Voter ID – Good for Thee But Not for Me.

By Tom Rhodes, 6/28/2013

The Obama Administration once again displays a distinct double standard. They want reliable elections free of voter fraud in other countries, but not in the USA. Concerning the Texas Voter ID Law, in August 2012 the official position of the White House as expressed by press secretary, Jay Carney, was, "And on the voter ID case, I can tell you that, as you know, this administration believes it should be easier for eligible citizens to vote -- to register and vote. We should not be imposing unnecessary obstacles or barriers to voter participation."

This week the White House put out a Fact sheet titled "U.S. Support for Strengthening Democratic Institutions, Rule of Law, and Human Rights in Sub-Saharan Africa." This official White House Position published as President Obama and his family tour of Africa, promotes the $53 million Kenyan program that helps young people "obtain National identification cards, a prerequisite to voter registration."

Civil society and independent media play a critical role in any vibrant democracy. Across sub-Saharan Africa, the United States supports efforts to ensure civil society organizations and independent media can organize, advocate, and raise awareness with governments and the private sector to improve political processes, transparency, and government performance. Examples include:

In Kenya, the $53 million Yes Youth Can program empowers nearly one million Kenyan youth to use their voices for advocacy in national and local policy-making, while also creating economic opportunities. In advance of Kenya’s March 2013 general elections, Yes Youth Can’s “My ID My Life” campaign helped 500,000 youth obtain National identification cards, a prerequisite to voter registration, and carried out a successful nationwide campaign with Kenyan civic organizations to elicit peace pledges from all presidential aspirants.

This begs the question: Why does the White House promote and laud the Voter ID requirement in Kenya, while denouncing it as “unnecessary obstacles or barriers to voter participation” in Texas?

It also makes you wonder why the DOJ and FBI are investigating Project Veritas for exposing voter fraud in New Hampshire?

Quiet Win for Individual Rights

By Tom Rhodes, 6/27/2013

Amidst all the hoopla over gay marriage and voting rights, a win for individual property rights by the SCOTUS went un-noticed. In what was probably the most important of this week's SCOTUS verdicts, was Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, where they found that when municipalities attach fees and extraneous payment obligations to a permit, like finance road improvements or expansion of waste disposal sites or wetlands development, the burden is now on the government to justify those mandates.
The idea that to force a property owner to pay extra to expand or improve sites not owned by that property owner as a condition to build or develop that property, the burden is no longer on the property owner to prove his development won't have an impact but on the government to prove it will. Unless the government can prove that such mandates are in "rough proportionality" to the demonstrative effects of development, such mandates are in effect the taking of property by the government.
The case is simple, St. Johns River Water Management District denied an application by Coy A. Koontz Sr. to fill more than three acres of wetlands in order to build a small shopping center. The district put conditions on granting the permit that effectively took his property. They were requiring Mr. Koontz to reduce the size of the development or spend money on any of a variety of wetlands-restoration projects designed to offset the project's environmental effects. Because Mr. Koontz declined to pursue any of these options, the district denied the permit.

KooKoo Koontz claimed that the permit denial constituted a "taking" based on other Supreme Court precedents; specifically Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard. These cases established that conditions placed on the development of private property are an appropriation of private property unless the government could show a logical relationship and a "rough proportionality" between the conditions imposed and the projected effects of the development. The SCOTUS agreed.
SJWMD vs. Koontz dramatically shifts the burden of proof to
the government to justify mandates placed on private property owners; it follows the traditional idea that people are innocent until proven guilty, including the impact of private property development. This dovetails with other recent rulings against the EPA concerning "wetlands." And will have an impact on the EPA which will now have to prove development impinges on wetlands rather than the property owner proving it doesn't.

This was a both a symbolic and real win for private property rights. It may be used as a blow against "sustainable development." This SCOTUS ruling puts the onus where it belongs, on the government.

Just Shut Up!

