Occupy Soldier Field

Good morning, comrades. “Good morning, comrades.” And thank you for participating in Occupy Soldier Field. “And thank you for participating in Occupy Soldier Field.” OK, enough of the creepy ‘human microphone‘ thing. “OK, enough of the creepy ‘human microphone‘ thing.” No, really, stop.
Before we get started let’s give a big hand to 99 percenter’s George Soros, Michael Moore, and Kanye West for stopping down to give their support on the way up to their luxury box seats. And how about a shout out to our friends from the Communist Party USA and the American Nazi Party for helping keep order down here on the field. My assistants inform me we haven’t had a theft, rape or molestation yet and we’ve been here for nearly an hour! In your face, Cleveland!
But, friends, today we are here to shine the light of justice on yet another blatant example of income disparity in America. Are you aware, brothers and sisters, that the average NFL player earns $1.9 million a year? I repeat, $1.9 million per year! And, are you aware that the average disposable income for the American citizen is a mere $32,479 per year? This, my friends, is not justice. It works out that these fat cat players earn 60 times the yearly income of the average American. Sixty times! And who knows what Big Ownership takes in. This, comrades, is not the America in which I would choose to reside!
Their despicable greed knows no bounds. Here in the very stadium in which we stand, one of the biggest current stories involves running back Matt Forte. He currently earns $600,000 a year. Is he happy earning 20 times what the average American does? No! His avarice is infinite. His greed unbound! Are these the values that capitalism instills? Then, friends, capitalism must die!
And do they pay their fair share? I shout a resounding, NO! They invest their money tax free in Wall Street. In Wall Street, brothers and sisters! And they buy real estate. For themselves. Where is the Main Street in that? They are reneging on their side of the Social Contract. They are not paying ‘their fair share’!
And what‘s worse, just this weekend we have seen them callously shipping American jobs overseas. The Bears/Buccaneers game is being played in England! The very same England we fought in our revolution. Maybe, friends, it is time for a new revolution. Against Big Football, against fat cat players, against evil greedy coaches.
And what have any of them actually accomplished? It is merely the whim of fortune that has given them their physical prowess. Where is the fairness in that, I ask. Why should we less physically fortunate not be allowed the same access to the game as they? Is it right that mere fate decides who plays and who does not. I say NO! I say that until you and I are able to start at running back for the Chicago Bears that there is no fairness in America! Justice demands it! NO, we 99 percent demand it!
Lastly, our Top 10 list of demands:
1. The Chicago Bears immediately cut Adam Podlesh and Gabe Carimi and send them back where they came from.
2. Free Guy Fawkes masked for all children this Halloween season.
3. Extra police cars for the ladies in order to shorten the toilet lines.
4. Canadian corporation, Adbusters, be given American tax-free status.
5. U.N. peacekeepers to protect the protesters from police brutality.
6. Smoke alarms free with every purchase of an American flag.
7. A complete list of home addresses for every NFL player.
8. Forgiveness of all debt past, present, and future for everyone everywhere, except for the top 1%.
9. No more negative connotation connected to the words “in your parents basement”.
10. The words ‘marxism‘, ‘communism‘, ‘liberalism‘, and ‘progressivism’ to be purged from all documents and language and replaced with the words ‘Democratic state religion’.
Can I get an amen? “Amen”. God, is that annoying.

