Thursday, August 27, 2009

More Federal-Imperial Arrogance



This footage of the "town hall" meeting is illustrative of what ails our country (though I find the heavily made-up cheerleading "newscasters" - including the carefully crafted leg-shots of the blonde in the red dress - to be themselves part of the problem).

Federal politicians have been treated like demi-gods far too long. They are supposed to be public servants, but it has become clear over the last few weeks that the federal-imperial hubris is a bigger problem than anyone could have imagined.

Our founders envisioned citizen-servants representing the people in a republican manner - with dignity, humility, and in accordance with the Constitution. But what we now have is a Leviathan, and out-of-control juggernaut fueled by a combination of confiscatory taxation as well as essentially counterfeit dollars cranked out by a secretive cabal of bankers, accountable to no-one, who have the power to create money out of thin air with no restriction. Congress has the power to pass extra-constitutional laws and regulations to benefit those who donate to their re-election campaigns, but which cripple the ability of ordinary people to make a living.

Congressmen, used to the menial ministrations of bowing yes-men and scraping lackeys, are cordoned off, inaccessible to the vast majority of the people they represent, only trotted out for carefully scripted pageants and photo-ops. However, the paradigm of state-worship may be shifting, as the people are starting to find their voice and have been reminded that Congress is supposed to represent us. We are their masters, not vice versa.

This is a hard concept for this elitist gang of pampered mandarins, who hold the people in contempt, to understand.

Just look at this Congressman demanding "credentials" from a citizen who was invited to a public meeting! What arrogance. When Congressman are constantly being lauded and feted, adulated, and wined and dined (especially by lobbyists) there are no requests to see drivers' licenses. It is only when they are being criticized do they behave this way - for they are not used to criticism. Even the passing of Ted Kennedy, with all the abuse of power that man has been treating himself to for decades, has caused Congress to carry on as if one of the gods of Mt. Olympus has fallen off the mountain. They act as though we have lost a hero of the Republic, when in fact, if non-Senators did the same things as this privileged substance-abuser, they would be living in a cage. And do we need to be reminded that one of the illustrious members of the august Senate is (literally) a clown? It is apparent to everyone (Congress excepted) that Congress is a joke.

The mood of the country is not unlike 1775, when the people began to wake up and realize that rather than being served by their government, they were being used and fleeced, like hosts to the parasite, and treated with abject contempt once the leech has sucked his fill of blood from his victim.

Is it any wonder people are angry?

Our ancestors sent bureaucrats and government hacks back home arrayed in chicken feathers. Tea went into the harbor. The people refused to pay taxes (which were but a fraction of those we accept as reasonable today). And the effigies of the crown's representatives were openly burned in the streets. Colonial governors were arrested as new governments were put into place by the newly-independent states - whose governments - unlike our modern Democrat and Republican controlled versions - were no longer puppets to the general government and party apparatchiks.

And it was inconceivable to the king's representatives that they were seen as the problem, as the enemy.

Hopefully, this general government will start to take the hint rather than arrogantly steamroll over the people yet again. Taxation without representation didn't work out so well then, and it isn't now. The overwhelming voice of the people in opposition to the Wall Street bailouts (some 99% of the people were opposed) went absolutely unheeded by both the Bush and the Obama regimes. Federal officials of all branches (and from both parties) hold the people in utter contempt and ignore their concerns, confident that election day is a long way off and that the people can be lulled back into worshipful awe of the federal government through appeals to patriotism and propagandistic fear-mongering to make the federal government seem indispensable. The anger of the people is being dismissed as some kind of manipulation - because that is what Congressman do: play games of manipulation. They have done it so long that they have become jaded to real outrage.

The bottom line is that the federal apparatus is too big.

When the U.S. in its current form was established in 1789 (between 11 states at that time that had ratified the new constitution), each Congressman represented 30,000 people. There was no income tax. There was no standing army. There was no central bank. Congress's powers were limited to only those specifically enumerated in Article I Section 8 - and no more. Today, each Congressman represents over 700,000 people. The federal budget is in the trillions. The people routinely pay nearly half of their income in taxes of one kind or another (absolutely unthinkable when we were British subjects!). Our empire spans over 130 countries around the globe in over 700 military bases that must be serviced, manned, and paid for. And it is all financed by a central bank shell-game that has devalued the dollar to below five cents of real value since the Federal Reserve's genesis in 1913.

