Now I mean it…This is REALLY my last blog

OK, so I was ticked off when I wrote that last post and I should’ve known better.  On another blog I was labeled a “liberal” (sort of correct, actually) and my family and I were threatened with death.  

Sheesh. 

The threatening post has been deleted (I wasn’t the one who’d complained…I’m glad somebody else did) and I never felt threatened, really, but it pointed out to me, once again, that I really have better things to do than blog.  I intend to get on with those things.

Anyway, as a parting shot/olive branch/denouement, here’s an old column I’d written several years ago (I think in 2002?)  that should balance the forces of hatred a bit.  If not, too bad:

In 1939, while FDR was planning USA’s entry into WWII, U.S. agents began compiling the CDI (or Custodial Detention Index); a race/ethnicity-based list of potentially suspicious persons in the USA.  The CDI was unprecedented, of course; but what happened next was even more so.

On December 7, 1941, immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt used the CDI to round up not only those of Japanese ancestry, but of German and Italian descent as well. 

FDR first identified his enemies both here and abroad.  Then he tracked down and rounded up potential enemies within our shores.  Then (and only then) he waged war in Europe.

Most Americans don’t know this history.  It’s generally not taught.  But it should be -particularly since our war with Germans and Italians had not yet begun when many thousands of innocent Italians and Germans were imprisoned and their property was seized.

Think what you will about the legality and morality of FDR’s actions; but at least he was thinking ahead. 

We’re not so clever today. 

Americans were introduced to what we now call “terrorism” at the 1972 “Munich Massacre.”   Since the 1979 hostage crisis in Tehran, there have been scores of Muslim-lead kidnappings, bombings and other attacks on US persons and property. 

Yet whose side did the USA take in Clinton’s war on Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1995?  The Bosnian Muslims, of course.  The USA fought side-by-side with Mujahideen from Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations against the mostly-Christian Serbs who’d been fighting Islamic jihadists since before the Crusades. 

Are the Bosnian Muslims grateful?  Well, not the ones who’ve joined the Muslims fighting us in Iraq.  Not the prominent Bosnian Muslim cleric who’d accused the USA of genocide.  Not the mostly secular but ethnically proud “Bosniaks” who’ve been radicalized against America.  They’d identified their enemy long ago, and it’s us. 

Even after 9-11, we’re afraid to identify, let alone “profile” the enemy.  Our leaders, who now possess tracking technology and massive databases that make FDR’s CDI look pitiful, prefer to squash the rights of every American citizen rather than to disturb the sensitivities of a few. 

FDR would have hog-tied jihadists by 1979 at the latest.  Yet we instead train our enemies, arm them, fund them, fight their enemies, and then act surprised by what happens next.  We’ve never legally declared war on anybody (not since WWII!), yet we are killing and being killed on several fronts today. 

While I have my doubts about what’s been called our “Greatest Generation,” there can be no doubt that we are surely the dumbest.

You see, the very heart of our current malaise in war, daily life, immigration and commerce has nothing to do with our enemies. 

We can’t identify our enemies because we can’t identify ourselves.

What are the “American Values” politicians speak of?   Are they the ones we can’t display in public anymore?

Do we still believe “it’s a free nation,” when the USA has the world’s highest percentage of citizens in prison?  Is this still the “Land of Opportunity” when we have more litigation, regulation and taxation than all the other nations on earth combined?

Do we even know what we’re spreading in the Middle East when, “Democracy” according to Benjamin Franklin, “is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch”?

And we say we’re promoting the Rule of Law in Iraq, but America is under the Rule of Lawyers -law is irrelevant for anyone carrying cash.  And how many of us have even read the U.S. Constitution? 

It takes only an hour to read; and the Bill of Rights are only one sentence apiece!

What was America all about in 1941?  Read the signature line of FDR’s controversial internment orders:

“…in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and forty-one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and sixty-sixth.”

Year of our Lord?  Independence?  That sure sounds good to me. 

Liberty or Bust,

Andy Horning

The Freedom Farm

Golden Calf Republicans

Once again, I’m not just disappointed, I’m disgusted. 

No, it’s not the Sexiest Man Alive thing; I didn’t really expect to win that.

I’m disgusted with the “true conservatives” and “Tea Party” Republicans who apparently have no idea what it is they want; and who obviously have money, time and energy to burn on the altar of their “War On Terror.”

It’s hard enough to figure out what it is that you attack.  But what do you defend?  What do you want?

O ye idolaters!  No amount of flag-waving, no Democrat Demonizing will save you from your hypocrisy, immorality and failure.

After the 911 attacks when the war drums announced our intentions to the world, only Ron Paul of Texas wanted to legitimize/legalize our violence with a constitutional, congressional declaration of war against Iraq.