Holiday Reform

Some believe that with Obamacare very nearly in hand, and this being the season of giving, it is high time this country faced what has been referred to as its next single greatest injustice. Experts agree that upwards of 140 million children will not receive adequate holiday gifts this season. They say charities do what they can, but this inequality is simply too large for the private sector. They argue that it is time for the Federal Government to act.
The proposal being envisioned is already being referred to as “The Uncle Samta Bill” by some insiders in Washington.
President Obama wished to be perfectly clear when he stated, “This is not the utopia, er, America I envision. It is time Wall Street, Big Business, Big Oil, the pharmaceutical companies, the insurance industry, bankers, the Chamber of Commerce, and many others too lengthy to mention did their part in the gift giving in this country!”
Senator Harry Reid called this issue “a gross inequity” and compared inaction akin to slavery. He then went on to promise a bill by Christmas 2013.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated, “I will not sign any bill that does not include a single giver clause. Parents are already so stressed this time of year. Anytime, and I do mean anytime, the Federal Government can help in easing the responsibilities of ‘the little people’, it simply a must. This reform is no less than our moral duty.”
Senator Mary Landrieu (D-La.), originally opposed to the bill due to private versus public giving issues, has finally fallen into line. From the steps of the just built Louisiana Center for Government Largesse and Social Sustainability said, “I fully back the public plan. Oddly, my fears that the taking of giving out of private hands could somehow lead to a worse individual have now been fully forgotten.”
The Republicans in the House and Senate have stood together in their opposition, questioning the President’s claims that the bill would be deficit neutral and would provide a fair distribution of non-Chinese lead-free toys to all American children.
Former vice-president Dick Cheney said, “For the Democrats to blame the previous administration for a lack of quality, affordable dolls and PlayStations is patently ridiculous.” He added, “And a Happy New Year to you too. In jail!”
Fox News and the Right-wing blogs have been reliably up in arms. They greedily argue that giving and compassion should come from the individual. Glenn Beck even had the gall to claim that parents should hold the ultimate responsibility. The Huffington Post shot back, “For the Right to believe that minorities and single mothers should somehow once again bear the brunt of gifting while investment bankers are receiving record bonuses and the planet is drowning in CO2 is just sickening on its face. It is time for the rich to pay their fair share.”
Keith Olbermann then named George Bush “The Worst Person on Earth” and Michael Moore added, “It’s no surprise that Capitalism has led us down this road. In Africa, the Middle East, and the secular European countries this doesn’t seem to be much of a problem.”
But all this sermonizing is just chatter until the CBO report comes back. The president has promised to keep the budget for this bill under one trillion dollars and vowed to veto any bill coming in over that amount. “Even the Federal Government has its limits. If I was to give every child everything on his or her list, I wouldn’t have the money to nationalize the life insurance and farming industries.”

When Our Heroes Fail

Heroes in post-Capitalist America tend to be more rare than gains on one’s 401K. So it was with no small amount of exhilaration that I gleefully welcomed three promising candidates into my mental Mount Olympus. Two great men and one woman of such high moral stature, unfathomable bravery, and devout strength that I as a humble homosapien could only stare in awe (and quickly avert my eyes so as not to be struck blind) at such inspiring brilliance. I was, it seemed, one leg shiver away from a man crush.
Ah, but if I have learned anything on my eternal path to maturity it is that there is no perfection in this realm of physicality. That all utopian hopes and standards fall far short of the eventual reality. And so it was to be with my soul’s investment in these three as well.
But I should not get too far ahead lest I lose the reader to mindless wordiness and numbing meaninglessness. Thus I will start with a premise I find most basic, yet one that is today spoken only in whispers in smokey backrooms in rural America.
The Thirteenth Amendment made slavery illegal in the United States of America. We all know this. Well, at least those of us who have had the good fortune to have attended government schools pre-Noam Chomsky and Al Gore. Yes, the Thirteenth Amendment finally brought truth to the Founders promise “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” This was a great moment for our country. America’s founding promise fulfilled.
But the ratification in 1913 of the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution changed all that. It gave the Federal government the right to a direct income tax on "wages, salaries, commissions, etc. without apportionment". Sure, there had been an income tax during the Civil War, but this tax had a definite date of termination. The Sixteenth Amendment codified eternal taxation on American production.
With that history lesson, I now submit my premise: All taxation is slavery.
Any time a human being unwillingly works for the enrichment of another by threat of force from that same entity, this is slavery.
But let me be precise, American’s are not slaves. Not always anyway. In 2008, working Americans worked until April 23 to pay their taxes. That is nearly four months of work, not for one’s own self interest, but for the sole interest of another party(here government) through the tacit threat of force.
One may be thinking at this point, “This is all fine mental gymnastics, but what does any of this have to do with present day heroes and men of greatness?”
Ah, but if the reader will only grant me a moment more digression it should all become a bit more clear.
In his essay Civil Disobedience, tax resistor Henry David Thoreau wonders, ”Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?” His refusal to pay six years of delinquent taxes and an ensuing night in jail until his aunt finally paid them (over his protestations no less) were his answer.
But that was ancient history, what relevance has any of this to do with today’s passing scene? It is here we meet my fallen heroes.
Tom Daschle, former U.S. Senator from the great state of South Dakota, former U.S. Senate Majority Leader, former nominee to lead Obama’s Health and Human Services Department, and former anti-tax zealot. His righteous stands in non-payment of $101, 000.00 for limo expenses and his under reporting of $83,333 in consulting income were a shot across the bow of the immoral slave ship in which every working American now sails.
Next we have Tim Geithner, previous president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and presently Obama’s the United States Secretary of Treasury. His refusal to pay $34,000 in due taxes stoked steam to the train of a modern Underground Railroad of freedom from tax slavery.
And lastly there was Nancy Killefer, previous Senior Director and Head of the Washington D.C.’s office of McKinsey and Co. and failed Obama nominee to head the cabinet position of Chief Performance Officer. Her admirable stance in avoiding a freedom sapping $950.00 tax lien reminded me of such great American Abolitionists as John Brown and John Jay.
Ah, but human greatness is such a fleeting thing. The insult, offense, and even the grief that I felt when each in kind relented to the threats of the taxation status quo, no words can accurately express. The fact that not a single one of these champions I had previously exalted could stand up for their most deeply felt beliefs tore a hole in my soul that will assuredly take a lifetime to repair.
My heroes had acquiesced. The Founder’s promise of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” would again be put on hold.
Oh, Tom, you could have fought for the promise of “Life”. For that portion of “Life” that is stolen from each worker toiling not for himself but for the government. The moments of his “Life” he could have better spent as a free man, not a slave constrained by the ties of governmental intrusion.
Poor Tim, where is the “Liberty”? Where, indeed, when a free man must spend a third of his working life in slavery to the whims of government? Is a man two thirds free, free at all?
And Nancy, what of “the pursuit of Happiness”? I can not deny that a man can pursue “Happiness” while enslaved, but I will aver he can not be truly happy.
You could each have stood up and said, “No more”. The moment was yours to throw off the ties of bondage and make a stand for freedom. Freedom for us all.
You could have been heroes. But like Icarus the heat was too much, freedom just a passing dream. It seems as always, when heroes fall, they fail us all.

