Reinke Faces Life

—–Original Message—–
From: A Friend Of Mine (yes I have a few)
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 3:33 PM
To: John Reinke
Subject: Defeat these Senators!

Below is a list of U.S. Senators who just voted to give illegal aliens
Social Security benefits; in essence, your FICA monies. Money to people
who are here illegally. Remember this at election time. They depend on
us to forget, and most of us do.

THESE ARE THE SENATORS WHO VOTED TO GIVE ILLEGAL ALIENS SOCIAL SECURITY
BENEFITS. REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL PARTY, THESE POLITICIANS NEED TO BE
DEFEATED IN 2006, 2008 OR 2010 WHENEVER THEY COME UP FOR OFFICE.
SEND THIS TO ANYONE YOU KNOW IN ANY OF THE STATES LISTED. THE ENTIRE
POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION. THAT IS
UNLESS THEY DO NOT MIND SHARING THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY WITH FOREIGN WORKERS
WHEN AMERICAN CITIZENS ARE BEING LEFT OUT.

—–Reply Message—–
How about if we stop using force on everybody in sight?
As far as bad guys coming in, if we pull our troops home, and stop messing in other people's business, we'll be much much safer.

As far as freeloaders coming in, just end welfare. It's just the theft of people's stuff to give to other people.

So kill social security, all the other forms of government welfare to individual, corporate welfare, the drug war, the public skoolz, and all the myriad of things that the government does!

And, make no mistake, Social Security Insurance, is a deliberate mislabeling of a Ponzi scheme designed to put all older Americans on welfare. Their pay in doesn't even come close to matching the payout. SSI is nothing more than a transfer from poor minority males to old rich white females! SSI has single handedly demolished the traditional family. Before Roosevelt, families of different generations bonded together to help each other. Old folks lived with or near their children and helped with the economics and the grand children. With the advent of SSI, they had the wear with all to move to Florida and "retire". Until such time as then need a nursing home, all of their assets magically disappear and it becomes the government's burden. In the old days, the family figured it out. And, there were charities to help. Remember the old soldiers home, and such? I do.

Then, there will be NO need to use force on people?

Prior to 1924, there was no immigration control. Then, only people willing to work come here. There was a vibrant civil society, outside of the government, to help them. The various fraternal organizations have there roots in the need to help immigrants to land. The Churches had a huge role in social services. All as a balance to government.

See that is all what it is about — government control! They get us fighting over the scraps that they the rulers deign to allow drop from their table. e fight with each other over this issue or that issue.
The free market allows people to CHOOSE what services they want. Only government gets to dictate what services we will pay for.

Arghh!

Let's shine up the Statue of Liberty and get back to those ideals.

http://channel-surfing.blogspot.com/2006/06/pensioned-in-budget.html#comments

Monday, June 19, 2006
A pen(sion)ed-in budget 
***Begin Quote***

The Star-Ledger today offers a pretty solid overview of the fiscal calamity facing the state, which raises unstated questions about the current budget discussions that neither political party seems willing to answer.

Gov. Jon Corzine, as I've written many times, has put together a painful budget that makes some effort to right the state's fiscal ship. The problem is that he is asking taxpayers to help foot the bill though an increase in the sales tax rate and an expansion in what it can be applied to.
***End Quote***

1. The state has been spending more money than it has generated in recurring revenues for years

So, that's easy. Hard times are here. Cut the spending to the level of theft.

Yes, money extracted involuntarily from people is theft. Let's get the gubamint out of the theft business. A start would be to cut ALL the services that are not Constitutionally required. Even those, that are required, but should really be dumped or minimized, could be unenforced by the Guv. They are enough lawyers in Trenton to justify whatever the Guv really really wants to do!

Why is the gubamint the only thing in the world that can force us to "buy" its services and "pay" outrageously for it? If I can't avoid it, then it's a tax. Let's have truth in gubamint labels. If a service is SO important that people want it, then let thems that want it pay for it and leave the rest of us out!

Gubamint is ineffective and inefficient. Ineffective, in that, it ALWAYS hurts the people it is intended to help and has unintended consequences. Inefficient, in that, it can not do what a market can do because it always has overhead and is never permitted to fail going out of business. No one can name ONE effective and / or efficient gubamint program.

2. The state has been underfunding its pension plan

Well, IBM, Delta, and a host of other companies have shown the Guv how to lead us out of this problem. Get the State out of the pension business. Now don't screw the people. They have a right to depend upon what they were promised. So, lets unwind it. New employees get a defined CONTRIBUTION plan like a 401k. Old employees are "frozen" with a Net Present Value of what there pension is worth. If we don't have the money in the pension plan to unwind it. Give them a partial payment and an IOU for the difference. The IOUs are basically bonds for the future value. We should be fair but not fools.

Some reforms are needed:
** one job per person period;
** no relatives under your supervision, sorry your family have to get real jobs;
** vacation, use it or lose it;
** sick pay, you have to be kidding, use it or lose it;
** we eliminated pensions; so the era of adding sick and ot pay to your pension base is over.

Yup, Guv C wouldn't tolerate this Barbara Streisand when he was on Wall Street, so why is Trenton different? Yup, no cajonies!

