How We Fix This Mess

I love talking ideology. But right now, talking about Demorepublicrats, or socialism versus fascism versus libertarianism is like discussing paint colors while your house is on fire.

coming-money-trustForget ideology; that’s not the problem.

CORRUPTION!

Corruption is the problem. Almost everything else is just a symptom of that.

Let’s be clear about what our nation’s “corruption” really is. We have an unconstitutional (illegal) ruling class that’s intentionally violating our most fundamental laws (legal, moral, economic) to fill their pockets though it harms the rest of us.

That’s called crime when any of the rest of us do it.

We can’t determine to what degree and in what ways we’re being harmed because so many  of our rulers systematically and habitually lie to us about everything. So it may not be off the table to include mass murder in the list of crimes.

The unregulated militarized monster we only call “government” is really a crime ring that’s “too big to fail.”

So let’s fix it.

Here’s how:

liberty

1. Stop voting for it! And by “it,” I of course mean the global crony network whose puppets we call The Two Party System. Don’t give this monstrous mob your approval on Election Day. And do NOT, by default, grant its wishes by staying home on Election Day. Anybody left alone and unchallenged with unchecked power for too long becomes corrupt, and almost all of us have been blowing electoral kisses to the same Powers That Be for over a hundred years nonstop. STOP THAT!!
2. Vote against it. Yes, we’re supposed to vote against people. Remember, this is revolt with your vote! When your house is on fire, you need to kill the fire, not swap it for another. So first, fire the crooks! Vote Libertarian, independent, Green…anything or anybody but the Democratic and Republican party puppet show you know to be corrupt!

rememberRemember, even the very best Ds and Rs (and there are some great people in those parties – like Thomas Massie, or Justin Amash, for example) are powerless against this mess.  They cannot fix their party, or the people who control it; and a vote for even these people, is a vote for the crony system they chose to represent.  YOU must vote against all of that!

NoGunOur nation’s founders understood that elections are messy, corrupt and problematic in themselves; so elections’ purpose is very focused – they’re for peaceful revolution. That’s why we vote; so we don’t have to shoot politicians the way our founders did.
YOU!3. Use your vote as a weapon, or somebody else might. Seriously. It actually happens that people who don’t vote often show up voting…even after they’re dead. If you think staying home is a protest, you don’t understand how bad things have gotten.

4. Then, and only then, is a discussion of ideology and ‘isms something better than a time and energy wasting distraction.

In summary: Vote against the Two Party System as though it’s war! Because, of course, it is.

 

…Gun control? Who’re we kidding?

During the slippery slope SCOTUS case, VOISINE ET AL. v. UNITED STATES, Clarence Thomas shocked everyone by asking his first question from bench in ten years:

“Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor suspends a constitutional right?”

He was talking about the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, of course.

Thomas was right to raise the question, since even though all of our rights have been demoted to conditional privileges, the 2nd Amendment is under special attack these days.

And despite Thomas, our Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot-leaning SCOTUS ultimately decided that, of course a misdemeanor is sufficient to suspend a constitutional right. What isn’t?

I’m not a “gun nut” by any stretch. I love almost every other kind of gadget, device, machine or app. But I’m not a fan of guns. I’m not fond of what they do.

NoGunBut the 2nd Amendment isn’t about guns. It’s about violence, and trust. I hate violence, and I definitely don’t trust politicians with a monopoly on it.  It’s THEIR guns that most need restraint.

But humans, particularly in groups, are very emotional creatures. Where there’s a conflict between fact and feelings, feelings almost always win.

That’s why demagoguery works. That is why nearly all of human history is about oppression, slavery, genocide and war; and why peace, freedom and prosperity are very, very rare, but precious, blips.

…Because it’s not the emotions of love and loyalty and empathy that drive humankind’s political governments.

No, it’s fear, and greed and envy and sloth and…all the evil stuff.

So let’s be real clear on who oppresses, enslaves, commits genocide and war:

Our politicians, under that abstract incantation we call “government.”

It’s politicians – specifically our own politicians, invoking and blaspheming the common good while fanning the flames of all our worst emotions – that take away the freedom that’d be ours if left alone.

This is why human governments have a 100% failure rate. Aside from the obvious violence, they devalue currency, steal across generations, and generally self-destruct.

And it’s why people even consider the catchy but crazy “no fly, no buy” talk in the US Congress.

Yes, The Home of the Brave is terrified; so much so that The Land of The Free is surrendering even more of its tattered freedoms to promises of security from our entrenched, corrupt, arrogant, lying, thieving, heavily armed and violent ruling class.

While there can be some reasonable debate whether more guns mean less crime, or what the 2nd Amendment is really all about, there’s really no denying that gun control laws don’t work as politicians claim they do.

As the gun control debate has been going on for centuries now, there’s plenty of objective evidence demonstrating that, considering that some cultures are just more violent than others, gun control laws are, at best, ineffective. The pro-gun control arguments I’ve ever read or heard so far rely on either post hoc ergo propter hoc or false-choice logical fallacies, or disgorged-from-the-gut emotion. And only the purely emotional arguments for gun control suggest that gun laws would actually work.