As Republicans bared their teeth at Dr. Paul, then-Chairman Henry Hyde hissed (imagine the serpent in the Garden of Eden):

“There are things in the Constitution that have been overtaken by events, by time.  Declaration of war is one of them. …There are things no longer relevant to a modern society. …Why declare war if you don’t have to? …We are saying to the President, use your judgment.  So, to demand that we declare war is to strengthen something to death.  You have got a hammerlock on this situation, and it is not called for. Inappropriate, anachronistic, it isn’t done anymore…”

Now these Palin-worshipping, Cheney sycophants are whining about the legal consequences they created?

Y’all claim to support the constitutions, but you don’t when it matters.  Y’all claim to oppose the “big government policies” of “the left,” but you never have.

I admire the rhetoric of Ronald Reagan as much as anybody.  But even FDR ran a tighter ship.

No Republican Governor or President in the past 60 years has cut the size, cost, intrusiveness or unconstitutionality of government.  The last USA President to actually sign a reduction of spending and debt was JFK.  Nixon created the EPA, fired up the War on Drugs, pushed socialist wage and price controls, and in general, delivered what Democrats had only promised.

I don’t think Republicans believe what they say they believe now.

I do understand, to a point.  Nobody alive remembers how free markets build schools, roads and hospitals; or how they dole out charity.  Nobody alive can extricate the politics of today from the technology to which we truly owe our present comforts.  We can’t exactly calculate the opportunity costs of government or factually claim how life would be if we hadn’t gone authoritarian.

But are you blind to the failure all around us?

Every day there’s a new “conservative” organization claiming to be the true torch-bearers for the Founding Fathers.  They’re continually crying out for more money, more organization and more fresh blood.  But what, exactly, do they propose doing?

Hmmm?

Yes, they’d like to replace some politicians here and there.  But to what end?  We’ve swapped parties and people many times to ever-worse effect.

The people and parties are not the issue.  Republicans vote against those who promise to cut government down to its constitutional size, and instead vote for candidates who don’t even promise to cut anything.

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul set fundraising records and energized young people like no other Republican.   Republicans had a candidate that, at long, long last, truly and fully represented the “conservative” rhetoric spoken in Kiwanis halls and churches and JBS meetings for the past several decades.  But instead of supporting a champion of Liberty and Justice, the GOP did its worst to hamstring his chances and proved that for all their patriotic talk, they’re more problem than solution.

I’ve experienced this personally.  As GOP candidate for Indiana’s 7^th US CD I’d personally experienced Republican leadership from national level down to individual voters.  I know their sick game.

What do they actually propose to do about our failed authoritarian monetary, political and social policies?  Well, I know they’re upset about some perceived epidemic of gay marriages.  I know that many go apoplectic over Obama’s citizenship.  A few will say some things about foreign invaders pouring across our southern border…but only when it’s clear that they can do nothing about it. 

They complain about anti-Christs and crosses in the desert.  They complain about foreign nations, greenhouse gas and pot smokers.   They still complain about flag burning. 

But what do they really want to do?  Has anything changed since they had all the power in the nation and set us up for disaster?  Has there been some constitutional epiphany that I’ve missed?

I’m asking.

I’m listening…

 

 

You say you want a Revolution?

It’s a little disturbing that one of the most common web searches bringing people to this blog is, “Give me hope, please.”  But what really worries me is how many people are typing, “violence” and “revolution,” to end up here.

My fellow Americans, what are you thinking of? 

What is violence going to accomplish that your votes did not?  You got what you voted for.  You want something else?

What?!?

OK, so I have nothing to say to “centrists.”  These human dandelion seeds have no senses, apparently; and just float the prevailing wind.  I wish I did have words that’d shake them down.  But I’ve never had any luck with people who think it’s reasonable to split the difference between Hitler and Stalin. 

And true socialists are twisted, ruthless monsters who know that their violence and oppression is self-serving to the elite group to which they feel they belong.  They know what I’d want to say to them, but they’d happily have it tortured out of me anyway.

But most people of the so-called “left” are not those socialists, and they’re not hopelessly foolish.  They simply don’t know that they’re invoking, promoting and unleashing violence upon their fellows.  The multiply-pierced, tattooed but still smiling Obama fan you see at Whole Foods really does want a peaceful society; he just hasn’t thought any more deeply about politics and market economics than he thought about that ring in his nose.  He doesn’t know that his free-love-and-world-peace dreams drag us all into Stalinist nightmares.  But so far, I’ve found it rewarding to talk to these people. 