Hey Guv C, hire me for a dollar a year, and in one year, we could have it cleaned up. I've worked for Wall Street bosses who would only need six months. My mother in her prime could have done it in three!

Cablevision and a seasonal shore house

A MATTER OF DEFINITION  June 16, 2006
By L. Neil Smith
For “L. Neil Smith At Random” on http://www.BigHeadPress.com
***Begin Quote***

A long time ago, in a Wichita far away, I met Robert LeFevre for the first time at a week-long seminar in the basement of the Ramada Inn. I learned a lot from him in that week, and over the years that followed. For example, as Americans, each of us has the right to vote as our individual conscience may dictate — for the socialist of our choice. LeFevre referred, as I have myself ever since, to so-called liberals as “left wing socialists” and to so-called conservatives as “right wing socialists”, pointing out that there isn’t any other option on the conventional political spectrum, or on the ballot at the polls.Vote for the socialist of your choice, but vote.
***End Quote***

You have to admire people who can spike the verbal volleyball! I'm going to steal this argument, with attribution of course. 

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2006/tle372-20060618-04.html

The Battle of Wakarusa
NLG and ACLU Fail to Defend Liberty
by Jim Davidson
***Begin Quote***

In early June 2006, the Wakarusa Music Festival took place around the USA Army Corps of Engineers Clinton Lake park facilities. About fifteen thousand people from around the country came for the festival, camped out, listened to live music, and brought millions of dollars in sales to area businesses.

But it wasn't all good news. With a USA feral "high intensity drug-trafficking area" grant, the State of Kansas and the Douglas County Sheriff's Department organized blockades of Kansas Highway 10, US Highway 59, and off ramps from Interstate 70, causing a three-day traffic snarl, violating individual liberties, and generally making a mess of the festival. The organizers who have brought the event to Lawrence, Kansas for three years in a row are considering not having it again, due to the oppressive police presence. 
***End Quote***

There goes the Fourth Amendment. The writer correctly asserts that the lawyers, a government granted monopoly, can't seem to get organized in time to defend our freedoms. But, they have no problem getting organized to take the benefits of a government monopoly. Sigh, what can one person do? 

Unemployment is an uninsurable risk!

The purpose of insurance is to take the risk from an individual and spread it among a large number of people and  / or organizations that are exposed to the same, or similar, risks.

So, rather than one person absorbing a million dollar loss, it's preferable to have a million people lose a dollar. In theory  and practice, this is done by an insurance company. But, Lloyds of London is a partnership. 

In order to transfer the risks, someone has to estimate the probability and cost of losses.  So, losses have to be estimable. Also there needs to be a large population to spread it over. Or, at least, some population who wants to pool their risks and minimize their losses. So this assumes that there are a class of people who all are exposed to the risk. 

I have full control over being employed or not being employed. All I have to do is tell my boss what I really think of him and I will soon be unemployed. On the other hand, I can almost always make sure that I will be employed if I am willing to take drastic wage cuts, for instance. If I were to work nearly for free, I would be employed.

So obviously this is not a risk that is insurable. It falls into the realm of individual responsibility.

It's a scam by gubamint to: confuse the issue, make people dependent upon gubamint as opposed to self-reliant / family -reliant, destabilize families, train people to taking welfare, eviscerate charities – unions – fraternal organizations – clubs, create make work jobs for gubamint "workers", and above all make the politicians look good.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north461.html

Textbooks as Ideological Weapons by Gary North

***Begin Quote***

For four decades, 1961–2001, R. J. Rushdoony was the best-known Protestant defender of Christian education and the de-funding of all tax-supported public education. There were other defenders of Christian education in the twentieth century, but none equally committed to the complete de-funding of public education. The others were defenders of Christian education as supplementary to public education. His position was hard-core: Take away the public schools' money.

His position was grounded on a concept of responsibility: Parents, not taxpayers, are responsible for their children's education. He accepted church-supported schools, but he thought they were generally a mistake. Parents do not pay for 100% of their children's education, so parents must share responsibility with church members. This leads to division in the churches over how the money should be spent. His ideal was either profit-seeking schools along the lines of Fairfax Christian School in Virginia, or home schooling.

***End Quote***

Even the good Brothers who taught me didn't understand that they were being fooled into indoctrinating me and their other charges.

I particularly like North's two prong test for indoctrination (1) the Federalist debate; and (2) the war of Northern Aggression aka the Civil war but what really should be called the end of the American Revolution. While the new nation state survived, it was set inexorable and inescapable down the path of empire.

It is a tremendous burden that Libertarians have to overcome. We have to reverse literally nearly a century of brainwashing. It makes the Communists look like amateurs. 

So how do we take back "our revolution"?

We have to roll back the Socialist's victories. Their key wins: the "publk skoolz"; the fiat currency; the progressive income tax; and the militarization of the American empire.

Focusing on the schools, they are: immoral, ineffective, and inefficient. 

By definition, they are funded with stolen money (i.e., taxes). So using the principle of the "end can not justify the means", they are the result of an immoral theft.