Barring a radical (and speedy) reform of decentralization and a massive dismantling of the federal monster (both the welfare- and warfare-state), we are on an inevitable trajectory of dissolution, just as was the top-heavy Soviet Union (which also considered itself "indivisible"). We are simply on a path of growth that is unsustainable. And on top of all the crushing debt, inflationary monetary policy, expansion of war in Afghanistan, the explosion of federal regulations, the encyclopedic bills passed by Congressmen who do not even read them, the massive tsunami of retirees expecting a Social Security check and medicare - the federal government has now made it a top priority to seize control of the entire health care system for all American residents, legal and illegal. It is sheer madness that surpasses any of that of King George III. The federal government continues to find new ways to burden the states illegally - which explains the recent outbreak of state sovereignty declarations, and even calls for secession.

But, of course, the demi-gods in Congress have their own lucrative pension plan (insulated from the Social Security ponzi scheme of their creation for the "little people"). They have a world-class health insurance plan - unlike the socialized monster they have in store for the "hoi polloi." And unlike everyone else, individuals and businesses, Congress is never required to balance a budget. They can tax, and when the people complain about taxes, they simply print new money and pay with that (even as our dollars lose value). Somehow, even on salaries that are not exceedingly great, "public servants" at the federal level all seem to leave office as millionaires. Hmmm. I wonder how that works. It must be because they are so brilliant at managing money - which is pretty apparent, isn't it? One can certainly see why members of Congress bury their heads in the sand and expect the gravy train to keep rolling forever.

But they can only do it so long.

You cannot indefinitely pay MasterCard with Visa. You cannot continue to have an elevated standard of living with increased polities of Socialism. You cannot have freedom coexist with "central planning." Eventually, the military-industrial complex is spread too thin, and at some point, the money paid to the common soldier risking his life either devalues to scrip or simply runs dry. The people, military and civilian, will get increasingly angry and hostile, even as the states become less and less loyal to Washington.

It may go out with a bang, or with a whimper, but one way or the other, the entire federal-imperial house of cards is going to fall, and the demi-gods, exposed as the worthless idols that they are, will have to join the rest of us picking through the rubble to rebuild what they have destroyed.

24 comments:

Rev. Paul Beisel said...

Wow. Double Wow. Triple Wow.

Thanks, Fr. Hollywood, for this piece. This is fantastic writing. I'm glad to see people rising up, but I'm half expecting it to calm down like it always does. It's no different in the Church: how many times are we going to draw the line in the sand and say, "No more."?

Rev. Daniel Robert Skillman said...

I'm wondering if some of the people who have for so long been saying that the USA is "God's country" are going to see the folly in that statement. I know theological arguments haven't seemed to work.

Rev. Eric J Brown said...

What has been oddest for me is talking to some of my more liberal friends who want government health care. . . yet they are public school teachers who constantly complain about how their schools are run.

I fear you may be overly hopeful in waiting for a shift in government. You tell people, "Don't worry, it will be alright, I'll take care of you this time" and too many people will listen, even if you've abused them in the past.

Brian P Westgate said...

The Representatives are at one per around every 700,000 now? For some reason I thought they were around one per every 550,000. It should probably be set at one per every 500,000.

SLJubilee said...

Dear Sir,

If there were one representative per 50,000 citizens instead of one per 700,000 people, the number of representatives would be greater rather than fewer. This proposed increase in the number of public servants seems to be the opposite of smaller government.

Furthermore, Senator Kennedy was a well known advocate for the "little guy". His constituent services were second to none.

Anastasia Theodoridis said...

One salient difference between now and 1775 is, now they have nukes.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear SL Jubilee:

Thanks for making my point. The country simply is too large to manage. It must be broken up - the way (and using the same rationale) the federal government broke up "Ma Bell." The argument is that "Baby Bells" would be better than one, gigantic, monolithic, monopolistic, bureaucratic entity. The same is simply true of Washington.

If we had several, smaller federal governments (such as regional confederations of states), we would not only have a more responsive government, we would have competition. As it stands now, whether people live in Texas or Massachusetts, abortion is mandated to be legal, federal tax rates are the same, and everyone is compelled to participate in the same government pension and health schemes - whether they want to or not. There is no competition.

