close

Welcome to JBS.org

Login or create your account below.

Member Login

Constitution Blog



Obfuscation, Demands, and Tantrums PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Written by Linda Schrock Taylor   
Wednesday, 12 August 2009 01:47

Obama stareThe Obama administration and its actions are breathtaking, and not in a good way. I find myself wondering from whence these people came. They cannot be true Americans because they could not pass the easiest civics test. Might they be aliens from another solar system? Might they even be radioactive? They certainly have brought a deadly form of something to America! 

The man at the top shows neither understanding nor respect for the background, meaning, and intent of the U.S. Constitution. In addition to a total lack of common sense, the administration gives appearance of being positively obtuse. Terms like “checks & balances” appear incomprehensible to them as well “government by the people,” while the specific role and duties of the Executive branch of our Republic speed over their heads. I can often be heard yelling at the TV, “These people do not even know whether they are afoot or horseback!”

How could this administration and its supporters develop such a grab bag of flip-flop, badly-focused, illogical, unintelligent, anti-American, wrong-headed, kill-the-Constitution policies?

The answer to “How could they….?” is “The Appeal’s Arsenal of Facts 1914,” written by Fred D. Warren, published January 1, 1914 by Appeal to Reason, and addressed to “Brother Agitator.” This small 192 page book, details the procedures for converting America into a new Evil Empire. This socialist workers handbook explains more than most Americans even want to know. However, we must equip ourselves to recognize our enemies. The government has now, more than ever before, become the adversary of the people, and Obama’s plan is to “fundamentally transform America.” 

Obama’s transformational plans come right out of the “Working Program of the Socialist Party,” Adopted at Indianapolis, May 17, 1912. Read them and weep:

1. Collective ownership of all transportation, communication, and all large scale industries.  (Bailout and control of the automotive industry anyone?)
2.  Immediate acquirement by municipalities, states, and federal government of all grain elevators, stock yards, and storage warehouses.
3. Extension to public domain of all mines, quarries, oil wells, forests, and water power.
4.  Further conservation and development of natural resources to include: scientific forestation, reclamation of arid and swamp tracts, storage of flood waters and the utilization of water power (Think Hoover Dam, as one example), stoppage of waste of soil and the products of mines and oil wells, development of waterway and highway systems.  (Interstate Highway System)
5.  Collective ownership of land.  (The Department of Natural Resources sends buyers to Michigan farm and land sales. With the FED’s printing press behind them, the DNR out bids all others.)
6. Collective ownership of the banking and currency system. (The FED, financial bailouts, AIG)

The socialist plan also includes “the conservation of human resources, particularly of the lives and well-being of the workers and their families”:

1) Shorten the workday, 2) Secure for every worker a rest period of not less than 1 ½ days per week, 3) Secure more effective inspections of workshops, factories, and mines. (Think MSHA and OSHA), 4) Forbid employment of children under 16 years of age. 5) Co-operative organization of industries in penitentiaries, 6) Forbid the interstate transportation of the products of child labor, of convict labor, and of all uninspected factories and mines, 7) Abolishment of the profit system in government work and award contracts to cooperative groups of workers. 8) Establish minimum wage scales, 9) Abolish official charity and substitute a non-contributory system of old age pensions, and create a government insurance plan to protect members against unemployment, invalidism, industrial disease and death.

Now let us contemplate the demands — the other side of the same coin — of the Socialist Party:

1. Absolute freedom of the press, speech, and assemblage.
2. Adoption of a graduated income tax; extension of inheritance taxes; to be employed in the socialization of industry.
3.  Abolition of the monopoly ownership of patents and the substitution of collective ownership.
4.  Unrestricted and equal suffrage for men and women.
5.  Adoption of proportional representation, both nationally and locally.
6.  Abolition of the senate and the veto power of the president. (I guess the Obama camp forgot to read this one.)
7.  Election of the president and vice president by the direct vote of the people.
8.  Abolition of the Supreme Court’s right to overrule anything enacted by congress.
9.  The abolition of the present restrictions upon the amendment of the constitution, so that the instrument may be made amendable by a majority of voters in a majority of states.
10. Granting of the right of suffrage in the District of Columbia.
11. Extension of democratic government to all United States territory.
12. Enactment of further measures for general education.  The bureau of education to be made a department.    
13. Enactment of further measures for the conservation of health.  The creation of an independent bureau of health with such restrictions as will secure full liberty for all schools of practice. (Liberty for abortionists!)
14. Separation of bureau of labor from the department of commerce and labor and its elevation to the rank of a department.
15. Abolition of all federal district courts and the US Circuit Court of Apples. State courts to have jurisdiction. The election of all judges for short term.
16. Immediate curbing of the power of the courts to issue injunctions.
17. Free administration of justice.
18. “The calling of a convention for the revision of the constitution of the United States.” (Fundamentally Transforming America)