No Fly, No Buy is No Different in terms of any promised effects.

I’m not objecting to the No Fly, No Buy marketing campaign just because of that; or because our increasingly militarized empire is pushing for a political monopoly on weapons, or because it’s another example of bureaucrats with too much power. And it’s not just that we beleaguered taxpayers are expected to arm everybody but ourselves.

I’m more concerned with how our political emotions work on the fundamental, psychological and even religious level.

We excuse the deceit, transgenerational theft, corruption and destruction inherent in politics because our fear, hatred and envy lead us pray to the false gods of politics for protection and vengeance. Wise people knew this to be unwise, so we’ve got some very excellent constitutions, state and federal, to keep a leash on our tendency to, for example, sacrifice our children to the whims of state.

But that wisdom has been discarded, and our government is now completely ungoverned. The regulators are unregulated, and the police are unpoliced.

The No-Fly, No-Buy canard isn’t just the abrogation of the enumerated rights to arms and due process; it stomps on the whole point of constitutional rule of law –

That it’s our politicians who need to be restrained…not us!

Our government has always kept secret lists of people, and there’ve been secret, but less-formal no fly lists for decades, enough has been said about the No Fly list as it exists today. The FBI and TSA denied it existed for the first 2.5 years of its now-acknowledged existence, which is plenty to lead us to suspicion about this embarrassment.

But the fear and loathing represented by this list are not only our nation’s recurrent gestalt, it’s what’s been, through the past one hundred years nurturing, fomenting, exacerbating and elevating to godhood a costly military industrial complex and thieving, murderous racket.

I’d recently written about our Middle East Madness; and by now we all know that our own government creates, trains, arms and funds our enemies such that we end up in war against ourselves all over the world.

I’ll wrap this up with some context:
Our militarized police anti-constitutionally/criminally take more property than do all other criminals combined; and you’re 58 times more likely to be killed by cops than by terrorists. But it’s politicians who’ve increasingly put police into their ever-more adversarial role. And as already mentioned above, our politicians lie about pretty much everything all the time. They’ve destroyed their moral authority to issue speeding tickets; they hardly deserve any trust with a secretive, heavily armed, and globally aggressive crony network with control of nuclear weapons and our sources of information, education, food and water.

They created the situation that we feel we must respond to with laws that increase their power, secrecy and unaccountability…at our expense.

I say we run, not walk, in the opposite direction.

Over two thousand years ago Marcus Tullius Cicero said, “The more laws, the less justice.” We know that the “War on Terror” has dramatically increased terrorism. I think facts support the notion that the less politics we tolerate, the more security, prosperity and of course, freedom, we’ll enjoy. So I suggest that instead of more laws, we nullify our way out of this corrupt and complex tangle we’ve made of our nation, and try, at long last, what our wisest founders hoped we’d actually become; a nation where all are equal under law, and where prosperity and security come from liberty, and justice, for all.

Nullification – It already happens, all the time

To get my vote, I expect two things from any political candidate* at every level of office in the upcoming election:

1. A federal 10th Amendment / Indiana Article I Section 25 view of our constitutions.

2. Nullification of everything else from politics.

Our constitutions have already been effectively nullified by the endless stream of political prohibitions and mandates, subsidies and taxes, regulations and corruption.  I want our constitutions, state and federal, reinstated, by nullifying everything that violates them.

I’ll explain.

“Nullification” as a legal doctrine, is very simply, invalidating a law by ignoring it, ruling against it, or refusing to enforce or obey it.  When states nullify a federal law, it’s often called “interposition,” but that’s just fancy talk.

Among the few who understand their meaning, the words “nullification” and “interposition” have somehow acquired a simultaneously religious, conspiratorial and rebellious meaning.  That is weird, because nullification and interposition happen every day, everywhere in the USA.

If you look up the terms on a legal site or Wikipedia, you will likely read that the practice has never been upheld in court. But that’s bunk-in-action.

Practically all legislation, Executive Orders, bureaucratic rules; practically every high court case and government action at every level nullifies some part of our constitutions, our laws and culture.  Courts nullify legislation all the time…it actually is part of their job.

Sometimes the nullification is subtle and by parts; such as laws restricting the right to weapons, or nationalizing our state militias, which increasingly nullify the Second Amendment and our whole constitutional and social design for peace, sane foreign policy, and self-defense.

Sometimes it’s overt; such as when President Obama and the DOJ nullified the Defense Of Marriage Act in 2011; or when Obama essentially nullified the 2006 Secure Fence Act (I’m not saying it was wrong to do so in either case).  Or when the FCC started regulating the internet in violation of a federal court order (that was wrong). …Or when Kim Davis attempted to nullify both a Judge’s and Governor’s nullification of an Amendent of the Kentucky Constitution which nullified the federal constitution (that was a lot of nullification, and I am saying that Davis was wrong to do it).

Sometimes the nullification is from ignorance.  Who’s read the state constitution, for instance…so how would anybody know when politicians violate it?