They also teach from a common agenda. That can possibly match what the parents believe in, so that's an immoral brainwashing of children.

We have evidence today of their ineffectiveness. We're last in the world in so many categories that it's a joke. We hear the stories about dropouts and rigged tests. We know from personal interaction with children that bright inquisitive children go in and brain dead functional illiterates come out the other side. 

The famous Objectivist Branden compared education to shoes, arguing that private enterprise is more efficient at providing goods and services than the government. So we know that they are inefficient.

So how do we strike back. I'd advocate a three pronged approach: (1) Make fun of the whole idea. Big Gubamint doesn't like to be perceived as a fool. It's hard to oppress the people if they are are laughing at you. The recent roll back of the Spanish American War cell phone tax was imho primarily due to the late night monologues making it obvious to even the graduates of gubamint skoolz that they were being screwed. Make the whole subject of gubamint skoolz a laughing matter. (2) Parents want the best for their children. Educate them about what their children will turn into after 8, 12, 16, or 20 years of what passes for education in Amerika. (3) Have an agreed paln about how we get out of this mess. It took us 70 years to get to where we are. We can't fix it overnight. Let's have a forty year plan to get out of this mess. I blogged about 20 to switch to a free market school system and the second twenty to end the taxpayer funding. People need time to adapt. (4) Don't let up keep hammering the message: ridiculously funny, immoral by theft, immoral in what they teach, ineffective, and inefficient. And wrong, un-American, and anti-Liberty.

http://www.mises.org/story/2196

The Case of Government Retirement Programs
by Mark A. Pribonic
Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006

***Begin Quote***

I call these programs misdeeds by the political caste because it has been obvious since their inception that there is not enough wealth created to ever sustain them but for a short period of time. The lessons of defined-benefit pensions, which Social Security is the largest example of, have been well documented in the recently revealed financial troubles of the domestic auto companies, airlines, and others. Ignorance of economic law is no excuse.

***End Quote***

Clearly Social Security Insurance is not insurance. Ponzi scheme would be a better description. Insurance company executives would be in jail if they did what the politicians have done. If we think about these benefits as a discounted cash flow, that anyone in an MBA or an undergraduate course knows, then there has to be an asset to balance the teeter totter. The ROI of social security insurance is negative. There is no asset to provide the needed balance. So that bill will come do. There is a reason that business has moved from defined benefit pensions akin to social security. But, the business had to create that pool of assets to pay off its pensioners. Otherwise, the government would send the executives to jail. Note that politicians and professional bureaucrats don't go to jail for the same behavior. What's different? The change from  defined benefit to defined contribution plans puts the onus on the employee, not the company.

Clearly, governemt employee pensions are not funded like a company's pension plan. Unfunded liabilities abound in the government. And, we get to make good on these when they come do.

Just as clearly, the chickens are going to come home to roost, and they are going to be big, dirty, and nasty.

Consider when all these unfunded liabilities come due, there are only a few choices to make good on them:

• Increase taxes to stunning levels;
• Decrease benefits to manageable levels;
• Sell off the national treasures;
• Inflate the currency;
• Or, do the unthinkable and renege on the promises.

My bet is for inflation. It's the "quietest tax" on accumulated savings, cash, and fixed incomes. The market will respond to the increased amount of money chasing the same amount of goods. It'll make Carter's 21% inflation look tame. It will be like the German hyperinflation in the 20s.

http://wcbstv.com/local/local_story_165172930.html

School Cell Phone Fight May Be Heading To Court
Mayor Does Not Appear Ready To Budge On Issue
Kerri Lyon Reporting

***Begin Quote***

Mayor Michael Bloomberg said they're a distraction in the classroom. Parents and students said cell phones are a necessary lifeline in case of an emergency.

***End Quote***

Silly people, Michael Bloomberg, by virtue of being elected mayor, knows what is right in eddykation. Those sentenced to gubamint reeducation camps, aka publik skoolz, should not the resemblance to Father State's prisons. Since they can't keep drugs, weapons, and cell phones out of prisons, they are going to try with an easier target the prison's traing grounds … the skoolz.

Personally, I hope that everyone fights a lot and ridicules the skoolz. It seems that when we can attach a derogatory label on something, it morphs or get repealed. The gubbamint doesn't like to look stupid! And, it certainly doesn't want ot wake the sleeping people, the sheeple, the sheep people, who are being shorn of their rights.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/suprynowicz/suprynowicz43.html

Why I Am Not a 'Conservative'
by Vin Suprynowicz
***Begin Quote***

who in Washington today are more conservative than the so-called liberal Democrats, yapping like protective bitches, should anyone approach their overgrown brood of social welfare programs? 

*** AND ***

But after the Republicans came surging back 20-odd years ago, vowing to close down the wasteful and counterproductive federal Departments of Energy and Education (it would have been a good start) – they did none of it. Never even tried. In 22 years they have repealed no significant infringement of the Second Amendment, closed no significant federal agency or program.

They smile like Br'er Rabbit in the briar patch as the leftist press dances their stylized political Kabuki, decrying Republican "budget cuts" that are really nothing but modest reductions in the rate of bureaucratic growth.
***End Quote***

And neither am I. Like the Classical Libertarian of the pre-French Revolution, I am taking the logical high ground for freedom. Downsize DC, Down with Conservatives, Liberals, Red States, Blue States, Democan, and Republicrat. 