By Tom Rhodes, 6/21/2013

In Salinas vs. Texas, the SCOTUS has just ruled that the government can use a person's silence against them if it comes before he's told of his right to remain silent. Justice Samuel Alito said. "It has long been settled that the privilege 'generally is not self-executing' and that a witness who desires its protection 'must claim it.'" Read More Here What this means is that under no circumstances should you ever talk to the police, even as a witness to a crime - PERIOD!

The SCOTUS has ruled cops can lie to you to get you to talk. What is plainly obvious is that our government cannot be trusted, therefore there can only be one response to any question by any law enforcement officer of any type. "I'm sorry officer, but in light of the recent Supreme Court ruling that says what I say as a witness, even my silence as a witness, may be used against me unless I specifically invoke my 5th amendment rights, I must now inform you that I'm invoking my 5th amendment right and will not answer any questions. I know this makes your job harder, but for my own protection I must invoke my 5th amendment right and cannot answer any of your questions. Even as a witness to a crime, by merely talking to you puts me in jeopardy. So without written documentation by a judge who has jurisdiction saying that nothing I say can or will be used against me and a lawyer present for my protection, I cannot answer any of your questions. Am I free to leave?"

Talk to any law enforcement officer and you'll soon detect the "Us Vs. Them" mentality, they assume everybody is a criminal and have to prove they are not. Law enforcement is not your friend anymore. They can and will lie, cheat, and coerce to prove a person is guilty of something. Since it is virtually impossible for you, or any business to actually follow all the laws we now have, it is vitally important that you protect yourself from the government. This video explains exactly why you should never under any circumstances talk to any government official. Watch the whole thing and play close attention to how the cop explains how he can and will trip you up.


FYI - In the state of Florida you are legally required to give your name and address if a law enforcement officer asks but are not required answer any other questions. You do not have to present ID except: when driving you must provide your driver's license if requested; when hunting or fishing you must present your hunting or fishing license if requested; when carrying a concealed weapon must have in your possession your CCW permit.

The reality is even if you've done nothing wrong and are completely honest talking to law enforcement could lead to your arrest and imprisonment. Under no circumstances is it ever in your best interest to answer any law enforcement officer's questions for any reason, so don't.

The New Idea to Governance

By Tom Rhodes, 2/14/2013

Both factions of the ruling party, the Democrats and Republicans, continue to present old failed ideas. Calling them Progressive or even Conservative doesn't change the fact that they simply want to have the powers of rulers of old. They are still trying to convince us that they are the enlightened elite smart enough to dictate how we should live. This method of ruling is older than written history. The idea is that only those enlightened rulers should be allowed to use force, and the fact that by virtue of being stronger and having better weapons then everybody else grants them not just the authority, but the right to take your property is how society has worked throughout history. Be it tribalism, feudalism, communism, despotism, progressivism, or whatever ism that is currently vogue with the ruling elite, it is the same tired old philosophy. What has been hinted but never fully attempted is Libertarianism.

All the methods of a ruling oligarchy have been around for as long as man has been around, only since the enlightenment has the radical idea that people should be free to live as they want, own and acquire property unfettered by the ruling elite, and the purpose of government is to protect the live liberty and property of all individuals equally. The early works of Smith, Burke, and Locke lead to the ideas our Founding Fathers so concisely put in our Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights. Never before was a government instituted that was so clearly limited. Every other governing system, including that of today's so called "progressives," are statist. They work on the idea that the State has supreme power and the ruling elite know best how everybody should live and has the authority and power to dictate how others live.

Progressives today continue to try and push us to a future that is a repeat of the past. They want to revert to some variation of tribalism with a ruling person or oligarchy that controls all use of force and can force the people to do as they think is best. From dictating what food you can eat, how big a soda you can buy, to how you must build your house, to who is allowed to cut your hair, the assumption is that they know better how to live your life than you do. Their excuse today seems to be that because so many people don't make the right choices that the government must protect people from themselves. They loudly proclaim that the people are too stupid to know how to live their own lives, so they the enlightened will force the stupid masses to live as the ruling elite dictate.