An Open Letter to President Obama

President-elect Obama,
It seems congratulations are in order to you and to the Democrat party on your successful bids for the American presidency and both houses of Congress. I congratulate, also, those Americans who put the proper time, effort, and thought into their choice of elected officials.
Also, I must profess appreciation for the wisdom inherent in the following words uttered at your acceptance speech on that historic Tuesday evening in Chicago, “And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.”
I, sir, am one of those voices. As are more than 50 million of our fellow Americans. You campaigned as a “Great Unifier”, soon will come the time to make good on that promise. Undoubtably, it will be no easy task to join red and blue, capitalist and socialist, Conservative and Progressive. With this in mind, I have put together a short list of suggestions aimed at helping you traverse the obstacles that will surely impede your progress along this arduous, near impossible path.
Sir, despite your belief that many of your fellow citizens cling to guns simply out of some mental or psychological weakness, the truth is that many of us have a deep seated faith in the Second Amendment for a much deeper, fundamental, and yes even American reason. There are those who innately understand that a government that takes away the ability of its people to protect themselves from that self same body is no longer an government by and of the people, but rather a government that in fact rules its people. The NRA alone has more than four million members. You, sir, will be their president, too.
Sir, it may be your view that those who oppose your tax programs must be selfish, unfair, or simply unpatriotic; but let me assure you this is, in fact, not the case. You must at least attempt to entertain the thought that there may be no small number of Americans who may simply disagree with the idea of taxation as a mechanism for social change. A group with a different view of the government’s role in the pilfering of monies. Who understand that taxation and freedom exist in opposition, and that the more there is of one, the less there will be of the other. Our founding fathers understood this. They fought a revolution for this very idea. Millions of Americans still hold those old fashioned beliefs. You, sir, will be their president, too.
Sir, I ought not show such hubris as to question your belief in the sanctity of the First Amendment, but there have been some rather ominous signs during your campaign of an inclination toward intimidation and the silencing of your critics. Your monk-like silence while your followers viciously attacked the personal lives of those who would question or disagree with your views lends to the belief that you condone such behavior. The smear campaigns against Joe the Plumber, Stanley Kurtz, and Sara Palin come to mind. Both sides need understand that the First Amendment does not absolve one from disagreement or from opposing arguments. But it most definitely should protect a citizen from personal attacks, unlawful government intrusions, and any and all types of intimidation. Most all Americans believe deeply in their First Amendment right of freedom of speech. Unfortunately, fewer believe that right includes the free speech of others as well. You, sir, will be their president, too.
Sir, it may just be that the notion ‘no matter what the question, government is the answer’ has been encoded into your personal DNA, but this is not the belief of a large section of the American public. In fact, many believe they succeed in spite of the government, not because of it. As a scholar interested in our shared history, you surely must know that the Federal government today is larger than it has ever been at any time in our history. Yet somehow our ancestors, with that very same smaller government, endured and even prospered for nearly two and a half centuries. The fact is many believe this was not merely a coincidence. You, sir, will be their president, too.
Sir, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that your stance on Global Warming comes from an honorable place, that you are in fact more interested in protecting our shared planet than accumulating even more governmental power. But do your stated policies even stand up to scrutiny? Many believe they do not. According to Jacob Sullum at Townhall.com, you plan to “”implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050." That is even more ambitious than the goal of a cap-and-trade bill that the Department of Energy estimates would cost between $444 billion and $1.3 trillion in reduced economic growth over two decades.” The Cato Institute’s Policy Analysis “The Consequences Of Kyoto” posits that even with a worldwide adherence to Kyoto protocols, “The amount of warming "saved" by the emissions reduction...is infinitesimal: 0.19 degrees C.” Let’s face it, not even a polar bear could feel that variation. Again that 0.19 degrees, sir, is with a worldwide adherence. Your program simply deals with America alone. Let’s do the math, over a billion dollar hit to the U.S. economy on the one side, the mere possibility of a fraction of a degree temperature change on the other. There are still a few Americans left with the facility of critical thought. You, sir, will be their president, too.
In closing, sir, I “hope” that you truly are a “change” from what we who may disagree with you have come to expect from the Liberal establishment. I hope that you will, as you have said, hear our voices and be open to our help. As hard as it may be for you to fathom, we ‘loyal opposition’ still have America’s best interests at heart. It is important, if you wish to be true to the moniker of “Uniter”, that you do not simply dismiss us. For you, sir, are our president, too.

