It's fascinating to watch the administration lackeys back away from acknowledging the massive tax increase that is the "Affordable" Care Act, even going so far as to deny that someone who paid the tax needed to pay it.
Summarized here, the blood-sucking has begun, beginning with first-quarter estimated tax payments from the self-employed and entrepreneurs who in a better time would be fueling the engine of our economy.
3/20/14
5 gems of pith and vinegar from H.L. Mencken
No one since H.L. Mencken has been able to cast a few words into the sea and catch the truth – of course there’s the legendary observation “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
Here are several more of my favorites courtesy of Brainy Quotes:
+++ Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
+++ The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out ... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.
+++ The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
+++ It doesn't take a majority to make a rebellion; it takes only a few determined leaders and a sound cause.
+++ I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone.
Here are several more of my favorites courtesy of Brainy Quotes:
+++ Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
+++ The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out ... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.
+++ The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
+++ It doesn't take a majority to make a rebellion; it takes only a few determined leaders and a sound cause.
+++ I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone.
3/19/14
Irony
Toyota agreed to pay a $1.2 billion bribe fine to the U.S. government on Wednesday for a variety of crimes against humanity, among them misleading the public from 2009 to 2012.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black …
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black …
3/16/14
The one thing all dystopias have in common
Just finished watching Catching Fire, the second of the four films in the “Hunger Games” trilogy (Don’t ask). The series gets much more compelling as it goes along. In this installment, the country grows increasingly discontented with the idea of having young people kill each other in a lethal reality-TV show after 75 years, and people veer toward violent revolution.
Having inhaled the three books a couple of years ago, I’m impressed at how well the first two have been adopted to the screen, this second one better than the first.
I am a big fan of dystopian fiction – Nineteen Eighty-Four, Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451, and any number of other great books and films – and you know what theme they have in common?
A government that believes it knows better than the rest of us. Government officials who believe they are made of superior stuff than the rest of us. A government designed to shepherd the lives of the rest of us.
No matter how well intentioned, the more government tries to run our lives the more it messes our lives up – and the more well intentioned, it seems, the more terrifying the result.
Having inhaled the three books a couple of years ago, I’m impressed at how well the first two have been adopted to the screen, this second one better than the first.
I am a big fan of dystopian fiction – Nineteen Eighty-Four, Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451, and any number of other great books and films – and you know what theme they have in common?
A government that believes it knows better than the rest of us. Government officials who believe they are made of superior stuff than the rest of us. A government designed to shepherd the lives of the rest of us.
No matter how well intentioned, the more government tries to run our lives the more it messes our lives up – and the more well intentioned, it seems, the more terrifying the result.
3/13/14
Why they need us
Another one of my golden goodies. It's amazing how stuff I wrote 6-7 years ago still holds true. If anything, the scare tactics of our totalitarian state are more obvious and absurd than ever. And P.S. If you still haven't seen V for Vendetta, shame on you.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
[This musing assumes you have seen the film V for Vendetta. If you have not and wish not to view "spoilers," go watch the darn flick and come back later. You've been warned. You're welcome.]
Towards the climax of the great movie about violence and the state V for Vendetta, megalomanical leader Adam Sutler declares the time has come for the rulers of totalitarian England to remind the peasantry "why they need us." What follows is a montage of news reports clearly intended to cow the citizenry into a state of fear, reminding them that the government is the only thing standing between their security and utter chaos.
A civil war drags on in the former United States. Water shortages are reported and predicted because of a lack of sufficient rain for two years. Police arrest nine suspects who were hoarding vaccine against the deadly avian flu. Twenty-seven people have died in the wake of the discovery of a new airborne disease. New evidence links the terrorist V to an attack on London 14 years earlier - reminding them of the attack that made citizens turn to the government for protection in the first place. A skeptical bar patron says out loud: "Can you believe this shit?" Of course we can't, and we shouldn't.
The truth revealed by the movie is that the state is the source of the chaos. The titular character V, either a freedom fighter or a terrorist depending upon point of view, helps detective Finch uncover the reality that the central terrorist attack of his age was staged by government forces seeking control of citizens' lives under the cover of providing more security. V himself is the product of secret government medical research gone awry.
A central theme of the movie is the same as mine: Refuse to be afraid. The standard political script has been unchanged for decades now: Remind people about something they fear. Offer yourself as the solution to that which they fear. Once elected, strip people of freedom in the name of fighting that which they fear. Rule with an iron fist or a velvet glove, but rule; do not let people live for themselves in freedom.
I would like to dig one notch deeper: V himself preys upon fear, as well. He manipulates people's fear of the state and their fear of losing their freedom - a healthy fear, no doubt, but a real and palpable fear. Notice that V's agenda is first vengeance against the people who conducted the secret medical research on him - hence the title V for Vendetta. He justifies his vendetta by wrapping it within the more worthy cause of freedom: "People should not be afraid of their governments; governments should be afraid of their people." But this little proverb betrays his agenda: Someone should be afraid.