That is really the only way to return to small, less intrusive government that is accountable to the people. As it stands now, we either accept one representative "representing" (ha!) 700,000 people, or (as you say) support an even bigger Parliament of Parasites than we have now.

Time to break it up!

If Kennedy really had sympathy with the "little guy," he would have refused the Congressional pension plan and joined the same "Social Security" as the "little guy." He might also have refused congressional pay raises and the top-notch health care plan afforded the Congressional demi-gods. That would have shown solidarity with the "little guy."

Rep. Ron Paul is about the only one of them that really has sympathy with the "little guy." He does all of the above, and routinely votes against any and all deviations from the Constitution and any bill that increases taxes and increases the scope of government.

The Kennedy family was a disgraceful example of how the rich and powerful were above the law, enjoying legal protections not afforded to the "little guy." Hopefully, the sun is finally setting on their "dynasty."

Just my two cents! Thanks for taking the time to add to the conversation!

Father Hollywood said...

Dear Anastasia:

That is certainly an added complication! :-)

The Soviet Union managed to devolve in a relatively peaceful and orderly fashion - even with the question of nukes. It can be done, and it can be done peacefully.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear Brian:

I don't see how a congressman can be any more responsive to half a million than he can to 700,000.

I think it is time to acknowledge that the federal government is simply too big, in its scope, size, expense, and tendency to dominate the states.

I think we can do a lot better than a ration of 500,000 to one - but only if we allow the Union to devolve and divide into a friendly commonwealth of sovereign allies.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear Paul:

Thank you. I know exactly what you mean. It takes a lot of energy to keep up the anger and activism. It's all we can do just to work and support our families.

If what I believe is going to happen really happens (really bad inflation and a government healthcare system that will be a colossal failure, our problem may not be people calming down, but the opposite: rioting, civil disturbance, and a fascist crackdown in response. It could get very ugly.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear Dan:

There is a fine line between healthy and godly patriotism and self-serving statist idolatry. The problem is, when people cross the line from the former to the latter, they do it without even realizing it.

Kyrie eleison!

Father Hollywood said...

Dear Eric:

It is puzzling indeed.

It is equally puzzling how the word "liberal" shifted away from self-sufficiency and individual liberty to a statist, socialist agenda of neo-slavery.

Health care is too important to be entrusted to government - especially the federal government!

If bigger is always better, why don't we just turn it all over to the UN and let them run it?

Thanks for the comments.

SLJubilee said...

Regarding Senator Kennedy, I assert that it is not necessary to place oneself in the same tough living conditions that the common man experiences in order to have pity and act on behalf of him.

In the United States we tend to go overboard on the equality bit, which is often based on envy. Our elected officials should indeed have top-notch health care and executive salaries that are not provided to the man on the street.

In fact, the current low salaries paid to our leaders breed corruption manifested by lobbyists and the revolving door. And yes, 180k a year is a low salary for a family to survive on in Washington DC where a mortgage costs $10k/month for a 3 bedroom house within a 2 hour commute of the Capitol.

Regarding the socialist nature of the late senator; it is quite clear that King Solomon himself was a socialist. The wisest man who ever lived believed not in the unfettered free market - which resulted in complete corruption and sin as evidenced by the murdered concubine of the traveling priest (remember the story...) - but rather he managed a controlled country and economy.

Solomon also believed in hard work, and the work that he guided the foreign servants to perform is what brought unprecedented wealth to his country. Interestingly, the Israeli citizens had first responder and civil government type jobs - these jobs produced no wealth intrinsically. Rather, the socialist system produced enough wealth for all to share. Every man had his vine.

Moreover, this system allowed for Solomon to have the greatest scientists and artists that the world had ever known. Libertarian Las Vegas has produced whore houses and Tom Jones. Solomon knew that individuals could not be trusted to make unrestrained decisions in many areas of their lives.

Socialism can indeed work, though it takes a very smart leader to manage it. Solomon's foolish son quickly split and destroyed the country by threatening to raise his father's high level of taxes to an even greater level.

However, the notion of smaller areas of control that you mentioned does make sense. Socialist countries such as Norway and Sweden do very well due to three reasons:

1) Their small size (under 10 million people)
2) They have a solid work ethic with an educated populace (in the case of Sweden)
3) They have vast intrinsic wealth (in the case of Norway with its oil reserves).