Libertarianism is the only philosophy that doesn't assume some elites, be they kings and dukes, or Presidents and Bureaucrats, or dictators, or other form of gangs with enforcers, have the knowledge and authority to dictate how you should live. Being a libertarian means you don't assume to know how others should live; you assume they should be allowed to choose how they want to live and benefit from that choice; you also assume that should others make bad life choices you should not be forced to pay for those choices; you believe that government is a necessary evil, but should be limited to protecting the natural rights of all individuals equally under the rule of law from force or fraud by other individuals, groups or countries.

Libertarianism is the newest philosophy of how to govern ourselves. History is clear, there will be a government, where there is anarchy soon warlords of some type appear and some statist government emerges. History is also clear; no form of government has lifted the quality of life and relative wealth of the masses better than limited government implementing libertarian ideas. In terms of human history, the libertarian idea is new, and for those in power it is scary, it limits their power, it limits their control, and where in place actually promotes the rule of law where even those in power can be held accountable.

We used to have the rule of law in the USA. Nixon was justly impeached and forced to resign over abusing his power. His abuse included sending the IRS after his enemies, how things have changed. Both Democrat and Republican factions of the ruling party, will not allow themselves to be tried and judged by the same laws they force upon the masses. They are reverting to some variation of tribalism, were the few in power who have better arms and willingness to use force dictate to the masses how to live.

There is nothing "Progressive" about so called liberal/progressive ideas; we are again reverting to the oldest governance known to man, statism; rule by the strongest most willing to use force to preserve their power and enforce their dictates. The ideas and practices that made America prosper were innovative and new, they were libertarian innovations; the ideas and practices that are zapping our prosperity are old and retrograde, they are statist and tribal. The Libertarian Party exists to implement the newest and most "progressive" method of governance, Libertarianism.

Boomers the Grasshopper Generation

By Tom Rhodes, 6/13/2013

The Bishop of London, the Rt Rev Richard Chartres, a Baby-Boomer himself said that Boomers are a “fortunate generation” who have enjoyed dramatic improvements in living standards but are now “absorbing” more than their fair share of taxpayers’ money. Duh! The entire Social Security Ponzi scheme is based on the idea that those who fail to save for retirement through either bad luck or poor life choices should not suffer the consequences of bad luck and poor life choices, thus others should be forced to support them. A backwards interpretation of Aesop's fable of The Ant and the Grasshopper.

There is a biblical/libertarian doctrine that is emotionally bothersome to most Baby-Boomers. The idea can be seen in Aesop's fable of The Ant and the Grasshopper. The wisdom of this is lost because as a society we’ve adopted the idea that just because the Grasshopper made poor life choices doesn’t mean he should suffer, the Ant is so rich he can afford to feed the Grasshopper. In fact it isn’t “fair” that the Ant has massive food supplies while the Grasshopper has none. This is an emotional response to seeing suffering, Baby-Boomers would rather sacrifice their children’s and grandchildren’s property rights then suffer their failure to save for their “golden years.”

According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development “The proportion of elderly in the population is around 15% across the OECD and on average they receive 40% of all public social spending. In Japan and Italy, where senior citizens make up about 20% of the population, public social spending on the elderly is about 60% of the total.”

OK Baby-Boomers, it’s time to let you live with the changes to the world you made. Why should our children and grand children live in debt and have to pay huge sums in taxes to allow you to continue to live beyond your means? Baby-Boomers have the wealth and as a whole can support themselves. Taking 40% of our GDP and giving it to those who have 64% if the nation’s wealth is absurd and unfair. Let the Baby-Boomers support other Baby-Boomers. They caused the Trillions of Debt, let them pay it back. The fact the vast majority of wealth is held by those of retirement age.