Sometimes it is by brute force when a cop nullifies rights literally to death.

Rarely, some smart-Alec citizen invokes a jury’s right to nullify bad laws or bad application of law.  (Juries have tremendous power; though judges never tell jurors that anymore).

However you look at it, and from every level of government, from the citizen on up, nullification happens every single day.

Every Single Day.BWLadyLib

Let that sink in a minute.

 

Every day.

It happens.

All the time.

Everywhere.

Up to now, there’s been a direction to that nullification.

To make governments, bureaucracies, corporations and programs bigger, costlier, more heavily armed and aggressive, more intrusive, more secretive and even more corrupt (though that last part is getting very hard to do), constitutions at both state and federal levels, had to be nullified.

Not all nullification has been bad.  Courts have nullified what used to be the “settled law” of past generations in some good ways.  Slavery exists now mostly in other countries, and the Jim Crow laws are gone, thank God.  But the power the federal government gobbled up in the meantime has been used to heap entirely different evils upon us, such that now, our trans-generational debt/theft machines and their incessant wars are about to cause us horrible grief.

My vote is mine.  I won’t waste it anymore on the status quo mess.  I mean to use my power of peaceful revolution as intended.

So here’s all that I will vote for:

1. A federal 10th Amendment / Indiana Article I Section 25 view of our constitutions.

2. Nullification of everything else from politics!

In other words, I want government to do exactly and only what it’s supposed to do, and otherwise leave us and everybody else alone.  I want politicians out of our lives and wallets and rights as much as humanly possible.  I want a lot LESS from politicians, in summary.

And I won’t vote for any less than that.

 

*Well…OK, the candidate can’t be a Democrat/Republican, but that’s a different story...

 

Technology versus Politics

Technology is marvelous. It tends to make things better, cheaper, more available. It tends to make people happy.

Politics, on the contrary, is the opposite of all the above.  The most exciting, promising technology turns divisive, corrupt, costly and deadly once politicians get their mitts on it.

We should never have let them monkey with our healthcare.  I’ve said so many times in the past (see links below), and I’ll keep saying so until we snap out of our stupor …or it comes crashing down around us (at which point I will say I Told You So).

So, let me offer just one, seemingly minor, even merely clerical reason, why your healthcare sucks.

It’s called ICD-10.

First of all, in my business of healthcare information/image technology, compliance with ICD-10 has been an enormous (i.e. expen$ive) undertaking. There are seven squillion, nine hundred and ninety three fillion codes (give or take) to correlate to software hooks and data. It has made the inherently complex business of making products for patient care even more complex.

The mass of codes and interrelations is certainly a hassle for the engineers making stuff to sell to doctors – presumably to make healthcare providers’ jobs easier (at increa$ed co$t, of cour$e).

But what does ICD-10 mean to doctors, patients and the tangle of insurance companies and taxpayers who ultimately pay for all this complexity?

Well, as of October 1, the wrong code can lead to not only a denied claim and/or months/years of costly hassle, but perhaps significant punishment (on basis of “Medicare Fraud” among other things too legally frightening to mention) for the doctor/institution as well.

Good, you say?

You want fewer mistakes in medicine.

Yes of course.  We all do.

Doctors must do better, certainly.  Prescription drugs, correctly taken, kill more people by far than do “illegal” drugs.  And hospital stays in general (with iatrogenic infections, drugs, mistakes, etc.) kill more Americans than everything but cancer and heart disease.

But what does “do better” mean?  And how do we help make that happen?

And how much arm-twisting, lawsuit-hurling, defrocking, fining and imprisoning force does it take to be helpful??

Let’s see how ICD-10 “helps.”

Let’s say a Farmer Andy comes to the Family Practice clinic with an infected wound that he’s not so sure he can explain. Stuff happens to farmers all the time, and he just can’t remember what this wound was from, initially. He’s always getting bangs and scrapes and cuts, after all.

(And let us be truthful. Andy is a terrible farmer. He’s mostly into quixotic politics)

So, what was the injury initiating this visit?

It’s legally critical we get this right!

Was it ICD-10 code W55.21, “Bitten by a cow,” or W61.33, “Pecked by a chicken?”

Was it when he became a V00.01 “Pedestrian on foot injured in a collision with roller skater?”
Come to think of it, he had been visiting his nephew in prison when that happened, which could add a Y92.147,“Courtyard of prison as the place of occurrence of the external cause.”

Does that qualify as a Z63.1, “Problems in relationship with in-laws?”

Anyway, the doctor knows it wasn’t Y92.253, “Hurt at the Opera,” since Farmer Andy hasn’t gone there since the last episode…(we mustn’t discuss it here.  That would be a violation of HIPAA rules which could lead to a revoked license and even prison).

Farmer Andy did mention (under his breath, seemingly ashamed) that it could have been an “Accident while knitting or crocheting,” which would be a Y93.D1.

The doctor hated to ask, but since he knew Andy and his family had been to Sea World, could Andy have been “Struck by Orca, initial encounter,” which would be a W56.22?

No, said Andy.  It certainly wouldn’t have been a Killer Whale, nor was it a strike.