Solomon's socialist Israel had all three points. His country was the greatest that the world has every seen.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear SL:

There are a few more contemporary examples of Socialism upon which to draw: The Soviet Union, East Germany, Cuba, Romania, China, etc.

In this fallen world, neither Socialism nor freedom will provide a Utopia. But Socialism, like all government "solutions" rests upon compulsion.

Solomon's Israel was a theocracy. I don't think it would work here. It was also an expansionist empire, and like all empires, benefited by plunder. The forerunners of Solomon's Israel also put all (or almost all) of the Canaanites to the sword - women and children included. They were instructed by God to do this for very specific reasons. I don't believe Congress enjoys the same divine mandate.

The members of Congress (not merely the late Sen. Kennedy) should be enrolled in the same pension and health care plans that they *mandate* everyone else to be in. It is the same principle as the Chinese government requiring executives of the Chinese Airline to fly on the very planes they are responsible for - so there is a lesson we can learn from the Marxists. ;-)

If Congressmen were subject to the very laws they pass, they might pay better attention to what they are putting into law - including reading the bills. I would also like to see a percentage of them drafted if the country goes to war. It might be a good quality control device to separate wars based on genuine need vs. those undertaken for the sake of the lobbyists and the military-industrial complex.

But I do applaud your honesty in lauding Socialism. For many years, this was something progressives would never do. They avoided the term like the plague. If you honestly believe it is the better system, than I encourage you to fight for it. I disagree. I believe freedom is always the better way than slavery. The Scandinavians too will run out of wealth to plunder and redistribute.

Either way, private property is a constitutional matter, and Socialist Congressmen of both parties have no right to push it.

Father Hollywood said...

It really is fascinating that Socialism has become "cool" here, openly advocated by the left and even shamelessly endorsed by TV newscasters - adding to the irony of a post-USSR Pravda editorial warning us to stay away from central economic planning!

Will we listen and heed the warning borne out by 70 years of oppression and poverty?

Father Hollywood said...

The "it" being Socialism, that is. :-)

SLJubilee said...

A few months ago, I needed a simple blood test for an employment matter. I did not want my insurance company to know about this test, for I did not want to give them an opportunity to deny me future catastrophic coverage.

Alas, I saw thirteen administrative and support personnel before I was able to see a doctor who was willing to write me a prescription to have a vile of blood drawn. The first clinic turned me away. It was quite simply not possible to have the procedure done without an insurance plan and a specialist doctor's prescription. Cash was not accepted.

The clinic that finally performed the service for me steadfastly refused to quote me a price. "I need x test and one vile of blood drawn".

"Sorry, you must sign here guaranteeing that you will pay whatever we charge", said the woman in charge.

"But I want to know the price, and I will pay in cash". I said.

"Sir, sign here or leave. There are others waiting".

"May I at least know the maximum price I might be liable to pay?" I asked, with a little bit of desperation.

"For a simple office visit, we charge up to $465".

I ended up spending about that amount - almost $500 - for a blood draw and simple test that any para-nurse can perform.

Now, I had this same test done in Spain - at a private clinic - and it cost 20 Euros and took five minutes. The lab work took an additional five minutes.

The dual private-public European system which allows rich folks to have private insurance while providing a basic insurance to everyone else keeps the market working.

In the United States there has been a complete market failure in 20% of our GDP. There is no free market for health care, for one must have prices to have a free market. I experienced this first hand, as the notion of a price for a medical service simply did not exist.

The free market has failed spectacularly in health care. The giant insurance companies have created a crony capitalism model, successfully eliminating prices from the equation and somehow enlisting the help of the religious right as their allies.

At times of market failures such as these, government compulsion is exactly what we need.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear SL:

The failures are *because* of government. Government became involved in healthcare with Medicare/Medicaid. That's when prices began to skyrocket. Before government involvement, office and medicine prices were reasonable. Even for a time thereafter.

We used to have hospitalization insurance for catastrophic situations, and paid out of pocket for everything else. The market kept the prices reasonable.

Today, insurance companies (heavily regulated by the government) and the government plans have driven prices through the roof.

Only the government pays hundreds of dollars for a toilet seat - and only government involvement in healthcare makes routine care and prescription drugs cost thousands of dollars.

Government is the problem, not the cure. Socialized healthcare around the world is awful. The grass is not greener. If you'd like some horror stories firsthand frpom my Canadian relatives, I can give you several phone numbers.