Obama and the 1st Amendment

With the endless din of righteous indignation erupting from the Left over imagined book burning in Alaska, one would be led to believe that surely Wasilla today must bear a striking resemblance to Nagasaki circa 1946. One might also be led to believe that those same indignant Obama faithful would have a deep seated adoration for the First Amendment. Sadly, one discovers, this is simply not the case.

For where are the shouts of censorship from Democrats over the Obama campaign "...asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad during the presidential campaign."? As well, why are St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, and Sheriff Glenn Boyer not being pilloried by our mainstream media for their culpability in this prime example of the chilling effect of intimidation on free speech?

But the intimidation does not end at the Missouri border. The NRA-PVF has recently released ads "to educate gun owners and sportsmen about Barack Obama’s longstanding anti-gun record". So what did the Obama camp do to counter? Did they deny, refute, or attempt themselves to educate the hayseed gun clingers? Well, no. They reacted by "bullying media outlets with threats of lawsuits" and "intimidating cease and desist letters...threatening their FCC licenses if they run the ads". In fear, it seems, of the truth of Mr. Obama’s record on the 2^nd Amendment, his lawyer cartel had no problem at all in trampling the 1^st.

Oh, but there’s more. Recently, Stanley Kurtz, a contributing editor to National Review Online, appeared on WGN 720 radio out of Chicago to speak about the William Ayers/Obama connection. The Obama campaign was quick to mobilize its base to mass e-mail and mass call to attack the "right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz" and "his baseless, fear mongering terrorist smears". WGN’s Zack Christenson, a producer for "Extension 720 with Milt Rosenburg", noted that the station received "...the biggest response we’ve ever got from a campaign or candidate...people are flooding the calls and our e-mail boxes". One may wish to assume the e-mails were to praise WGN for its preemptive compliance with the Left’s threatened Fairness Doctrine. One could assume such a thing, but one would be wrong. Weeks later the author of "The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate", David Freddoso, then appeared on the very same radio show. Obama’s speech brigade again went on the attack. In an e-mail to National Review’s Corner, producer Christenson wrote, "Tonight, we have David Freddoso on our show discussing his new book. As we speak, thousands of Obama supporters are flooding our phone lines and e-mail boxes, just as they did for our show with Stanley Kurtz. An Obama Action Wire was sent out tonight to intimidate us into taking Freddoso off the air." Obviously these men’s free expression of ideas were a danger to Obama’s free ride to the Oval Office and thus must be suppressed at all costs.

Let us return to Stanley Kurtz, for he had not seen the last of the Obama thought police. In his investigation again of the Ayers/Obama connection, he became aware of "a large cache of documents...the internal files of the Chicago Annenburg Challenge". Documents that were "housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Chicago", documents that could demonstrate a link between President wannabe Barack Obama and ex-terrorist and Weather Underground member William Ayers. Mr. Kurtz contacted the library and was told he would be allowed access to these records, only to be informed upon his arrival in Chicago that "the donor of the CAC records" had alerted the library to the fact that it did "not have a signed deed of gift" and that "access to the collection is closed". Mr. Kurtz was finally able to review the documents, but one can not help but wonder about the who and the why behind this attempted stifling of freedom of information.