There was perhaps that bite from a Sea Lion, Andy recalled.  Though it wasn’t the first time, or even the second time that had happened.

So that would be a W56.11XS “Sequela…Bitten by Sea Lion.”

Hmmm, the doctor thought. That would have a very specific look to it.  No; it must be something else.

The wound wouldn’t look like this if it were a V91.07 “Burn due to water-skis on fire,” certainly.  He’d seen plenty of those before.

And the doctor could tell just by looking at him that Farmer Andy hadn’t been “Sucked into jet engine,” or X52.

Or was he getting the codes wrong?

Damn!

Wait…X52 is actually “Prolonged stay in weightless environment.”

Was it V95.40? No…that one is the rather vague, “Unspecified spacecraft accident injuring occupant.”

How about Y37.54?  (Doctor types in code and waits…it’s a big database)

When the doctor worked in the hospital, there was an entire department of people whose only job is to “do coding.”  Here in the clinic, they’ve got a part-time/outside IT department, and sometimes their network bogs down, and…
Oh, here it comes…

Oh heck no!  Y37.54 is “Military operation involving nuclear radiation effects of nuclear weapon.”  SMH, he thought.  He should’ve remembered this one from last week’s incident.

Ah, there it is…V97.33 is the sucked-into-jet-engine code.

Dang it, he has to remember that.  The CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) “ICD-10 Ombudsman” was fairly lenient last time.

He can’t afford to make that mistake again!

OK, I have a question for you.  Does the preceding strike you as the best way to improve healthcare delivery?

No?

Now, codifying data is a great idea.  In the right hands and in the right way, when we’re ready (this is a key part), then having convenient, appropriate labels for all our data makes it easier to store, find, and use in a meaningful way.  And I’m even all in favor of people using ICD-10 exactly as it is…if they choose to.

Let me restate that.

If people trained in the care of patients, in their situation (hospital, clinic, private practice) find that using ICD-10 codes helps them treat patients, then great.  Excellent, even!

But that’s not how our $y$tem work$, is it?  It’s not up to the healthcare professional how things are billed and paid anymore.  It hasn’t been for many years now.  In the most practical $en$e, politicians are more involved in healthcare decisions than doctors are.  Doctors can bill for only what they can get paid for by people other than patients; and that is determined by politicians.  In this case, technology becomes more of a parasite than an aid.

As a true-free-market technology guy, that breaks my heart.

Just imagine you’re trying to sell something; a product you make, your old car, cookies at a bake sale…but bickering politicians, lawyers and lobbyists determined what you could charge for it.  Imagine they demand you buy some things, and don’t let you buy others…and that every political intervention not only directly affects your job…it substantially changes your job.

How would that work out in the real world?

And the way “meaningful use” and other “federal” requirements are being FORCED on healthcare providers is, at this state in our knowledge and technology, madness on top of even more madness (do I even need to mention Obamacare?).

To make matters worse, healthcare has been a union shop/monopoly for over a hundred years.  There can be no serious competition with what politicians and lobbyists call healthcare.

If the rest of our technology worked like this, we’d all be clacking away on Windows 3.1, at best.

There were smart people involved in the development of ICD codes.  Lots of them.  But their seemingly dedicated work was performed in disconnection from monetary, human and practical technology concerns.  It’s another good example, in fact, of such obsessive bureaucratic “paperwork” (albeit mostly without paper), that the recording and processing of all this data can and often does compromise patient care in ways analogous to the Observer Effect.

OK, so I have another question for you.

Should we let doctors, who go to school for many years and spend a lot of time in residency and continuous training, actually do the jobs they were trained to do, or should we continue to vote for ever-more intrusion into that profession by politicians, who don’t need any education or even interest in healthcare at all?

Well, please think on it.

It’s your money, your rights, your life and health at stake here, you know.

https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2013/10/15/can-politicians-even-define-health-care/

https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2009/07/28/health-insurance…or-healthcare…choose-one/

https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/a-short-history-of-health-care-let-doctors-be-doctors/

Euphemysticism, and other Almighty Powers

I am, and have been for quite a while now, truth be known, a progressive liberal.

No, I am not a “classical liberal,” since that implies something has changed since the words’ first invocation.  Nothing has changed.  Wicked people are still twisting language; and idiots are still falling for it.

Let others defend their moniker or change it – I am a Progressive Liberal.

“Progressive” as in “progress,” from the Latin progressus – to move forward as opposed to backward; and “liberal” from the Latin liberalis – liberty, bountiful, befitting a free man.

People like John Locke described “Liberalism,” like “libertarian” and “liberation,” as freedom from political oppression, and as the right to life and property; as opposed to the Divine Right of Kings.  To liberals of even as recently as a century ago, liberalism was advanced through the Rule of Law, which meant that nobody, including the King, was above a uniform, equal application of law.  All (meaning all humans) were to be treated as equals under law.  No special categories or classes whatsoever.

We still use liberal that way when speaking of other nations.  For instance, when China liberalized trade, that meant their government relaxed its iron grip on it.  When the former Soviet-socialist nations liberalized, they adopted free market and personal rights reforms.