I vote for small government every time, no exceptions.

Hopefully others will get the idea and make the Second American Revolution a bloodless one! 

As I sit and think of the mess that we are in, both here in Amerika and the People's Republic of New Jersey, perhaps it is time to propose a "solution". Now the dead old white guys were fond of what I call a "gum up the works" strategy. Maybe we need to adopt their thinking. A representative republic is a good alternative to democracy!

I never cared much for gerrymandering. 
For New Jersey, I would propose that we leave the State Assembly popularly elected for a while (more on that later). But we make the State Senator, nominated by the County Freeholders, and elected by the Township Councils in that County. Then we can hold our local governing body accountable for what goes on in and comes down from Trenton. Smart the dead old white guys they are. Take a local hostage! If one man one vote comes in play, then the state senators vote would be multiplied by the citizens in their respective counties. In NJ, then there would only be 21 State Senators, and they would be very visible. No more pass the buck and point the finger. The local guy blames the county and trenton and says there is nothing that can be done. Trenton and the county blame the local guys. Let's put the local guy in the driver's seat! Hmmm. I like that idea.

So, again, I would align the State Assembly districts to the boundaries of the various Townships. Since the State Assembly should give people a voice, I'd make it census population based. Since the population of New Jersey is 84 Million. I'd set one State Assembly seat for every million people. Unless the Township committee decides differently, the State Assembly seats would be Township based. The Township Committee could decide to apportion those by some sub-community as proposed by the Township Committee and approved by the voters.

Now I don't see much use in electing County Government. So I would replace that election with a County Committee of representatives appointed by the Township Councils. Get the idea. Representative government up the line, all focusing on the local politicians, who you can get your hands on!

Now to have some uniformity, we should stagger all of this. Just to make change a little slower. So Township Committees should be say 5 people elected annually for a staggered five year term. County Committee people should say get a 5 year term. State Senators get a 10 year term. And we elect assembly people every year.

Of course, we should allow recall of any representative on say a 80% vote.

That should suitably (1) slow down legislative change; (2) put the local politicians clearly on the hot seat.

Oh, and let's end the farce of school board elections. The socialist government school system is merely supporting an incestuous relationship of: School administrators, teachers, their support staff, their unions, their contractors, and the corrupt politicians. All sucking the local taxpayer dry for a second rate result. Again, make the local Township council responsible.

That should sum up the works and save us a few bucks. AND, when we are getting screwed we don't have to go far to find the people responsible!

Warm up the tar, pluck the chickens, get out the pitchforks, here comes the voters!

http://tinyurl.com/hnjzk

A modern touch for the pension system
By Kerry Healey  |  June 13, 2006

***Begin Quote***

The state pension system has $13 billion in unfunded liability that acts like an anchor on the budget and mortgages the state's future. Next year , taxpayers are set to pay more than $1 billion just to chip away at the pension debt. Those annual payments will rise to $2.3 billion by 2023.

***End Quote***

This is all about Taxachusetts. But, why do gubamint employees have pensions? Federal, government, local, skoolz, yada yada yada. In today's economy, employers don't give pensions. So why does the gubamint drones get them?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/brennan/brennan13.html

Telling Families of Dead Soldiers
by Mark G. Brennan

***Begin Quote***

The proposal has three simple steps. Step One is the easiest – abolish the position of CNO in the military. Step Two is the replacement of the CNO with the 2 Senators and 1 Congressional Representative of the deceased. Step Three is watching the ensuing riot. Imagine watching "my" senators, Hilary Clinton and Charles Schumer, along with some representative from New York, delivering the fateful news to a New York state resident who, you can bet your bottom buck, did not donate to any of their campaigns as keeping their financial heads above water was their primary preoccupation. After regaining composure, the next-of-kin might respond with several questions for the messengers like, "As my elected representatives in the Senate and Congress, why, if you don’t support this war, don’t you do something about it?" or "Since you are always so busy talking out of both sides of your mouth in an effort to win your next election, explain to me how I, my children and my country benefit from my husband’s death?" Or how about, "Ms. Clinton, why is your child not fighting in Iraq if this cause is so important?"

***End Quote***

I like this idea. Let's — legislate – executive decide – judical fiat — it today! As a Libertarian, I think that "our representatives" need to take responsibility for their actions!

http://www.blogger.com/feeds/28006963/posts/full/114981847688681322

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16759148&BRD=1091&PAG=461&dept_id=425716&rfi=6

Panel lists open space priorities
By: Audrey Levine, Staff Writer 06/08/2006

***Begin Quote***
Van Dyke Farm tops open space list

The 192-acre Van Dyke Farm on Davidson Mill Road tops the list of high-priority sites that the Open Space Advisory Committee wants to see preserved, according to Jane Snyder, the committee chairwoman.

***End Quote***

Ahh, it's that time of year again in the People's Republic of South Brunswick. Don't you just love when Mommy Government tells us what is good for us. You silly taxpayers are too stupid to figure out that "open space" is good for your property values. Unless it happens that your property is the "open space" that the Kommissars want!

