toes and a Bleeding Heart, a blog that caught fire during the FLDS fiasco.

Contrary to the name, "Sore Toes" is NOT a bleeding heart in the traditional, Upper West Side Limousine Liberal sense of the term. Her heart bleeds for the children being yanked away from family and home on the flimsiest of excuses. She's got a very good grasp of the issues, and a real nose for digging up the dirt on the "civil servants" behind Der Staat's malevolent claim on our children.

She's a talented writer and is significantly nicer in her treatment of the foul vermin she reports on than, say, Vox Day, Nate, or I. It's not a chick blog -- she addresses hard issues and does it well. Give her a read -- you'll be glad you did.