That is liberalism, by history, etymology, and all but the most silly, recent, and USA-only use.  It is the opposite of authoritarian socialism.

People like Immanuel Kant invoked “Progressivism” as movement away from barbaric authoritarianism, and toward peace and technological progress.  Moving forward meant moving away from almighty government and its tribal-drum-beating conformists.  Experimentation and progress requires freedom, you know.  So “Progressive” and “Liberal” really go together very well in their proper use.

“Conservatives,” on the other hand, had always rejected notions of classless individualism and egalitarianism, and promoted hierarchy under a distinct ruling class; and often hereditary at that.

So, where are we today?  We have hereditary rulers, practically speaking.  We definitely have a ruling class we’ve empowered over almost every physical aspect of our lives; even allowing them to determine the value of our currency.  You and I have no “rights” they cannot seize for any number of political whims.  “The Patriot Act,” and other similar euphemysticism, is all about gutting the rule of law and everything our founders, as well as thinkers like Locke and Kant were all about.  With something cynically deemed “historic” every day now (literally historic, as in regressing to pre-Hammurabic barbarism), we’ve become lock-stepping, militarized, book-burning fascists.

I do not use that word “fascist” lightly or without cause.  Look up how Mussolini defined his corporatist variation of socialism, and you’ll see that the USA is and has been for some time, fascist.  Mussolini himself declared FDR a fine fascist.

I wish I were making that up.

But even “fascist” is just a repackaging of humanity’s ancient default state of brutish-dumb, tribal, Obey-The-Alpha authoritarianism.  Probably the best term for this is Regressive Conservatism, since it’s what we fall back to when we stop fighting what’s most stupid in all of us…

Since Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt started a “Progressive Movement” in the USA, that regressive conservatism is what “Progressive Liberal” in modern parlance has become.

In other words, our use of those labels has almost completely flipped.  I say “almost” because “conservatism” now means close to the same thing as it did before; which is to say it means the same thing as “progressive liberal” does to most people today.

In other-other words, what we now call “liberal,” “progressive,” “conservative,” “Democratic” or “Republican” all means the same thing: stone-age authoritarianism, self-aggrandizing tribalism, misguided technology, and perverted “science.”  The supposed opposition of the various incorporated factions are based upon false dichotomies that work very well to manipulate y’all (our language’s only distinct second-person personal pronoun) and distract you from the massive corruption that’s lining the rulers’ pockets and consolidating their power.

Words are important.  Words start and end wars.  Words are laws and contracts.  Words can bring tears of happiness, or pain.  How we use words can wound or heal or kill or repair.  Words can enslave, and words can set free.

I think it’s time we reclaim our language.  We must start using our ears to hear and our minds to discern (I should be able to say, “discriminate,” but that word has become a twisted and destructive invective of late).

And, dammit, we must speak truth to power.

I, for one, intend to use words properly.  I am a true Progressive Liberal.  And I’m hoping that all who see the corruption and violence we call “government” as a threat, and who seek peace (the kind without theft and explosions…you know, real peace), justice (real justice), equality (real equality) and freedom (yeah, real freedom), will also reclaim that once-honorable moniker.

And now for something that’s very “politically incorrect.”

We need to start shaming people.

It’s already happening from the other side, of course.  They try to shame us for believing truth, speaking truth, or being human.  More than shame us, they invoke the heavily armed might of armies, jails, cops and fines to force their politifaith upon us.

It’s time we shame them for their lies, their absurd, violent, thieving and self-destructive madness.  They nullify our laws, our history, our culture.  Let’s nullify their lawlessness, amoral fantasies and oppressive self-indulgence.

We have allowed too much intrusion on life, liberty, contracts and property.

So, shame on those who put their faith in politics as some benevolent god.  Shame, shame on those who still intend to vote for this monstrous “Two Party System” puppet show.  And shame on those whose Newspeak has made wrong right and right wrong, as nearly all of us goosestep to the precipice.

In one way or another (and I’m hoping we use the peaceful means our founders bequeathed us), what we need is another 1776 to move us forward from all this horrendous, death-spiralling, 1984.

Let’s Clean Up our Mess

In an OP-ED for Indiana Policy Review I lay out the steps to clean up our mess:

  1. End the duopoly.
  2. Drive away the moneychangers.
  3. Stand down the Empire.

Nearly all of what we call “issues” — the unraveling economy, a ridiculous healthcare system, rising prices, even militarized police and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria — are just symptoms and side effects of a much worse problem.