Nearly as disturbing as the above is Mr. Obama’s recent establishment of a "no sign" policy. During his speech before a fawning crown of possible future ACORN enlisted voters in Berlin; citing "security concerns", his organization handed out flyers "that read ‘Posters & Banners not allowed’". One could argue that this is fine for a German audience, even if one be rather skeptical of the security spin, for they are not bound by the American Constitution. However, at a rally at the University of Mary Washington, a publicly funded university no less, his people reiterated his anti-free speech policy. It may be that Mr. Obama’s interest in pristine photo-ops co-opts his interest in the Bill of Rights. Or it may be that he just feels an innate need to censor all opposing viewpoints.

In closing, one can not help but find it odd that a man who so regularly espouses transparency as an all encompassing governing value would feel the need to go to such extremes in order to hide his beliefs and past, thus abusing the very American values he may soon be sworn to protect.

All in all it looks like the Obama campaign is busy writing the book on First Amendment abuse. Anybody got a match?

Sorry, Mr. McCain

Alright, Democrats, you win. I’ll do whatever you want. I’ll sign whatever papers you need.
I never thought I’d live to say this, but please, my God, let me vote for Hillary Clinton!
What a Machiavellian plan you’ve hatched. Such subtle intrigue. I stand an awe bound simpleton to the machinations of minds capable of such intricate complexity. It echoes of Roveian depth and width. And it has won me over.
Where did you find him? Was he built from the ground up or was it just simple dumb blind luck that you stumbled upon him? For he is perfect. He is the quintessential anti-American elitist populist academic know nothing empty suit. Hold on, maybe I’ve gone too far. I apologize to all empty suits.
But he is perfect. He is not just the “I’ll hold my nose and vote for his opponent” candidate. He is the “I’ll vote for anyone else, just tell me who. Please, I mean anybody else!” candidate. The anti-anti-Manchurian candidate!
But, it was this statement that broke the back of every Conservative clear thinking camel this side of sane:

Everybody's watching what's going on in Beijing right now with the Olympics, think about the amount of money that China has spent on infrastructure. Their ports, their train systems, their airports are vastly the superior to us now, which means if you are a corporation deciding where to do business you're starting to think, "Beijing looks like a pretty good option."

Where in God’s name do I start?
How about here. Mr. Obama, is anybody home? For a man of such purported intellect, what were you thinking? Or does this statement actually show the wading pool depth of your thought?
Surely you understand that Beijing has been rebuilt over the last several years as a showcase to the world. That the Chinese communist government would spare no cost in its people’s cash and cheap back breaking labor to make it so. Do you feel this it what should be done throughout American cities? And as an aid to corporations? This will not sit well with the anti-capitalist wing of your party, my friend.
And, sir, do you really believe that this “superior” infrastructure is the standard for other cities and rural areas throughout China? If so, where did you get this information? Is the idea of a centrally planned government so ingrained in your mind set that you can simply ignore reality? I think I already know the answer to that one.
Did you not know, sir, that as of 2006 the average Chinese worker earned the grand total of $2,756 per year or an impressive $230 per month.* If not, why? Isn’t this little fact a rather important one if your point is to make any sense when viewed from the American model? How do you feel American unions will be reacting to this rather substantial cut in pay? I wonder what types of hours they will be forced to work. Under what circumstances. What sir, do you intend to do with OSHA?
I can’t go on, my head’s starting to hurt. I’ve already admitted defeat. Just give me the ballot, Bill, you win. I’ll vote for your wife, let’s just get the dirty business over with.

*http://www.forbes.com/markets/2007/07/02/china-wage-growth-markets-econ-cx_jc_0702markets1.html

One Million, Two Hundred Twelve Thousand, Five Hundred and Forty Two Pounds of Yellow Cake

WASHINGTON (AFP) — At Iraq's request, the US military this year transferred hundreds of metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq to Canada in a secret, weeks-long operation, a Pentagon spokesman said Monday.
The 550 metric tons of uranium, which was sold to a Canadian company, was moved by truck convoy to Baghdad's "Green Zone," then flown by military aircraft to a third country where it was put on a ship for Canada, said Bryan Whitman, the spokesman.
"The operation was completed over the weekend, on Saturday," Whitman said.
The yellow cake was discovered by US troops after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq at the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Facility south of Baghdad, and was placed under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Yellow cake is a form of processed uranium ore that can be used to make fuel for nuclear reactors, or if further enriched as fuel for nuclear weapons.

One million, two hundred twelve thousand, five hundred and forty two pounds of yellow cake was transferred “from Iraq to Canada.”
One million, two hundred twelve thousand, five hundred and forty two pounds of Saddam Hussein’s yellow cake “was discovered by US troops after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.”
One million, two hundred twelve thousand, five hundred and forty two pounds of yellow cake that can be “further enriched as fuel for nuclear weapons.”
One million, two hundred twelve thousand, five hundred and forty two pounds of yellow cake has been ignored by the mainstream media.