#45?

Image via Wikipedia

President Obama (our 44th President) recently spoke at the graduation ceremony for Miami-Dade College.  The Miami Herald provided videos and a report on his speech at http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/04/25/2193397/obama-speaks-to-miami-dade-colleges.html.

Curiously, at the bottom of that article, the Miami Herald quoted President Obama as follows:

“I’m only going to be president a little bit longer,” Obama said. “You are going to be leaders for many years to come.

Hmph.  “I’m only going to be president a little bit longer“? How freakin’ odd.

Is that simply a misstatement?  (Did somebody turn off the teleprompter and allow Obama to start ad-libbing again?) Was Obama speaking from an historical perspective where he presumes he’ll be reelected in A.D. 2012 but still regarded serving “only” until A.D 2016 to be “only a little bit longer”?

Or, when Obama said that he expected to serve “only a little bit longer”–did he really mean that he expected to be removed from office in the next several months?

 

The Thin Blue Line

Image via Wikipedia

A Las Vegas man videotaped the arrest of some burglary suspects.  A cop didn’t like it.  That man was ultimately beaten, arrested and jailed  Charges against him were subsequently dropped.  An internal investigation of the cop ensues.  The cop and the police department will presumably be sued.

Here’s a dramatic, 4-minute video of the initial event:  http://www.lvrj.com/news/exclusive-police-beating-of-las-vegas-man-caught-on-tape-120509439.html?viewAllComments=y&c=y

This is the kind of incident that makes people fear and despise the police.  The central cop in this story was probably amped-up on adrenalin and testosterone after apprehending several suspects.  Or maybe he’s just always an overly-aggressive bully with a badge.

But there was a second cop at the scene and rather than restrain the overly-aggressive officer,the second cop just kicked the victim’s camera.

The cops don’t protect the public, they protect their governmental employer and they especially protect each other. They have an “us (cops) against them (public)” mentality.  They may even have something of an “us (cops) against them (government employers)” mentality.

 

To Be Young, hmm?

Image via Wikipedia

Dayahm! 

I watch this video and I can feel the wind and the cold.  I can taste the snow.

Back in the 60′s and 70′s I lived at Aspen for a couple of years.  There was a time when I could’ve been one of the guys in this video–not because I was a particularly good skier, but because I was also a young man and therefore crazy.

I won’t say I’m too old to do what these “kids” are doing, but I’m probably too “mature” to be dumb enough to try.

 

Title 26 is not the Internal Revenue Code

Image via Wikipedia

The United States Code (USC) consists of 51 “Titles”.  Each “Title” deals with a different subject matter.  For example, Title 26 deals with internal revenue tax laws.

Roughly half of those 51 Titles have been enacted into “positive law”; about half have not.

Title 26 has not been enacted into positive law.

A friend mine, Dick Clark, passed away a few years ago.  He’d been at war with the IRS for most of 20 years before he passed, and had written a book on the subject.   As part of his research, Dick asked the National Archives for a list of those Titles in the USC that had been enacted into “positive” law and those Titles that had not.  The National Archives provided the requested list.

I never saw the list.  But Dick told me that, surprisingly, of the 51 Titles on the National Archive list—only one, Title 26, had an asterisk and associated footnote at the bottom of the list.  The footnote said something like “Title 26 is identical to the Internal Revenue Code”.

The implication was extraordinary.  Title 26 was not the Internal Revenue Code (IRC)  Title 26 and the IRC were two different documents.  Yes, they might be “identical” in terms of verbiage, but they were not identical in terms of authority.

 

Nazi Fruit Inspectors

Image via Wikipedia

This is hilarious . . . and more than a little inspiring.  People are standing up to governmental authority.

The 2nd Amendment should be amended to include the right to keep and bear video cameras.  The government is clearly intimidated by cameras that create evidence that might be admissible in court.  Nobody wants to be sued.

I’m reminded of governmental policy that showed up in several states in the last decade where police hiring policies specified a preference for less intelligent candidates.  Well, these video’s seem to illustrate what happens when government insists on hiring officers of below average intelligence.