It makes all our talk of ideology, libertarian versus authoritarian, or even “left” versus “right,” whatever those mean anymore, not just irrelevant but a costly distraction. The problem is corruption; we have a crony-network-crime-ring running the nation and much of the world. Here is what can be done about it in three steps:

First, take away the unconstitutional special powers and immunities seized by the private clubs called the Democratic and Republican parties. We shouldn’t have parties at all, really. Equality under law is fundamental justice, and mandated by Indiana Constitution’s Article I, Section 23. So let’s defrock these charlatans and thieves. Let independents and third parties have equal rights to election-related commissions and ballots. End primary elections, which implicitly provide more money, public attention, free advertising and media promotion to only Democrats and Republicans at the actual expense of all alternatives. End the special powers and immunities of precinct committeemen, which only Democratic and Republican parties are allowed. In case you think that having written special powers and privileges into Indiana Code make the self-appointed “major” political parties legit, Indiana Constitution’s Article I, Section 25 makes it clear that legislation cannot transgress the constitution. Read it; much like the U.S. Constitution’s Tenth Amendment, it’s the single most important sentence in Indiana Law.

Second, kill central banking. Yes, audit the Federal Reserve Bank system, repudiate unconstitutional/illegal debts and otherwise clean up the mess. Andrew Jackson was right —  moneychangers are inherently “…a den of vipers and thieves…” and we must rout them out. Sound money is critical to freedom, so ending the accounting tricks and thieving traps of central banks is the single most important step. That’s why it’s constitutionally mandated by the Indiana Constitution’s Article 11 Sections 3 and 7, as well as the U.S. Constitution’s Article I Section 10. But it’s highly unlikely we’ll be able to address the bankers until we take away their two-party puppet show diversions. Look at the campaign donations from the financial sector and you’ll see why this is step two.

Third, stand down the Empire. Our fear-aggression syndrome isn’t just costly and destructive, it makes us less secure, less prosperous, and certainly less free. Not only have all our wars since WWII been unconstitutional but the actual design of our military has been unconstitutional since 1903 by the federal constitution’s Article I Sections 8 and 10, Article II Section 2, the Second and Fifth Amendments, as well as Indiana’s Article 2 Section 9, and Article 12 (the whole thing). This also should be done immediately, but it’s unlikely that most people will see just how bad it has become (and how right Dwight Eisenhower was about it) until we unmask this monster by taking away that crony-network-crime-ring. Also, look at the campaign donations from the military-industrialist sector. Look at how no state of sustained warfare can exist without debt-based fiat currency. You’ll see why this is step three.

Joe Biden, proving that even a broken clock is right twice a day, said: “Fighting corruption is not just good governance. It’s self-defense. It’s patriotism.” Very well, let’s make 2016 the year we do that right.

Indiana’s embarrassing tribalism

Like everything Democrat v Republican, the Orwellian-styled legalistic effluvium known as the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” (Indiana’s recent edition of this, anyway) has become its own religion, with priests and heretics, idolaters and zealous enemies pro and con.  So, once again, the self-appointed Two Party System has you arbitrarily separated into two opposing partisan tribes, feuding against each other needlessly, in our apparently endless game of Enemy Du Jour Whack-A-Mole.

This is stupid, destructive, and, of course, unconstitutional.

Unless you actually read the text of the law, you are deceived by the profusion of political rhetoric.  If you do read the law and still think it’s what the combatants, pro and con, say it is, you are self-deceived.

Let’s take this step by step, shall we?

First, did anybody amend the Indiana Constitution’s Article I Sections 1-5, where people are acknowledged to have religious rights surpassing any government power?

No.

So why do these enumerated rights need restoration?  Who took away these rights?  From whom do they need to be restored if politicians were to keep their mitts off these freedoms?

Why do we think this law is necessary?

Because no politician in Indiana is keeping her/his oath of office, that’s why.

Nobody is affirming constitutional rights over the plethora of contradictory, divisive, cliquish and corrupt laws that, according to the Indiana Constitution’s Article I Section 25, (and as clarified by the federal constitution’s 9th and 10th amendments) are null and void anyway.

Nobody is doing the constitutions.  Not politicians, and certainly not voters who can’ be bothered with such things when there’s always something more entertaining going on.

I shouldn’t have to go any further than that.

But let’s look at the law itself now:

Sec. 6. As used in this chapter, “governmental entity” includes the whole or any part of a branch, department, agency, instrumentality, official, or other individual or entity acting under color of law of any of the following: (1) State government. (2) A political subdivision (as defined in IC 36-1-2-13). (3) An instrumentality of a governmental entity described in subdivision(1) or (2), including a state educational institution, a body politic, a body corporate and politic, or any other similar entity established by law.”

Pay attention to the preceding definition of applicable governmental entity.  It basically grants that all agents of our current government, including bureaucrats, teachers, or anybody under political whim, has authority under this law.  For the purposes of this law (you’ve got to read it), that is unconstitutionally granting that non-executives have executive power, and non-judicial folk have judicial powers, since this law grants (as you will see) broad powers of judgment and action to governmental entities to “burden” your rights.

Before pondering the obviously vague term, “burden,” let’s get more into the more clearly understandable “language” (Newspeak for “words”).

Sec. 7. As used in this chapter, “person” includes the following: (1) An individual. (2) An organization, a religious society, a church, a body of communicants, or a group organized and operated primarily for religious purposes. (3) A partnership, a limited liability company, a corporation, a company, a firm, a society, a joint-stock company, an unincorporated association, or another entity that: (A) may sue and be sued; and (B) exercises practices that are compelled or limited by a system of religious belief held by: (i) an individual; or (ii) the individuals; who have control and substantial ownership of the entity, regardless of whether the entity is organized and operated for profit or nonprofit purposes.”