Having the government "fix" the problem is like using leeches to "cure" a patient from bleeding. It will make things much worse.

Mark my words.

SLJubilee said...

Though sin affects people with suffering and death, very few look into the horrible face of pure evil.

This commenter has seen such undiluted wickedness.

This commenter saw the wicked face of that ancient serpent when he attended a top ranked MBA program, as ranked by the liberal (in the classical sense) globalist magazine The Economist.

Particularly disturbing was the juxtaposition of The Virgin Mary and the Crucified Christ on the wall of every classroom, and "bulge bracket" globalist investment bankers explaining in quite plain language how they stole from widows and orphans, and cheated investors with no concern to law or consequences.

Well, at the time there appeared to be no consequences.

It is true that government is a problem. That is, government brings with it regrettable inefficiencies and bureaucratic blundering.

And these injustices are often much more than the annoyingly long line at the Motor Vehicle Department that we all must endure. For example, the pain is quite real and consequences severe when a loved one is passed over for a federal job or law school admission due to a mandated diversity quota.

Nevertheless, government is not THE problem, meaning the root of all problems. As you wrote, we live in a fallen world. The sinful act of Adam that is the root of all our problems.

And once sin entered the world, men and women began to act like the gods and goddesses of Greek mythology. Man began the quest to conquer and control - through compulsion - his fellow man.

It was while studying in Europe that this commenter realized that the danger for all of humanity was represented not by the left, as he had been taught, but by the right.

St. James writes the same when he refers to the abusive bankers and money changers. St. Paul explains the proper role that government plays - precisely to wield the sword against those who do wicked, precisely to stop the investment bankers and money changers from impoverishing us all.

Additionally, each of us has a specific responsibility, and especially in individualistic America we do not embrace our responsibility to our fellow man.

Worse, Americans stopped honoring their parents and protecting their families long ago; they preached and listened to the message of individualism at all costs. The elderly and widows could turn only to God in their copious prayers.

And He listened.

This is why Social Security and Medicare were instituted. God would not sit silent while the cries of the weak and vulnerable rose to the heavens.

It was not the bankers but we Christians who failed in our task. It was not the government but we sons who withheld the love that we owed to our families. It was due to our greediness and sinful nature that the government was forced to increase in size.

The love of money is the root of all evil, said the Lord. Government is necessary to stop that unrelenting weed from spreading.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear SL:

The worst graft of all happens when government takes control of everything. It is the fox in the henhouse, and government is, by definition, a monopoly.

Can you name one instance where government has done something cheaper than the private sector? The explosion in cost steals from everyone - the poor included. This is why people used to be able to go to the doctor and their entire bill was less than the "co-payment" is today. This is how the cost of a prescription can be thousands of dollars. Nobody (except government) will pay that much. But since so much of the health insurance industry is under the control of government, and since the elderly need most of the prescription drugs, governm,ent drives the costs up exponentially.

If you believe government health care is an act of "compassion," than this kind of "compassion" is killing people around the world.

I notice you didn't take me up on my offer to chat with my Canadian relatives!

If you think government can run things better, fine. But I think you're delusional. The Soviet Union failed in seven decades. They simply (to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher) ran out of other people's money.

Jesus said we would always have the poor among us. It is our job to take care of them, not to create vast government bureaucracies so we can wash our hands of them.

And how's that V.A. hospital system working, by the way? More "compassion" in action.

Thanks again for commenting. These kinds of discussions really need to happen - especially before any kind of plan is implemented. These things cannot be rushed through so quickly that Congressmen can't even read the bills.

Father Hollywood said...

Dear SL:

Also, King Solomon's brand of socialism was equally a failure as the Soviet Union's. He squandered a vast array of wealth, and in order to pay for his public works programs he had to essentially conscript free people and turn them into virtual slaves (sounds familiar). King Solomon's brand of socialism is called in Scripture a "heavy yoke" (as are all such well-intentioned tax-run systems of forced "compassion").

After Solomon's death, his "heavy yoke" and the continuance of those policies resulted directly in a civil war that destroyed all remnant of the Davidic Empire (sounds familiar).

If you want to see the inevitable results of such policies, as well as the judgment of God against the likes of Solomon's socialism, read 1 Kings 11:42 - 12:19.

These kinds of schemes always look good at first when the shiny buildings are being built, but when the costs spiral out of control, socialism always ends in either third-world poverty, dictatorship, or both.

