…They must be kidding me

I wasn’t going to blog about such things. I really do mean to focus on my primary objective and avoid wasting time on anything else.

However, just moments ago I just opened the Final Order/assessment of a $503.68 “civil” penalty to the Horning for Governor campaign for what was, perhaps, the all-time most trivial offense against Indiana Election Commission paperwork.

We failed to properly close-out our meagerly funded campaign and report the money we didn’t make by their deadline.  That’s it.

But  the whopping fine, amounting to a huge percentage of what my campaign raised, is not what I’m writing about.

And no, it’s not that I’m miffed that Obama or Charlie White got away with much more serious violations of campaign and civil law, while a poor schlemazel like me has to cough up the dough.

(though, in case you’re wondering, I am miffed about all that).

No, I’m really writing about the two (2) quarter-sheet notices slipped into the envelope.

The two sheets were identical, and said,

ATTENTION

The styrofoam cube enclosed in this envelope is being included by the sender to meet a United States Postal Service regulation. This regulation requires the letter or package to be ¾ of an inch thick at its thickest point. The cube has no other purpose and may be disposed of upon opening this correspondence.

For any further questions or comments about the styrofoam cube only, please call 1-888-624-5990.

Now, there is so much wrong with this, that I hardly know where to start. Forget that StyrofoamTM is a trademark of the Dow Chemical Company and should …by law,  be so noted. Forget that the enclosed bit was not a cube at all (it was supposed to be a parallelepiped, but it was smashed into a rhombus). I don’t care so much about clumsy or incorrect grammar and such (“is being included,” or “disposed of upon opening”). And I’m assuming I was given two notices by mistake (may I never find out that this is another regulation!)

No, this is just one of those freakishly weird regulations that none of us could possibly know about unless we’re in the business of sending dangerously, criminally thin packages. I see this as analogous to having to duck under a sign that says “WARNING, Low Sign / ¡ADVERTENCIA, Señal de baja! placed in accordance with the Officious, Unnecessary and Badly-Worded Signage Act of 2010” 

I’m quite tempted to call that 888 number and…  No, strike that.  I don’t even want to know how many people staff that line at taxpayer expense.  I think I’ll just slip the “cube” and the little sheets into the documents I’m mailing to the Governor (https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/713/).  Maybe he’ll be amused.  Maybe the package will look suspicious and get “special attention.”

Sigh…

We must oppose this unregulated regulation/lawless lawmaking madness with all our wits and might; and we must not waste any more time in this important endeavor.

Please join me.

Huxley Only Imagined…

Well now.  Here’s something interesting

Not only is the Orwellian title attention-grabbing in its own right (and absurd, since experience hath shewn that governments by their nature do the opposite of “save lives.”), but just read this perversity and see if you don’t get cold chills.  Just think about the ramifications – our corrupt, foolish and selfish politicians collecting and owning all DNA data from everybody born in the USA:

  • Our politicians’ record with data security (from both hacking and plain old screwups) is just awful.  Mistakes will be madeHuge ones.  The United Kingdom, our apparent role model, already screwed up with DNA samples, among other things.
  • You think “pre-existing condition” exclusions are bad now!
  • What little good could come out of such a thing is certainly outweighed by sci-fi mischief and Keystone Cops incompetence.

Oh, but it sounds so well-intended and helpful, doesn’t it?  What’s the history of that as applied to politicians?

Anyway, it’s scheduled for debate in the House of Representatives.  Nearly all reps will vote on this without having read a word of it.  They may tell a 20-something legislative aid to read it for them, but most of those starry-eyed future congresscritters haven’t lived long enough to get through a history book and they’ve never heard about such a thing as constitutional limitation of powers.

It’s up to you to tell your reps what’s what and just who they work for.  Brave New World?  It’s still your choice.

Choose wisely.

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.