Those of you who remembered and learned the lessons of your parents who survived the Great Depression, and saved for the future like the Ant will on continue to live comfortably. The Boomers who so changed society that they believe that nobody should suffer because of poor life choices, including themselves may suffer as did the Grasshopper. Why should the current working generation continue to pay for the past generation who has continuously failed to live within its means? More importantly why should future generations have to sacrifice for the majority of never satisfied selfish self center Baby-boomers who put themselves and the entire country into such massive debt that we may never recover.

Baby-Boomers saw more economic growth and a greater increase in the standard of living than any generation in history, they borrowed and spent with abandon. They destroyed the idea of the extended family taking care of the elderly; they shipped their parents off to old-age-homes on borrowed money; as a whole they are spending their children’s inheritance, and leaving nothing for their kids and a mountain of credit card debt and a home with an upside down mortgage. They created a tax system so that even if they do leave something behind it gets sucked up to pay for other Baby-Boomers retirement.

The Baby-Boomer zeitgeist is that of the Grasshopper. From TinyLiving to Dave Ramsey, Generation X, Millennials and the new Silent Generation are again seeing the wisdom of the Ant and taking it to heart. Being debt free, and the liberty that accompanies it, is getting to be a bigger status symbol than shinny BMW (with a $600/month payment) or a 500hp hotrod. The current workers will not tolerate ever larger and larger parts of their labor being used to pay for past generations who refused to live within their means. Post-Boomers are going Galt. Already we see men, just not play the game, when extra work and effort results in ever greater confiscation by the government, why work. Generations of taking the surplus that resulted from Ant behavior of a majority of workers is disappearing; the Ant has learned that surplus for his extra effort is going to the Grasshopper not him or his children, so he’s not putting in the extra effort. In fact the Ant is joining the Grasshopper. With less and less working age people actually employed the fact is the future generations are saying loud and clear, “Boomers, since your leaving us debt for an inheritance, we aren’t working to pay for you luxury retirement.”

Unfortunately Boomers control current politics, their Grasshopper zeitgeist is leading to the destruction of our country. Baby-Boomers sheer numbers mean that the Post-Boomer generations don’t really have any say in government. What Post-Boomer generations can and are doing is going Galt, simply by choosing to live debt free with less stuff and do less work; the PC term is living simply. Boomers are failing to see the fact that Post-Boomer Ants have let go of their emotional distress at the plight of the Grasshopper, and again as an example for others to try and avoid, will allow the Grasshopper to suffer the fate of his choice of life style.

Treason

By Tom Rhodes, 6/12/2013

There is no difference between the two factions of the ruling party. They share the same statist goals and present We the People with the same talking points. Any mere citizen working for the government who exercises his First Amendment right exposing the ruling elite's clear violation of the Fourth Amendment that the ruling elite don't want public is considered by the ruling statist party (be they either the Republican or Democrat factions) a traitor.

On Monday the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said "I don't look at this as being a whistle-blower. I think it's an act of treason."

Tuesday this week on ABC's Good Morning America, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) labeled Edward Snowden, the contractor who leaked details of the National Security Agency's surveillance programs, a "traitor." Claiming that exposing the government's clear violations of the Fourth Amendment "puts Americans at risk. It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are, and it's a giant violation of the law."

The Constitution was written not to limit the people, but to limit the government. Obama infamously lamented that the problem with the Constitution is it made it hard to get things done. Our elected officials including Boehner and Feinstein took an oath to protect the Constitution of the United States. Their actions are representative of the unified ruling party, that is displayed as a false choice of the Democrats and Republicans. Rather than uphold their oath, they have been exposed for not only failing to protect the Constitution but in truth grossly violating it, and thus destroying what little trust remained of the government. The ruling elite declare that because the consequences of knowing that the government is in clear violation of the rights of We the People and ignoring the restriction placed upon the government by the people, hurts the ability of the government to "get things done," that exposing such truth is treasonous.