 

Congressional Whitewash

Image via Wikipedia

The Washington Times reports that,

“The Wall Street financial crisis of 2008, which led to the deepest recession since the Great Depression, might have been prevented if not for business and regulatory corruption, according to the most extensive congressional investigation to date.  The 635-page report, “Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse,” was released Wednesday and blames financial firms for taking advantage of their clients and investors, credit rating agencies for inflating the market with high-risk securities, and federal regulators for turning a blind eye.”

(Note that there’s no mention of corruption or blame attributed to Congress.)

“According to Senator Carl Levine, the report . . . tell[s] ‘the inside story of an economic assault that cost millions of Americans their jobs and homes, while wiping out investors, good businesses, and markets.’”  Senator Tom Coburn said a lack of ethics led to the fall of Wall Street.  “The free market has helped make America great, but it only functions when people deal with each other honestly and transparently. ‘At the heart of the financial crisis were unresolved, and often undisclosed, conflicts of interest.’”

Indeed.  Curiously, the Congress (whose principle political campaign contributors have been Wall Street financiers) is happy to talk about Wall Street’s lack of ethics and Wall Street’s “conflicts of interest”—but sees no “conflict” in congressmen taking “political campaign contributions” (bribes) from Wall Street to pass laws that empowered Wall Street to rob Mainstreet.

 

Dr Helen Caldicott – Fukushima Nuclear Disaster

Image via Wikipedia

Dr. Helen Caldicott is a doctor, political activist, dissident and internationally-recognized author and public speaker.  Dr. Caldicott recently made a chilling presentation on the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

Dr. Caldicott’s presentation is especially disturbing because she, being a genteel Australian woman, is disinclined to rant, rave and pound her fist on a table (as her report might require).  Instead, she reports the Fukushima catastrophe with smiles and eccentricity that somehow make her warning doubly-impossible to ignore or forget.

It’s ironic and humbling for the Japanese (who are presumed to be so highly intelligent) to see that those damn fools built six nuclear reactors on an earthquake fault line.  Thanks to Japanese hubris, the Japanese have effectively “nuked” Japan and caused more radioactivity damage than was first inflicted by the US atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII.

The Japanese have (nearly) “killed” Japan.

 

Gary Johnson for President in A.D. 2012

Image via Wikipedia

Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico, is running for the presidency in A.D. 2012.  I’d never heard of him before today.  He’s pro-freedom, pro-Constitution, pro-Declaration of Independence, and anti-drug war. He absolutely “talks the talk” that I want to hear.

I’m not fool enough to trust any politician.  But I’m delighted to hear Mr. Johnson’s rhetoric.  Whether he wins, places or shows in the next presidential race remains to be seen.  However, the fact that he’s making speeches in praise of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and against the drug war (that provides the foundation for our police state) is evidence of a welcome shift in this country’s political climate.

Here’s the “Johnson for President” website:  http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/.

Here’s a 00:03:34 video at:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk12-OJ9vLM&feature=player_embedded that also appears on his Johnson for President website.

 

Bloggers are Today’s Minutemen

Image by cambodia4kidsorg via Flickr

Here’s a very good audio file that illustrates our gov-co’s precarious position and the growing power of the internet and bloggers to restore constitutional government that serves the people rather than the oligarchy.

audio file

00:08:29

 

Rising Resistence to “Judicial” Power (over “Strawmen”?)

Image by Mike Miley via Flickr

If I hired an attorney to represent me, I should be able to fire that attorney whenever I pleased.  Likewise, if you hired an attorney to represent you, then you should be able to fire that attorney whenever you pleased. But, clearly, if you hired an attorney to represent you, I would have no authority to fire your attorney.

In the video below, a man attempts to fire “his” attorney.  The attorney says he’s been appointed by the judge and therefore only the judge can terminate his employment.

How is it that a man who is seemingly represented by an attorney, can’t fire what appears to be his own attorney?

Could it be that the attorney does not actually represent the man (whose proper name is, say, “John Ingress”) and who is the apparent defendant?  Could it be that the attorney instead represents an artificial entity (a legal fiction or “strawman” who bears the all-upper case name like “JOHN INGRESS”) and who is the actual defendant?