Let's propose a mental experiment. The people, who think that open space is a great idea, pass around the hat. Let me be the first, I'll pledge a hundred bucks. Form a non-profit five oh whatever corporation and collect donations for open space in south brunswick. Let them sell "shares" of the "open space". Raffles, car washes, tootsie rolls, poppies, white canes, or whatever they can think of. Or just accept donations. With the voluntary donations, they can buy space and keep it undeveloped.

I can hear the lamentations now. "The public won't support it." (Like the local movie theater?) "They don't have the money. Times are tough." (Yeah, paying taxes is a drag!) "It won't happen fast enough to save the planet." (Yeah, like we are just buzzing along now.)

See the hallmark of a bad idea is when you have to force people to do "it"!

Doesn't matter what "it" is. If you have to use force to get your favorite political or social goal accomplished, then sorry it's a bad idea. I like the idea of open space as much as the next person, so let me go to my neighbor's house and steal some money form him so I can have "open space"! Sorry Joe. But you "need" open space more than a new set of tires, your daughter's braces, your son's football, your wife's new frock, food, clothing, whatever! Have to go now I see the police coming to throw me in the clink for stealing Joe's money.

So why is it different for "government" at any level — South Brunswick Township, Middlesex County, State of New Jersey, or the US Federal Government — to do the same thing? Suppose Joe doesn't prefer "open space" over other needs. You see taxes come FIRST. Off the top. Before Joe or John get to decide what is their most important need, Father State — the new  King must get his portion. (Half? Three quarters? They have to leave the serfs something!) When government at any level takes taxes from joe or john for their "own good" to do something they don't want, why do joe or john have to pay for it? Taxes are theft. The government is the only entity that can force someone to pay for services that they don't want.

Tin cup around accepting voluntary contributions peacefully is a great idea for "open space" or anything. Taking tax money from people to do "good" is evil violence.

In case you haven't guessed, I don't think that taxes should be used to "preserve open space", or any of the other myriad of "services", that government provides me. I prefer to order form the ala carte menu.

http://www.emailbattles.com/archive/battles/idtheft_aadigajjdf_j/

Crusade To Dump Social Security Numbers Picks Up Steam
Posted on 06/07/2006 @ 14:54:06
in Identity Theft. 

***Begin Quote***

Even before the disclosure of the active duty losses, Gartner VP Avivah Litan told the Committee on Veteran's Affairs that this ripoff demonstrates just how vulnerable some of the nation's most sensitive data is.

"This incident also shows that the Social Security number has become an extremely unreliable piece of information and cannot be trusted to be unique to an individual. Companies should not rely on Social Security numbers alone as proof of individual identity," Ms. Litan said. "As many as one-in-seven adult Social Security numbers in the U.S. may already have been compromised."

Nearly all the states have enacted laws restricting use of Social Security numbers, or are working on them. Universities have led the way (for once), purging the numbers from databases. Even the feds are entertaining a variety of approaches to restrict SSN use for identification… at least for Medicare. 

***End Quote***

OK, I agree, let's kill the ssn completely. The program was sold as "not for identification" so let's get back to that! 

http://www.boston.com/business/personalfinance/articles/2006/06/07/healey_to_propose_state_pension_overhaul/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+Business+%2F+Personal+Finance+-+Money+Management+-+Financial+Management+-+Boston.com

Healey to propose state pension overhaul
New hires would get 401(k)-style plans instead of traditional ones
By Ross Kerber, Globe Staff
June 7, 2006

***Begin Quote***

{Massachusetts} Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey today plans to propose a sweeping overhaul of the state's fragmented public pension system that would eliminate traditional pensions for most new public-sector workers and instead give them corporate-style saving accounts like 401(k) plans.

***End Quote***

Now why can't we do that here in New Jersey?

It would eliminate all sort so of abuses we hear of Like pension padding by overtime, multiple "jobs, and "sweetheart" final jobs that are used to pay benefits off.

It would also completely eliminate the concept of an unfunded liability.

Right now who knows how much future taxpayers are encumbered by the pension of their current "servants"?

I don't know any business that has a defined benefit plan and wouldn't like to kill it.

Wasn't that the reason that government workers got lucrative pension plans in the first place? To compete with private industry for good people.

The taxpayers don't get a pension. Do they? Why should the "public servants"?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20060605/wl_csm/ostatelet

The coming of the micro-states
By Fred Weir
Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
Mon Jun 5, 4:00 AM ET

***Begin Quote***

MOSCOW – As goes Montenegro, so goes Kosovo, Transdniestria, and South Ossetia?

As Montenegro officially declared independence this weekend, accepting the world's welcome into the community of nations, a handful of obscure "statelets" are demanding the same opportunity to choose their own destinies.

In the latest example, Transdniestria, a Russian-speaking enclave that won de facto independence in the early 1990s, declared last week that it will hold a Montenegro-style referendum in September as part of its campaign for statehood.

Experts fear that many "frozen conflicts" around the world – in which a territory has gained de facto independence through war but failed to win international recognition – could reignite as ethnic minorities demand the same right to self-determination that many former Yugoslav territories have been offered by the international community.