Treason is now upsetting and exposing the ruling elite, not protecting the constitution and country from tyrannical usurpers taking powers that they clearly constitutionally prohibited from having. The idea that comes from on high, from Republicans like Marco Rubio, is that your liberty and freedom are secondary to "security" and that your right to be secure in your persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, in this day and age is not as important as the Ruling Elites desire to know what everybody is doing and to use that information to protect the ruling elite.

It's simple the government is prohibited from looking at your mail (email, snail mail, text messages, etc.) unless they have an impartial judge issue a Warrant, and no judge shall issue such Warrant but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Fishing for crimes by monitoring all communications, email, tweets, etc. to fish for violations of the law is specifically prohibited.

They have been exposed; the ruling elite are trying to tell us that exposing their abuses of power is treason. There is no difference in the ruling party's factions, Republican or Democrat. Any differences they have are inconsequential, when there is a real threat to their regime they circle the wagons and put out the same talking points and attack the actions of We the People. It is clear that both major political parties no longer represent the people, but the ruling elite. Their actions are treasonous, but then maybe electing them was equally as evil. I'll go so far as to say any future vote for either the Republicans or Democrats should be considered treason against your fellow citizen. This includes voting for Rand Paul and other so called "defenders of liberty" in the Republican Party. Any vote for a Democrat or Republican is a vote against the Fourth Amendment, and a vote for tyranny - PERIOD!

The one thing Obama and the Republican Party is right on, you can have total security if you aren't willing to give up your rights. The choice is yours; do you want a secure tyranny or dangerous freedom?

The Tin-Foil-Hat Crowd was Right.

By Tom Rhodes, 6/10/2013

A month ago Jon Stewart noted about the IRS scandal that now the government was in a position that they had to prove the Tin-Foil-Hat Crowd wrong. Since then, reality has come home to roost and it's no longer secret that Big Brother is spying on law-abiding citizens of the United States. The Will Smith, Gene Hackman movie from 1998 "Enemy of the State" now seems more like a documentary than a fictional action movie. The Tin-Foil-Hat crowd long considered "crazy", "conspiratorialist" and "paranoid" were right. You are the "Enemy of the State."

I've long simply dismissed "InfoWars" and anything by Alex Jones as sensationalism designed for entertainment created to get as much money out of the Tin-Foil-Hat Crowd as possible. The idea that his ravings were based on reality or factual information never really entered my mind. I firmly believe he took a kernel of truth, and exploded it way out of proportion for effect. Don't let your head explode, but the truth is that the NSA is everybit as intrusive and looking at ALL your communications as thoroughly as "Enemy of the State" demonstrated. The NSA program called PRISM, is where the Governemnt without probable cause reads and reviews your emails, chat conversations, voice calls, documents and more. The government has "direct access from the servers of these US service providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple." All that data is tied up in NSA's "Boundless Informant."

Over the past couple weeks every attempt by the NSA to refute some previously unknown facet of the US Big Brother state, is exposed as a lie by some new piece of previously unleaked information. We now know that the NSA's data mining tool "Boundless Informant" collected 97 billion pieces of intelligence from computer networks worldwide in March 2013 alone, and "3 billion pieces of intelligence from US computer networks over a 30-day period," most of it on US citizens with no foreign connections. Exposure of this will result in massive attack on Edward Snowden and significant retribution/attacks on journalists who've exposed the Obama Administration.

You are the "Enemy of the State"; the government no longer honors its contract with We the People. Obama has now said you can't have both security and privacy, so we're going to ignore the limits you the people have placed on us. The security of the ruling elite is more important than their oath to protect "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Obama's mantra is now "Warrant! we don't need no stinkin' warrant."

Do you feel safer knowing that every communication you make is recorded and data mined by the US government? Ben Franklin famously said, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." IRS-gate, the open attacks on the press, PRISM, and Boundless Informant, are exactly what we deserve, we've traded our liberty for safety. We now live in the very world George Orwell warned us against in is famous dystopian novel "1984."

Unfortunately for Edward Snowden he now lives the life of "Enemy of the State" character Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman), holed up trying to hide at some hotel in Hong Kong, because his exposing the corrupt ruling elite will have the same effect; a concerted effort by the US government to eliminate him.