Sadly, most of the so-called “right” are more difficult to work with.  Maybe they’re even worse in hypocrisy and idolatry, and thus inoculated against reason.  While many righties pray to God, they put their hands on their hearts and promise to obey a symbol (really; think about that).  While they know the word “constitution” invokes good imagery, they have no idea what the constitution is for, let alone what it really says.  Just like the lefties, they advocate bigger, costlier, more intrusive government – but they deny it.

Frankly, I’d rather hang out at Whole Foods than listen to self-righteous ignorami spouting off about the “coming revolution” or even secession.  They’re not as bad as centrists, but their rising mood of undirected, goal-free violence is not helpful.

What do they suppose a revolution is going to do if they don’t even VOTE for what they say they want?  And what would secession accomplish if it creates only a clone of our current mess?

After years of trying to find ten Republicans who know what it is that they want, I’m hard pressed to see any difference between the “right” and the “left” other than the aforementioned tattoos, piercings…and the type and degree of hypocrisy. 

Well, actually, I like Whole Foods.  The one near my work in Houston has a great selection of Belgian beers.  The GOP has nothing like it.

Now that they’ve given up their catbird seat and their hands are tied, the GOP talks (almost) like Ron Paul.  But when they held the reins of power they did only evil and then chose John McCain to lead them into more of the same.  They had a chance – a very good, record-breaking, youth-energizing chance – to set things right according to the words they speak from their mouths.  But their voting arms, inexcusably, chose otherwise.

And now they complain?  Inexcuseable.  Shameful. 

Even so, I think we’re seeing that even Republicans can come to their senses in sufficient numbers to shake the centrism tree.  The so-called “Tea Parties” exemplify this.

We all know we have enemies and problems.  But the question in battle is never so much what to attack, as what to defend.

What do you want?  Please don’t say you want “American Exceptionalism” unless you can explain to even yourself what that really means.  

How do you want to live?  Please don’t tell me “with American Values.”  We’ve all seen plenty of American Values, and I think that’s why we’re all so hopeless, disgusted, and crying for revolution.

On these pages I’ve said that I want my rules written down, and that’s true.  I don’t think we can live in peace without some hard and fast rules.

Good fences make good neighbors.

But if I were to paint my picture of The Good Life, here’s what it’d look like:

1. Citizens can do whatever they want to do as long as they don’t harm anybody else, or take what’s not theirs.
2. We’d have no more government than necessary to maintain #1.
3. We write this down in plain speech and call it law.
4. We invite others around the world to emulate our success, but otherwise leave them the heck alone.

So caveat emptor replaces the FDA, FTC, FDIC, FCC and a zillion other Fagencies.  Common sense, competition, voluntary associations, charity and free market options galore replace union/corporate monstrosities, Medicare, Social Security, lobbyists, regulations, litigation and price controls.  And because of the preceding, you get to keep what you earn, buy what you like (smoke it if you’re fool enough – and as long as you don’t blow it in my face), and live however and with whomever you want…as long as you leave others, and their stuff, alone.

That’s all.

Is that really so bad?  Could you live with that?

Because you know that the alternative plan is not working, right?

Plan B (AKA, the “Virtual Constitutional Convention”)

1. Of course we’d rather keep the country together; and we’d be completely satisfied with the existing state and federal constitutions obeyed as written.  But you and I know that likelihood of that is exceedingly, increasingly small, and that we really should prepare for what may happen next.
2. Of course we hope we’re wrong about our probable course.  But monetization of our national debt, now at over 40% of the GNP, almost assures dramatic and awful consequences both here and internationally.  It’s wise to consider both political and economic retrenchment to the most basic, proven forms.
3. Of course we would hope that all people everywhere would choose to live free.  But history demonstrates this to be a vain hope.   While there is no way to be certain where human politics are concerned, it seems logical to plan for a smaller geographical unit than the current USA, and to first consider an area with a culture and history of independence.  Many states have an equal or even greater percentage of liberty-minded citizens, but Texas seems to be a good draft model.
4. Our goal is to live in peace.  Voluntary interactions between humans and the suppression of human violence in all forms are both goal and method.
5. Toward this, we are creating a written social covenant called a “constitution” for a proposed political state under the Rule of Law.  This constitution will be the sole authority of all powers delegated to this state.  The state will have no powers that are not clearly and specifically written into this constitution.  This constitution will be the law of the proposed political state.
6. The words of this constitution will be clear enough to be understood by all; few enough to be known by all; and universally applicable to be obeyed without exception by all human beings within the border of the proposed state.
7. Three general rules:
   1. What is wrong for citizens is wrong for the state.  For example, exceeding the state’s contractually limited taxing authority is criminal theft; unauthorized killing is murder.  
   2. Citizens have infinite inalienable rights, while the state has no rights; only limited authority.  Therefore, what’s right for citizens isn’t always right for the state.
   3. Crimes committed by state officials are to be considered worse than crimes committed by citizens.