Even more significant than Montenegro's rise to statehood would be the international community's acceptance of Kosovo's bid for independence. The province of Serbia was seized by NATO in 1999. Ongoing talks discussing that possibility are being watched with intense interest by rebel statelets. But as tiny, newly independent states such as East Timor find themselves mired in ethnic violence, international observers are wary of the implications of such a move.

"If Kosovo becomes independent, this precedent will cause further fragmentation of the global order and lead to the creation of more unviable little states," predicts Dmitri Suslov, an analyst with the independent Council on Foreign and Defense Policy in Moscow.

***End Quote***

Maybe I'm just an injineer, but what is the problem? What makes these little states "unviable"? It would seem that this is the way to end ethnic violence. We saw it on a large scale when the British left India, and Pakistan was a result.

We have had "diplomats" drawing lines in the sand. That is how we wound up with Iran and Iraq. The diplomat's motivation was to deliberately create "opponents" that would "balance" each other. I guess that comes under the theory that, if they are too busy shooting at each other, then they will be too busy to shoot at me. And, of course, someone has to sell them the guns and ammo. (Is that too cynical?)

In a libertarian America, we would allow people to organize themselves as they saw fit. We have no "dog in that fight".

When we were "liberating Iraq", which I opposed, I wondered to no one in general in my scratchings, that each town should have been organized, held elections, and treated as a political entity. No need for a giant centralized entity. Let them organize "organically". If you are a "one man; one vote" fanatic, then each "municipality" could elect one elector that would go to "Congress" with a list of verifiable names. That count would be the number of "votes" he could cast. I can see it now. "I'm Jack from Isjackistan (they always have funny names) and I cast my people's 10,239 votes for passage of the "Thanks Amerika; Now leave" bill! Wouldn't that be a stich. Each town "freed" could have sent a rep to their new Congress with their proxy. The mayor could call a new election if the people didn't like what the rep did. It could be a working in nothing flat. Or perhaps, it wasn't desirable because it couldn't produce the required results.

Any way, I don't see a problem with allow people the freedom to organize and conduct their affairs in any manner that they see fit.

IMHO

Maybe now that South Brunswick more closely represents the People's Republic of China with single party rule, we should have a straw man party that they can run against. As with national and state elections, I always forget who's in charge. Is it the Democrats, the Democans, the Republicrats, or the Republicans? Is it "the small government but stuff happens and we make it big" or is the "the big government with lost of bigger ideas" party? You know there isn't a bit of difference.

So I propose that we here in South Brunswick, try a completely different party. How about one that wants freedom and liberty? It's the Libertarian party. We pop up from time to time to suggest that there might be a better way. Like the highest nail, we get pounded down by the "two" major parties, but we keep popping back up.  Testing to see if the voters would like to have a true choice.

While a single township can't change Federal, State, and County diktats, the local government can begin the process. We can NOT convert the schools from government run to free market by ourselves … YET! We can NOT end the drug war now … … YET! We can NOT end taxation as we know it … … YET! But we can start the discussion about school privatization and cut the waste and fat … … NOW! But we can direct our policing priorities to violent crime … … NOW! But we can cut taxes and fees with laser like clarity that we are their to minimize theft (that what taxes are) … NOW!

So, if you are tired of one party rule like the people in Russia, Poland, Hungary, and the rest of the old Soviet Union, perhaps you might find an outlet for your frustration! Libertarians are frustrated too.

http://channel-surfing.blogspot.com/2006/06/skewed-priorities.html

Monday, June 05, 2006
Skewed priorities 
Hank Kalet
Managing Editor
South Brunswick Post
***Begin Quote***

The basics go like this: Cut taxes for the rich — either by cutting their income taxes, the capital gains tax or the inheritance tax — and then cut benefits for the middle class and poor through changes to Medicare and Medicaid, education and other programs.
***End Quote***

And the moral justification for reaching into someones grave and stealing from them is?
Seriously, a person labors all their life, makes a contribution to society (otherwise people would not have given them money), and then the political komisars come along and say "no, no, you're too rich. we need it for the children!".

Of course that means that the grave robbers take it back to Washington, where if there is anything left after expensive meals, vast staffs of richly paid yessirs, and endless studies to document the "need", that might be trickled to the serfs.

No, taxes in general, and death taxes in particular, are immoral. Death taxes take money that was already taxed many times. It's one last shot at stealing before the person finally escapes.

And, like the two wolves and sheep voting on what's for dinner, counting noses doesn't make it right.

Beside depending on politicians a la Katrina is demonstrably deadly.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/14748174.htm

Woman charged with smuggling babies arrested in Arizona
Associated Press

***Begin Quote***

LOS ANGELES – A woman who allegedly smuggled babies and young children from Mexico was arrested Monday when she attempted to cross the Arizona-Mexico border, authorities said.

***End Quote***

I see a similarity. We have the poor in Mexico taking the modern version of the Underground Railway past the slave masters to the promised land of freedom.

But, then I think the Statue of Liberty is one of our strongest ads.