We can no longer trust our government. Last Month Jon Stewart noted because the Obama Administration has been caught in so many lies that the Government must prove the Tin-Foil-Hat Crowd wrong, now Snowden has exposed the objective truth that tin Tin-Foil-Hat Crowd was right.

Impeach the Tyrant

By Tom Rhodes, 6/7/2013

Yesterday was D-Day: The day we said enough is enough and took action to defeat Nazi Germany and turned the tide of totalitarian evil away from Europe and shown resolve to defend those in need. However Headlines in the USA showed that the once free country of the USA is now just another statist tyranny. Here are the news stories from June 6:

The Obama administration acknowledged that it is collecting a massive amount of telephone records from at least one carrier, reopening the debate over privacy even as it defended the practice as necessary to protect Americans against attack.

The National Security Agency has long justified its spying powers by arguing that its charter allows surveillance on those outside of the United States, while avoiding intrusions into the private communications of American citizens. But the latest revelation of the extent of the NSA’s surveillance shows that it has focused specifically on Americans, to the degree that its data collection has in at least one major spying incident explicitly excluded those outside the United States.

U.S. border agents should continue to be allowed to search a traveler’s laptop, cellphone or other electronic device and keep copies of any data on them based on no more than a hunch, according to an internal Homeland Security Department study. It contends limiting such searches would prevent the U.S. from detecting child pornographers or terrorists and expose the government to lawsuits.

The FBI is unhappy that there are communications technologies it cannot intercept, and wants a new requirement that software makers and communications companies create a back door so they can listen in when they want.

Although since modified even the NYTimes opined that Obama’s credibility is gone saying; “The administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it.”

No longer does the government serve the people, it now rules with different rules for those in the ruling elite, and drastic and severe punishment for the masses who don’t go along. There is now a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably a design to reduce us to absolute Despotism. Such is the patient sufferance of We the People. The history of the present Ruling Elite in Washington DC is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over We the People. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A President whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Obama must be removed from office, otherwise as our forefathers reacted under tyranny, so too will We the People.

NSA is monitoring 1 in 3 people’s phone calls.

By Tom Rhodes, 6/6/2013

AP news has reported that an order was granted by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on April 25 and is good until July 19, requiring Verizon to give the NSA on a daily basis information on all telephone calls in its systems within the U.S. and between the U.S. and other countries. Verizon serves over 100,000,000 customers, about a third of the total population of the U.S.

We don’t know if similar order was given to AT&T or the other major carriers. What we do know is that this is clear evidence that the Fourth Amendment to the United States is dead. The Obama administration is collecting the communication records of millions of We The People, indiscriminately and in bulk, regardless of whether they were suspected of any wrongdoing.

The 4th Amendment is pretty clear it states: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Reviewing the other Amendments, there is no place where the constitution has been amended to create an “exception” for anything, including national security.

Typically and constitutionally FISA court orders typically direct the production of records pertaining to a specific named target suspected of being an agent of a terrorist group or foreign state, or a finite set of individually named targets. This is clearly supported by the 4th Amendment where what is to be searched and who is to be searched and exactly what records are to be seized is specified. This FSIA court order signed by Judge Roger Vinson is so broad and unlimited that it covers a full third of the nation without specifics and is clearly unconstitutional. All the calls you make, and who you call are now classified as “business records.”

The reality is that they don’t have access to just Verizon customers (1 in 3 Americans). Because Verizon serves about a third of the country, and that third calls people not served by Verizon, even those people who are not Verizon customers will be monitored if they call or are called by a Verizon customer. Your calls are being monitored – PERIOD. This complete disregard for the constitution and the end of the Rule of Law, is part of the downfall of this country.

Personally I’d rather live with dangerous freedom, than secure tyranny. What are we going to do to stop the tyrannical government we have who now without justification says it has the authority to monitor the phone calls of every American?