Note the corporate person fiction.  Corporations, including churches under 501c3, are already under political authority as they, unlike actual living people, are government-created abstractions.  Grouping actual humans into this should warn you that this law evokes all the usual corruption.  But most people don’t get this, and that is another topic for another day, so I’ll move on to the more actionable words:

Sec. 8. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a governmental entity may not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability. (b) A governmental entity may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if the governmental entity demonstrates that application of the burden to the person: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

Sec. 9. A person whose exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened, by a violation of this chapter may assert the violation or impending violation as a claim or defense in a judicial or administrative proceeding, regardless of whether the state or any other governmental entity is a party to the proceeding. If the relevant governmental entity is not a party to the proceeding, the governmental entity has an unconditional right to intervene in order to respond to the person’s invocation of this chapter.

Sec. 10. (a) If a court or other tribunal in which a violation of this chapter is asserted in conformity with section 9 of this chapter determines that: (1) the person’s exercise of religion has been substantially burdened, or is likely to be substantially burdened; and (2) the governmental entity imposing the burden has not demonstrated that application of the burden to the person: (A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest; the court or other tribunal shall allow a defense against any party and shall grant appropriate relief against the governmental entity. (b) Relief against the governmental entity may include any of the following: (1) Declaratory relief or an injunction or mandate that prevents, restrains, corrects, or abates the violation of this chapter. (2) Compensatory damages. (c) In the appropriate case, the court or other tribunal also may award all or part of the costs of litigation, including reasonable attorney’s fees, to a person that prevails against the governmental entity under this chapter.”

Here’s where the rubber meets the road.  Read the whole section above and see how, “A governmental entity may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if…” …it wants to.

Do you not see what happens here?  Read the Indiana Constitution’s Article I Section 25.  Try to find anywhere in that constitution where politicians should have any authority to write a law that in any way “burden a person’s” rights, either enumerated or not.  That’s not how the constitutions, state and federal, are supposed to work…at all!

We The People are supposed to be the boss of government, not the other way around!

Boiling down what the law actually says:

The state itself can’t oppose your rights…unless it wants to.  The state may back you up in court…or not.  The state is who the state says it is, and it decides whether its motives and actions are right, or not.

Does this comfort you?

It never affirms anybody’s rights in any way at all.  It never grants that you can do business as you see fit.  It never says that nobody will make you sell when you don’t want to sell.  It never says the state can’t force you to compromise your religious beliefs in action. 

To the contrary…it says very clearly that the state may well oppose you in all the above.

Now, back to that “burden” thing…

The Indiana Constitution’s Article 4, Section 20 says, “Every act and joint resolution shall be plainly worded…”

What’s plain about “burden?”  What are the limits of that law-defining-word?

Yeah, that’s what I think, too.

So, my dear fellow mortal human sinners…we’ve screwed up yet again.  We’ve again given everything unto Caesar.

SHOULD we fight? For what? Are we ready?

There’s a lot of chest-beating, sturm und drang over the recent events in Nevada.  Some people think this should be our Battle of Lexington.
Americans should’ve been up in arms a hundred years ago, when a relative handful of moneychanger cronies took over the country.  That would’ve been morally and constitutionally warranted.  So I suppose every minute since then could serve as good as another to set things right in this nation.

But…why this?
And how did we get here?

Isn’t the corruption of our republic exactly and only what We The People have freely and repetitiously chosen every Tax Day, every Election Day for the past one hundred years?
We are here because it’s where we chose to go.  What’s different now?  What’s in Nevada that should make us fight?

The Nevada Constitution (1864) is dreadful.
First, under the ordinance empowering the state’s constitutional convention was this:
“Third. That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States.”

And that led to some of the most horrible words humans ever wrote into law in their Article I, Section 2:

“But the Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States; and no power exists in the people of this or any other State of the Federal Union to dissolve their connection therewith or perform any act tending to impair[,] subvert, or resist the Supreme Authority of the government of the United States. The Constitution of the United States confers full power on the Federal Government to maintain and Perpetuate its existance [existence], and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.”

There’s a lot of anticonstitutional, antilibertarian madness in that; perhaps the worst being that it essentially places the Supreme Court above both the states, and the federal constitution itself.  That’s entirely opposed to the founders’ original intent and plain words.

That phrase, “…as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States” replaces the written US constitution with SCOTUS whimsy.  And that phrase makes the constitution of Nevada irrelevant in any way other than as a declaration of complete obeisance to our global ruling class.

I’ve already said I understand the role of physical resistance and even violence in the way that MLK Jr’s efforts were almost certainly made more effective by the “bad cop” role of people like Robert F. Willams (president of the Monroe, North Carolina chapter of the NAACP – you should look up his story – very relevant to 2nd Amendment discussions) the Black Power movement, Black Panthers, etc.