You must remember the Underground Railway, even if you went to gubamint skoolz. It was during the War of Northern Aggression. Back when America the Republic began to become Amerika the Empire.

Surely you learned that.  

This was a comment by an emailer to FTL (http:/freetalklive.com). I'm not so sure about that. Have to think about it.

The boys at ftl really hit the bulls eye with this interview.

Loretta Nall is Libertarian candidate for Governor of Alabama. She describes how she changed the focus of a whole debate about the War on Drugs. 

I especially like her quip about having the two candidates for Sheriff "by the gonads" in front of a live audience. They reversed their positions on the War on Drugs within minutes of promising to "eradicate" drugs! 

It is a race issue (i.e., more blacks get imprisoned for drugs than rich white boys and girls). It's a class issue (i.e., rich people hire lawyers; poor people take plea bargains). It's a crime issue (i.e., violent criminals fight over turf like in Prohibition Days and drugs are so expensive that addicts commit crimes to get them). It's a fact of life issue (i.e., the rate of drug addiction hasn't changed over eons). It's a freedom issue (i.e., the Fourth Amendment is trampled by the drug warriors). 

And, I could go on and on. Listen to her on the interview clip. Review some of the FACTS about the drug war. And tell me that it isn't a joke! We've lost. What we are doing doesn't work and can't work. So let's try something new. Liberty!

Now I don't want everyone to be a drug addict. But, clearly that doesn't happen. If we put our energies into understanding, rehab, and finding the "cure", then we would be far better off.

If what we are doing doesn't work, then how can doing more of the same work any better. It's like visiting LA or Chicago and trying to use a map of NYC to get around. Even a child would say, that's dumb. Why is this any different? We have a map (i.e., the War on Drugs) that doesn't work. Let's try a new map (i.e. cure versus prohibition).

It didn't work in the Twenties, it doesn't work now! 

A 

http://techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20060602/0151254

***Begin Quote***

most people seem to ignore such {cell phone} bans anyway 

***End Quote***

Forget the government trying to force people not to use cell phones when driving. (Don't get me started on government.)

How about a simple solution?

Insurance companies shouldn't have to cover the cost of your accident if it's found you're on the phone at the time of the accident, or were on just prior to.

Simple and elegant?

I know that if I got that letter from my insurance company it would make an impression on me.

Think of it: insurance company lawyers would be sure to enforce that provision. They'd be on it far better than any "state revenue collection" agent (aka cop) — after all we know that with gubamint, it's all about revenue from radar traps, rather than safety.

I bet that "simple change" would change behavior.

IMHO

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese284.html

Original Intent
by Charley Reese
***Begin Quote***

They would be disturbed at how we have allowed politicians and judges to turn the Constitution into an excuse instead of a restraint.
***End Quote***

(1) Return the foreign policy to not meddling in the affairs of others. 

(2) Disband the standing army and decommission the myriad of TLAs with guns and "police power".

(3) Return sovereignty to the states.

(4) Return to U.S. senators that are selected by the state legislatures.

(5) Eliminate any federal mandate on the states (i.e., one man one vote).

(6) A party should be Constitutionally limited from a majority in the Congress when the hold the Presidency. (Not sure how to word that one?)

(7) Federal judge could be impeached by the legislature of the state in which he sat.

(8) Federal government, as an agent of the states, can only pass laws about the states not citizens of those states.

(9) No federal involvement in education, welfare, medical care, foreign aid and domestic pork-barrel projects. 

I can live with that! I'm voting Charlie for President. We'll sort out the details later!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/vuk4.html 

Step-by-Step Socialism
by Vedran Vuk
***Begin Quote***

Poverty is whatever the opponents of freedom make it out to be. Have capitalism and semi-free markets not increased the wealth of the poorest in America ten-fold?! The luxuries considered standard to the average U.S. citizen would have been marvels to kings and queens of a hundred and fifty years ago!

If capitalism in another hundred years improves the situation of the poor ten-fold again, the obstructers of liberty will still call it poverty! Not because the lower 20% don’t have enough but because the upper 20% have a hell of a lot more. 
***End Quote***

Very insightful. Like the fellow who said that he wanted to come to America because the poor people were fast. Even he realized the fallacy of the "poverty hustlers".  You know, those are those people, who appear to make their living out of lecturing us, that we are not doing enough about hunger, poverty, and homelessness. 

The bottom fifth is not "poor".

Those souls in the Third World, being starved to death by their respective government, are poor.

Now, I have no doubt, that there are people in America that are "poor". I also know that I see an awful lot of "welfare queens". An, they are not all at the welfare office drawing a gubamint check. We have lots of "welfare" recipients that don't have to endure the indignity of appearing at the welfare office for it. 

Let's start by cutting corporate welfare. Price supports! Here's a pet peeve. We have sugar price supports and sugar quotas. Now let me understand this I have to pay more for sugar and anything that contains it so that corporate farms that are growing it are incentivized to keep growing it. AND, since this cost is unavoidable, it's a tax. So everyone pays a sales tax to keep the sugar flowing. Does that make ANY sense at all? We have milk price minimums at the federal level. Again, it's a tax. Does it make any sense at all?