Beware, Americans! Think carefully about the socialists’ plans, both those already in force and those that Obama is forcing, as well as these quotations from columnist Joseph Sobran that lend important perspective:

Liberals have a new wish every time their latest wish is granted. Conservatives should make them spell out their principles and ideals. Instead of doing this, conservatives allow liberals to pursue incremental goals without revealing their ultimate destination. So, thanks to the negligence of their opponents, liberals control the terms of every debate by always demanding 'more' while never defining 'enough.' The predictable result is that they always get more, and it's never enough.

If Communism was liberalism in a hurry, liberalism is Communism in slow motion.

It is good that the attempted government takeover of healthcare has broken millions of Americans out of their decades long slumber. But to preserve liberty in the face of the socialist programs supported by the current administration and its supporters, will require continous and ongoing vigilance from all Americans, for there is much at stake.


Linda Schrock Taylor
is a reading specialist and former public school teacher. She teaches English composition at a state university.


 

 
Glenn Beck Exposes Cars.gov Malicious Behavior PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Written by JBS Staff   
Monday, 03 August 2009 09:44

Glenn BeckIf you think the "cash for clunkers" program is all sweetness and light, and that this is an example of the federal government helping the little guy, well, think again. Apart from the very questionable constitutional basis for the program (what Constitution? Anybody see a Constitution around here?) Glenn Beck of Fox News points out that the government operated website threatens your privacy, and claims to own your computer if you happen to click on the wrong link.

Critics claim that Beck is making a mountain out of a mole hill. One of these is blogger Chris Thomas who writes of Beck's concerns:

Beck pitches the entire story as if regular consumers are going to log on to the cars.gov website and, in the course of their use, encounter this message and blithely click “ok,” thereby giving the government’s jackbooted thugs the right to check out their financial spreadsheets and boost a copy of their porn collection.

That’s not going to happen.

An astute viewer of Beck’s expose might notice that the website that Beck is browsing is blue whereas the cars.gov website is green. This is no trick of the studio lights; though he never mentions it, what Beck is demonstrating only occurs on the dealer side of the website. The consumer side - the side that anyone who is not an automotive dealer will access - is green. What Beck demonstrates is not even something that a casual user of the site could stumble upon; they would have to go looking for it.

Thomas is right, as far as he goes. Most consumers will not be faced with a message telling them that their computer and everything on it is now the property of the U.S. government. But that doesn't really improve the situation at all. Car dealers, being the entities most affected, are still supposedly private entities -- and an affront to their privacy is really no improvement over an affront to the privacy of the average citizen.

Thomas makes the other valid point that "a quick Google Search turns up more than 800 instances of the “Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system…” verbiage on a collection of public and private sites." But, what does that do to make the overreach less harmful? Actually, it makes it worse because the chance that the average citizen is going to run afoul of one of these sites is greater simply because there are more of them.

Critics have some good points to make about this, primarily when they point out that those accessing government sites need to be aware of the conditions under which they access those sites, then proceed on a "buyer beware" basis.

But that still misses the problem, namely, that government has far exceeded its constitutional bounds. If it were kept within its legitimate sphere by the Constitution, and by a wary citizenry demanding fidelity to the nation's founding law, we wouldn't see programs like the recent bailouts, nationalizations, spying programs, and cash for clunkers, among many more. And, as a result, we wouldn't have to worry about the abuses of power these programs may enable.

 
June 1st, 2009 Milestone Reached - Real ID Moves Forward PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Written by Jim Capo   
Monday, 01 June 2009 01:29

Enhanced Drivers' LicensesJune 1 was the day passports, passport cards or Real ID/WHTI complaint (RFID "enhanced") driver licenses began to be required for citizens of the United States who re-enter the country from Canada at land crossings. Before June, any driver's license or birth certificate would have worked for you.