Fear is the great irrationalizer. People do stupid and terrible things when they are afraid. Therefore governments, comprised of people acting as a collective, do stupid and terrible things when operating out of fear. It is one thing to be aware of danger; it is entirely a different thing to be so afraid of that danger that you do or allow stupid and terrible things.
Being aware of the state's incomprehensible assault on our freedom is a healthy thing. Allowing yourself to become afraid of the state, and acting based on that fear rather than rational awareness, is unhealthy.
The state wants you to be afraid. Refuse to be afraid of their straw men and speculations. But go one step beyond: Refuse to be afraid of the state itself. When folks like me show you examples of the state's fear-mongering, use the information to think for yourself - don't be afraid of the state's power, because fear is part of the fuel of their power. We do not need the state to take care of us; the real truth is about how much our leaders need us to believe we need them. And that brings us to the second half of my mantra above: Free yourself.
The character Evie is unable to think clearly until she has no more fear. She reaches that condition of bliss only after a lifetime of horror and several weeks of torture - not a regimen any of us would like to undergo. Perhaps the best we can do is acknowledge our fears and refuse to allow the fear to control our actions and decisions. But that is the key - defeating the fear and living free.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
[This musing assumes you have seen the film V for Vendetta. If you have not and wish not to view "spoilers," go watch the darn flick and come back later. You've been warned. You're welcome.]
Towards the climax of the great movie about violence and the state V for Vendetta, megalomanical leader Adam Sutler declares the time has come for the rulers of totalitarian England to remind the peasantry "why they need us." What follows is a montage of news reports clearly intended to cow the citizenry into a state of fear, reminding them that the government is the only thing standing between their security and utter chaos.A civil war drags on in the former United States. Water shortages are reported and predicted because of a lack of sufficient rain for two years. Police arrest nine suspects who were hoarding vaccine against the deadly avian flu. Twenty-seven people have died in the wake of the discovery of a new airborne disease. New evidence links the terrorist V to an attack on London 14 years earlier - reminding them of the attack that made citizens turn to the government for protection in the first place. A skeptical bar patron says out loud: "Can you believe this shit?" Of course we can't, and we shouldn't.
The truth revealed by the movie is that the state is the source of the chaos. The titular character V, either a freedom fighter or a terrorist depending upon point of view, helps detective Finch uncover the reality that the central terrorist attack of his age was staged by government forces seeking control of citizens' lives under the cover of providing more security. V himself is the product of secret government medical research gone awry.
A central theme of the movie is the same as mine: Refuse to be afraid. The standard political script has been unchanged for decades now: Remind people about something they fear. Offer yourself as the solution to that which they fear. Once elected, strip people of freedom in the name of fighting that which they fear. Rule with an iron fist or a velvet glove, but rule; do not let people live for themselves in freedom.
I would like to dig one notch deeper: V himself preys upon fear, as well. He manipulates people's fear of the state and their fear of losing their freedom - a healthy fear, no doubt, but a real and palpable fear. Notice that V's agenda is first vengeance against the people who conducted the secret medical research on him - hence the title V for Vendetta. He justifies his vendetta by wrapping it within the more worthy cause of freedom: "People should not be afraid of their governments; governments should be afraid of their people." But this little proverb betrays his agenda: Someone should be afraid.
Fear is the great irrationalizer. People do stupid and terrible things when they are afraid. Therefore governments, comprised of people acting as a collective, do stupid and terrible things when operating out of fear. It is one thing to be aware of danger; it is entirely a different thing to be so afraid of that danger that you do or allow stupid and terrible things.
Being aware of the state's incomprehensible assault on our freedom is a healthy thing. Allowing yourself to become afraid of the state, and acting based on that fear rather than rational awareness, is unhealthy.
The state wants you to be afraid. Refuse to be afraid of their straw men and speculations. But go one step beyond: Refuse to be afraid of the state itself. When folks like me show you examples of the state's fear-mongering, use the information to think for yourself - don't be afraid of the state's power, because fear is part of the fuel of their power. We do not need the state to take care of us; the real truth is about how much our leaders need us to believe we need them. And that brings us to the second half of my mantra above: Free yourself.
The character Evie is unable to think clearly until she has no more fear. She reaches that condition of bliss only after a lifetime of horror and several weeks of torture - not a regimen any of us would like to undergo. Perhaps the best we can do is acknowledge our fears and refuse to allow the fear to control our actions and decisions. But that is the key - defeating the fear and living free.