I believe the USA is already close to collapse unless there is a huge reduction of government spending - both in the welfare and warfare state. It is simply unsustainable. The bubble is about to burst. If the federal government takes over healthcare (whether we call it ObamaCare, KennedyCare, or what I prefer, KopechneCare), it will be the final nails in the federal coffin and will either reduce the USA to the level of a third-world country, or (what I think will actually happen) a disbanding of the union into smaller unions of states - with some states being independent.

Even with the best of intentions, socialism always ends up running out of money and destroying incentive, creativity, and the lifeblood of capital that is necessary in order to pay salaries and keep economic activity (including health care) flowing. The love of money is evil, but to a socialist, it is not the love of money, but capital itself that is treated as evil.

Social Security is another example of failed socialist "compassion." It is nothing more than a chain letter that is quickly running out of suckers to make sure the people at the top of the letter get paid. If Bernie Madoff is in prison, so should every member of Congress that supports this racket - it is exactly the same thing Madoff did.

However, we will have an entire generation that has paid into SS over a lifetime, and they will get nothing. They will be left impoverished. So much for socialist compassion.

SLJubilee said...

It may well be that the United States is close to collapse, though this commenter does not wish the dissolution of the Union. Of course, Japan, Germany, Italy and a host of other countries have a much higher national debt to GDP ratio than that of America. Even the US itself had more than double the current debt to GDP ratio after WWII.

In any case, a collapse of the government would not be welcome. Even now, giant global corporations threaten and bludgeon local governments into submission by way of outsourcing and whimsical movements of headquarters when a piece of legislation has a chance of stopping their pillaging of the masses.

With the United States gone, corporations would no longer be constrained by the Teddy Roosevelt trust busters, and they would increase their global dominance.

Unfortunately, this is the likely course of events - not necessarily the dissolution of the United States, but a wholesale return to corporate fascism that overtakes the sovereignty of government. For example China is communist and "socialist" in name only. We can see the future by casting our eyes to Russia - crony capitalism run by powerful oligarchs.

No thanks to that model.

It is interesting that the failings of the Canadian system are referenced. Canada, North Korea and Cuba are unique in instituting a single payer system with no private option allowed. Extremism of any kind rarely works well according to Aristotle, and that seems to be the case here.

A better example would be the French, German or Spanish systems. These countries allow private options - and people do choose at times to privately pay for their healthcare.

The German model is particularly efficient as they allow private "focused factories" to take care of routine surgeries with doctors who are specialists and have lots of practice. Private mini-hospitals compete for government funded vouchers - almost like a public school voucher system.

A pragmatic approach is usually best, and it is a shame that the AstroTurf crowds on the right have made conversation impossible. Hoards of impolite, poorly dressed and poorly spoken followers of right wing radio personalities have increased the chances that we will end up with a single payer system like Canada and Cuba. Lawmakers and other government leaders are right to dismiss blathering drones foaming at the mouth.

This commenter would not even recognize a constituent to speak at a meeting unless a man was wearing a tie and a woman modest feminine attire. Politeness matters, and the current crowds are not educated.

When "bussing for healthcare" arrives as it did with the public school disaster, I suppose the radicals on the right will have no one to blame but themselves, as they refused to take part in a civilized problem solving process. With no reasoned arguments coming from conservatives and a general refusal to look at the data, the far left will be given complete control over the process.

The right claims to be on a path to revolution, and if - when - that does not happen, that part of the spectrum will be completely marginalized to the detriment of everybody.

Father Hollywood said...

I haven't worn a tie since 2002. I don't plan on starting any time soon. But then again, I don't attend these politicians' dog and pony shows.

But I like your conservative idea of "modest feminine attire" for ladies - though you're going to be accused of sexism by many on the left.

I disagree with you about dissolution. Monopolies seldom provide better anything - which is the theory behind antitrust legislation, isn't it? Although the federal government is the biggest trust, monopoly, and criminal syndicate of them all.

Russians, though hardly without problems (it is a fallen world after all) are much better living under freedom (dissolution of the union) than socialism (the USSR).

I say we do it in a civilized way, but those who want to cripple and oppress the states will likely push the whole matter over into warfare (plus ca change...).

So, uh, how are those V.A. hospitals doing anyway?

Father Hollywood said...

And here is a realistic look at the Lion of the Senate and his legacy.