The requirement is part of the State Department's Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) that is being rolled out across Canada and the United States (and eventually Mexico). This is Real ID by another name. WHTI compliant means RFID enhanced cards. Your driver's license will still have a pretty state logo wrapper, but be clear: This is now your electronically trackable national identification card.

If unresisted, mission creep will be the means for the presentation of this card becoming more and more a part of our monitored daily lives.

 

 
Falling For Mom's Invocation of Patriot Act Abuse PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Written by Jim Capo   
Saturday, 09 May 2009 14:33

Janet NapolitanoMy son is innocent...and he's a victim of the Patriot Act!

With leaked DHS domestic terrorism reports targeting just about everyone in the country coming out every week or so now, it was probably inevitable that a false alarm story like Ashton Lundeby's would come along. 

While the FED's work out whether or not young Lundenby is guilty or not of taking in PayPal donations in exchange for calling in bomb threats to schools, the rest of us should be redoubling our fact-checking procedures. We'd all like to think we've been at this long enough not to be so easily duped by one distressed mother and one local TV station looking to put the greatest possible hype on their story, but in the current environment the temptation to be swayed by emotion is high. The counter to such temptation should be to remember that damage control is such a waste of valuable reasources and credibility.

Check and verify.  We all need to keep our guard up.

 

 

 

 
Computers, Customs, and You PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Written by Becky Akers   
Tuesday, 07 April 2009 08:35

CopyrightWithout a warrant, probable cause or even the faintest suspicion, US Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) may decide to search your computer and all its files, your cell phone, and iPod when you return home from abroad. It offers the usual excuse for eviscerating the Fourth Amendment: “Our ability to inspect what is coming into the United States is central to keeping dangerous people and things from entering the country and harming the American people.” Actually, its ability to inspect is harming the American people since Customs’ warrantless rummaging sends some victims to prison.