3/9/14
The state of the state
I think I understand this correctly: It’s big news that the governor of New Jersey had people on his staff who arranged for two lanes of traffic to close in an act of political retribution against the mayor of Fort Lee, who declined to endorse Christie’s re-election.
But it’s old news and beating a dead horse to suggest that the president of the United States has an agency (theStasi Internal Revenue Service) that targets people and organizations for harrassment in an act of political retribution against anyone who dares to challenge the president’s ambitions.
But it’s old news and beating a dead horse to suggest that the president of the United States has an agency (the
3/5/14
Here we go again: The drumbeats of war
I am always amused by the silence that overtakes "anti-war" activists when a member of the Democrat wing of the State Party is holding the executive branch. When a Democrat sends good American lads and lasses to sacrifices their lives, limbs and minds to the cause of the state, it's not nearly as egregious as when a Republican does.
And so here we are, rattling the sabers again while squirrels who have never tasted life in a combat zone chatter on the sidelines. The next time a member of the Republican wing of the State Party wages an undeclared-by-Congress-and-therefore-illegal war, the chipmunks of the Democrat wing will regain their voices, but this is not that time.
Are the pending incursion into the Ukraine and whatever subsequent response by the United Nations/States part of what Barack Obama meant when he famously told Valdimir Putin that he'll have "more flexibility" after the election? The two state leaders reportedly talked on the phone for 90 minutes the other day; the official transcripts suggests it was a long exercise in saber-rattling, but of course the officials transcripts would.
It's hard to sustain "You're being an idiot/I know you are, but what am I?" for more than a minute or two. That's not how you spend an hour and a half. You spend 90 minutes with someone making plans, setting goals, or talking about your fantasy football teams. I'm guessing the conversation was about the scenario for the next few days, weeks, months and perhaps years.
Some wag back in the 1960s asked, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?" We're still waiting for the answer.
And so here we are, rattling the sabers again while squirrels who have never tasted life in a combat zone chatter on the sidelines. The next time a member of the Republican wing of the State Party wages an undeclared-by-Congress-and-therefore-illegal war, the chipmunks of the Democrat wing will regain their voices, but this is not that time.
Are the pending incursion into the Ukraine and whatever subsequent response by the United Nations/States part of what Barack Obama meant when he famously told Valdimir Putin that he'll have "more flexibility" after the election? The two state leaders reportedly talked on the phone for 90 minutes the other day; the official transcripts suggests it was a long exercise in saber-rattling, but of course the officials transcripts would.
It's hard to sustain "You're being an idiot/I know you are, but what am I?" for more than a minute or two. That's not how you spend an hour and a half. You spend 90 minutes with someone making plans, setting goals, or talking about your fantasy football teams. I'm guessing the conversation was about the scenario for the next few days, weeks, months and perhaps years.
Some wag back in the 1960s asked, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?" We're still waiting for the answer.
3/2/14
The Lessons of Arizona
On the events in Arizona in recent weeks, in which the governor vetoed a bill that would have allowed businesses to decline service to people on religious grounds, J. Neil Schulman has summed up the stakes quite neatly in a piece called "The Trap of Politics." A sample:
Attempting to use the blunt instrument of force that is government to achieve social goals is rarely a good idea, if ever. Whichever side won in Arizona – either the cause of religious freedom or the cause of gay marriage – the losing side was fated to be embittered rather than accepting, as any victim of a bludgeoning is likely to be. The governor's action did not create sympathy and understanding, and allowing the new law to take effect would not have created sympathy or understanding, either.
Only what Schulman describes as a "tortoise-slow uphill climb" ever generates true change. Using the jackboot of government to force a change only generates anger and resentment.
Once legal compulsion is established in principle to be used in compelling a private business to serve any customer regardless of the proprietor’s beliefs, ethics, or esthetics — any request for service where there is no right of refusal makes the proprietor a slave to the customer.
But here’s the other thing. Decent people who object to the right of refusal being invoked on the basis of various bigotries — skin color, ethnic origin, religion, or sexual preference — would rather live in a legal and political system that outlaws certain rights of refusal rather than working against such bigotry relying completely on the tortoise-slow uphill climb of argument, picketing, boycott, and writing novels, plays, and movies that combat bigotry with mind and heart.
Attempting to use the blunt instrument of force that is government to achieve social goals is rarely a good idea, if ever. Whichever side won in Arizona – either the cause of religious freedom or the cause of gay marriage – the losing side was fated to be embittered rather than accepting, as any victim of a bludgeoning is likely to be. The governor's action did not create sympathy and understanding, and allowing the new law to take effect would not have created sympathy or understanding, either.
Only what Schulman describes as a "tortoise-slow uphill climb" ever generates true change. Using the jackboot of government to force a change only generates anger and resentment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)