But man o man I wish the armed and angry folks would find a better cause to fight over than what’s happening with the ever-vague land use rights in the west…particularly in Nevada.

I’ve got a list of things that should make you tornado rocket nuclear lightning mad, if you’re interested.  (like, you and your loved ones are being robbed and deceived right now…as I write this)

But let’s agree to how we’re to live instead before we try to overthrow anything or anybody.  Because what we’ve got is what we have been choosing for a hundred years every Election Day.

There are hard ways and easy ways to change things.  But before you go and change things again (remember, what we have really is change – change is constant), you’d better finally get into your head exactly what it is that you want instead.

Can politicians even define “health care?”

I’ve worked in healthcare since 1978 in public health, research, clinical, education and industry roles.  And I can’t tell you what healthcare is.

Ascelpius-V-PoliticsTo my wife, it’s massage and things that smell nice.  To others, it’s Reiki, or heterodox nutrition.  Some debate that vaccines are bad medicine, but marijuana is great healthcare.  And they have convincing arguments.

Is gender-reassignment, or voodoo healthcare too?  I don’t know.

I think cardiovascular science and technology is really cool stuff, it’s my specialty, and I think it should qualify as healthcare.  But as for everything else?  I can’t even give you a clean definition of “health.”  And I’ve been in the business my whole life.

Politicians sure think they know all about it.  And by the Election Day polling numbers, well-over 90% of us believe and trust that politicians should control …everything.

But after the more than 100 years the unionized AMA has wielded political monopoly power, the 80 years of taxpayer subsidized health insurance, 60 years of socialized health, education and welfare, and the almost 50 years of even more directly socialized healthcare in the form of our rapidly swelling Medicare system, I’m appalled that we think we want more politics in healthcare.  I’m disgusted that we’ve been lead to believe that health insurance is what we want when that is often antithetical to healthcare.  And I’m embarrassed that We The People haven’t seen a better way to live that’s always been right before us.

In every field of science, technology and plain old merchandise that isn’t so political, costs decrease while quality, efficacy and availability increases with every new advance.  Luxuries of yesterday like cellphones and personal computers are now ubiquitous and powerful necessities.

The in-your-face availability and range of price/quality in shoes, coffee, kitchen gadgets and even things like used magazines and historical wristwatch reproductions has become amazing in a relative freedom from political control.

There’ve been innumerable healthcare advances in the last century that would’ve made healthcare cheap, effective, and easily available to all…if not for all the politics that’s been creeping in since Teddy Roosevelt’s time.
Politicians have already made everything related to medicine unfair, complicated, ever-changing, severely limited, and ghastly expensive.

And they’re not done yet.

However, none of the preceding is any part of my main objection to more politics in healthcare.
I’ll let others quibble over whether politicians will finally be able to keep a promise, or make something work at all as advertised.

The real problem, whenever we rub that genie’s lamp of politics, is corruption, and calamity.

Everything government does, it does by force.  Politics can’t do anything without at least the threat of fines, taxes, courts, guns and prisons.

It’s easy to dream that this kind of force can be used for good.  But the usual reality, as evidenced by all of human history, is a scale and degree of injustice and death that only politics can achieve.
Power is of course a seduction for those who’d wield it.  But it’s just as attractive to those who can simply buy the portion of such power as suits their purposes.

And make no mistake.  All power is for sale.

Whenever politicians are allowed to steal a new power, there’s a new industry in lobbying for the use of that power.  We can see how that lobby has worked for the military industrialists and bankers, and we should see what it has done to our health, education and welfare as well.

Adding more power to government, with more snooping into things that are more personal than ever before possible, only makes the resulting corruption more dangerous.

Hitler’s infamous “T4” eugenics/euthanasia program under Germany’s socialized healthcare system certainly demonstrated one hazard in giving politicians so much power over life.  But think about what we already know of our own government; what they’ve admitted to from the past (testing plutonium on school kids, syphilis experiments on black men, experiments on soldiers), and what they’ve been forced to admit recently about their spying, militarization and deceit.   Think hard about how much more secretive, powerful and deceitful we know our government to be now than ever before; and just what such a government is capable of doing with the actual coding in our cells.

And changing the role of healthcare workers from healers to government agents who’ll give to politicians everything from your DNA to your intimate personal and family details, will, over time, change the sort of people who’d seek out such a career.
You really shouldn’t want that to happen.

We The People have exactly and only what we have freely and repetitiously chosen not just every every day we sigh, and yield to what we know is wrong and isn’t working; but also every Election Day.

Elections were meant to be a means of peaceful revolution.  We’d better finally use them for that purpose, because the power over our bodies we’re granting to politicians now will have no good end, unless that end is determined by our change of heart and mind.

RELATED POSTS:
https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/a-short-history-of-health-care-let-doctors-be-doctors/
https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2009/07/28/health-insurance%E2%80%A6or-healthcare%E2%80%A6choose-one/

Updated Annotations to the US Constitution

Sorry it’s been so long since I’ve edited this…

https://wedeclare.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/the-united-states-constitution.pdf

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,229 other followers