Just as the Constitution prohibits the government from such generalized searches, so it nowhere establishes a customs office. That required an act of Congress in 1789 because, as CBP itself admits, the new central State “had one overriding concern...money: where to find it, how to collect it [sic for ‘steal it’], how to keep it rolling in.” Talk about your naked greed.
Two hundred years later, the Feds still have the same overriding concern. But CBP no longer confines itself to robbing folks on the Feds’ behalf. It now also “protects” Americans – or at least the American IP lobby.
IP stands for “intellectual property.” It refers to ideas and inventions as well as the process of copyrighting or patenting them. But it’s a loaded term that disguises an enormous philosophical debate and even bigger power-grab.
Let’s say you’ve just invented an engine that runs on saltwater, not gasoline. Or your lazy, no-account son-in-law who calls strumming a guitar “work” composes a song. I wrote this article.
These creations are essentially ideas; are they “property” as well? If so, do each of us own what we’ve produced? To what extent? Can you prevent another inventor’s adapting your engine to fresh water? Can Mr. Composer stop Team Obama from using his music in a re-election campaign? If you copy this article and sell my priceless prose, do I receive a cut of the proceeds?
Some folks answer “no” to the above. They reason that a finite number of people can use tangible property at one time while ideas suffer no such limits. Only you can wear your shirt at this moment; only you and a few friends can sit together on your sofa. But theoretically, at least, everyone worldwide can simultaneously think about Rudyard Kipling’s “If.”
Others say ideas are indeed property. People who work with them should reap the fruits of their labor. Just as customers pay a manufacturer for his widgets, so they should pay Kipling for his poem. Consumers of ideas should compensate the writers, composers, and inventors who deal in them.
Wherever you land in this debate, we who distrust Leviathan can all agree that private systems would best protect IP. After all, that’s how we secure physical property like our homes or cars (locks and keys; smoke detectors; burglar alarms) and virtual property (passwords on email accounts).
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution does authorize Congress "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." Earlier Americans spoke of this “exclusive Right” as a “monopoly,” prompting the question of whether anyone, even its creator, can monopolize an idea. No wonder people with financial interests in patenting replaced “monopoly” with the friendlier “intellectual property” in the late twentieth century.
But the Founding Fathers, for all their brilliance, were fallible; we need not leave Article 1, Section 8 to find more mistakes, such as empowering the Feds to “coin Money [and] regulate the Value thereof” as well as “to establish” – and thereby control – a Post Office. Allowing government to meddle with IP is as disastrous as allowing it to regulate money.
Managing IP increases the State's power. For example, America’s new national government granted monopolies on “useful” inventions – as politicians defined that: applicants actually appeared before the Secretaries of State and War as well as the Attorney General to persuade them of said “usefulness.” Today, inventors often work for corporations that own hundreds of patents and field lobbyists to mold legislation in their favor; ditto for associations of writers and composers. That means the State not only doles out patents and copyrights, it also polices consumers, such as those who download “illegally distributed” files from the internet.
Introducing laws and compulsion inevitably pits citizens against one another as legislators crown some folks victors and everyone else losers. In IP’s case, the winner varies according to time and country. Some governments want IP’s chief beneficiary to be “society” rather than the inventor, especially when their nations are poor and developing. They generally offer only crude legal monopolies on ideas; they may even actively encourage native sons to swipe inventions and discoveries from other nations. Indeed, eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Americans copied – and often improved on – gadgets like the steam engine from such places as England.
As peoples grow wealthier, however, full-fledged inventors replace the thieves, and they now clamor for IP to protect their profits. That’s particularly true in sophisticated countries like the US.
Obviously, such protection extends only as far as a particular government’s muscle does. But the rise of superpowers in the twentieth century and the explosive growth of IP law have foisted a new danger on us: international agreements that force the desires of IP lobbies in richer nations on everyone else. That includes not only larcenous “inventors” in poor countries but even consumers back home.
Which brings us to the infamous Anti-Counterfeiting and Trade Agreement (ACTA), a series of negotiations conducted intermittently since 2007. Among the participants are the US as well as the 27 members of the European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia, and even Switzerland and New Zealand. Their politicians are writing regulations to control all of us; later signatories will have no input on the provisions, even if the poor people who want progress in their countries outnumber the inventors who want protection. Such are the perils of one-world government.
American consumers are just as imperiled. The music and movie industries, among others, fret at our “pirated” downloads, and they press Leviathan for draconian new measures to stop us. No one knows for sure what those measures are: in addition to its other evils, ACTA veils itself in deepest secrecy. Indeed, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) petitioned the Feds to disclose their actions on ACTA under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The Bush Administration denied EFF’s request with its all-purpose refrain: national security. No surprise there – but Obama’s regime with all its hype about “Transparency and Open Government” cited the same bizarre pretext when refusing KEI’s demand.
That has commentators who follow IP in a justifiable tizzy. Richard Stallman, “a software developer and software freedom activist,” says of ACTA, “We wouldn’t like it if we knew. …[T]hey could do to us whatever they want. I can only guess that it’s going to be nasty, because if it weren’t going to be nasty, they wouldn’t need to keep it a secret.”
Leaked papers from ACTA’s negotiations are indeed nasty. They propose to criminalize “peer-to-peer file-sharing,” or, as the Recording Industry Association of America puts it, “Policy makers and law enforcement authorities must…recognize that Internet-based infringement, even when done without a profit motive, takes place on a commercial scale and has the same impact on copyright owners as for-profit piracy. It is essential…to criminalize such conduct, even though the individual actor may not be acting with any profit incentive, or possess what one would ordinarily think of as 'criminal intent.'" In other words, if you patronize Youtube, MySpace, or Facebook, which feature “unauthorized use of content on the[ir] platforms,” or if your briefcase holds Xeroxes of copyrighted articles, you’re a criminal.
How would “authorities” enforce the law? ACTA proposes to draft your Internet Service Provider (ISP) as cop: ISPs will spy on your surfing and downloads, just as laws against drunk driving force bartenders to monitor patrons. And just as bartenders must cut off tipsy customers, so ISPs will cut off customers after their third “offense.”
Horrific and intrusive as a private company’s surveillance may be, it gets worse. ACTA also urges customs officers worldwide to follow the US’s example and search computers, iPods, cell phones, etc. Other governments may not give lip-service to freedom, but they also neglect to rifle guests’ electronics as they enter the country. The Feds seek to change that through ACTA, compelling those countries to match American tyranny and thereby please the IP lobby.
Rather than liberty, we now export chains.

Becky Akers
, an expert on the American Revolution, writes frequently about issues related to security and privacy. Her articles and columns have been published by Lewrockwell.com, The Freeman, Military History Magazine, American History Magazine, the Christian Science Monitor, the New York Post, and other publications.
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next > End >>

Page 2 of 7