Let's examine all the wealthy welfare. Just off the top of my head, I can target Federal Flood Insurance that encourages wealthy people to rebuild expensive homes on dangerous coastlines at taxpayers' expense. I can site Sam Donaldson's sheep farm in Arizona that gets millions. And, don't forget the minimum wage that helps the unions and the gubamint workers. (And, you thought it was about helping poor people; silly taxpayer!)

So, in short, the bottom 20% needs a tax cut, a cost of living decrease, and the free market to elevate tehir living standard.

There's a bumper sticker quote to the effect that "no one ever taxed themselves to prosperity". Wow is that true! 

http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art43486.asp

Diabetes Site
Cindy Kimura
BellaOnline's Diabetes Editor
Conquer Diabetes Call-In

***Begin Quote***

{Content deleted at the request of the author. You'll have to visit her site to see what she said. I still think what I posted was a fair use quote, but I am an easy to get along with type. In summary she urged that you call the Congress to support R&D funding. I assume that because I differ with her tactically, not strategically, she wants to use "force" one me to silence my pov. Oh well. She'll learn that begging politicians for a pittance is a losing tactic as well as demeaning.}

***End Quote***

Dear Ms. Kimura,

While I am sure that you have the best of intentions, I don't agree that going hat in hand to the Federal Government is the best way to solve the problem. I am not unsympathetic to your quest. I'd like nothing more than to see Diabetes conquered in our lifetimes. My wife is a Type 1 and my best friend is a Type 2.

However, I am fundamentally opposed to using tax money for any such purpose. No matter how noble.

First, if it is a good idea, then funds should be able to be raised voluntarily. My experience is that funds raised that way are used more effectively and efficiently. I personally contribute to the Joslin Institute. Not because of the tax deduction, but because of the pioneering work that they do. I think that they have a real chance at a cure.

Second, the Federal Government is neither effective or nor efficient in what they do. You and I will long be dead and buried before they develop a cure or have any hand in developing one. Allowing them to call the shots is just plain silly. What expertise do they have as leaders in Diabetes Research to decide what the right amount is? How can they decide what is the next best use of the next dollar of diabetes research money? How can they determine diminishing returns? When you say call and urge, how do we know what the right number is? It is egotistical to think that this process will deliver anything but strife as the different special interest groups "battle" for a part of the budget. Isn't it much more efficient, effective, and peaceful, if we return this to the people for a decision? Let's cut the Federal Government out of the equation, and thus we lose their "handling fee" (estimated to be a half to 85 percent), and put that money back into taxpayers' hands. Let's assume the breakage of sending a dollar to Washington is 50% just to make the math simple. So if you had a check from the Federal Government representing your share of the R&D budget let's say it's a dollar, then you could send it to say Joslin. Now, instead of sending two dollars to Washington to get a dollar check to donate, how about if you just keep the two bucks. Then, you can send it to Joslin. The AIDS activists can send their two bucks where they want. The Parkinson advocates can send it where they want. You get the idea. It's effective because the research organization will have to impress you with progress to keep you contributing. It's efficient because the "handling charge" of the Federal Government will go to the charity. And, it's peaceful, because the various groups don't have to squabble among themselves and give the Federal Government the ability to play one off against the other.

Third, if you really want progress, then focus on "shooting" the FDA! It slows the process and makes it fantastically expensive. Eliminate them and the whole R&D pipeline will speed up and cheapen. Besides, do you really think the Drug Companies want to kill their customers? And, even if you do, do you think that the FDA is an effective remedy? If so, look at the Viox and such deaths.

Fourth, I can only think of one disease that was "cured" lately. That was polio. The March of Dimes flattened it. Without the Federal Government. My only gripe with them was that they didn't have the good sense to go out of business. They "adopted" another disease. And one that will have no cure. "Birth defects" probably can't be eliminated or cured, only minimized. But, if they can attract donations, then that's OK! When they get tax money or United Way, which is not voluntary for most people, then it's NOT OK.

So, if I was king, I would suggest to my subjects that I wasn't wise enough to figure out what to do. But, what I did know was that we, as a people, needed to develop a consensus. The logical addition of all our opinions would be better than mine alone. Since I wasn't smart enough to cure any disease, I would help my subjects figure it out what diseases we had and how to move ahead. So, I'd order the king's clerks to summarize the cause of all deaths for all the land. I would invite the king's doctors (a panel of fifty distinguished people selected by their peers serving pro bono) to identify the 50 biggest problems (either by deaths or death rate) and the organizations working on those problems. I'd proclaim the list throughout the land and invite my subjects to contribute to the charity of their choice. I, of course, would visit each organization (one per week) and encourage them to find a cure. If they did, I bestow a meaningless honor on the ones that cured their disease and went out of business. I'd compliment my subjects on their wisdom and remind them that we still had a list of problems. Notice that never once did I make anyone do anything. Or really really spend a lot of tax money.

I hope this little rant convinces you that, if you really really want to cure diabetes, as I think you and I do, that a different strategy will be required. After all, look where the current model has gotten us. Some wag defined insanity as doing the same thing and expecting different results. Depending on the Federal Government, to me, defines insanity.

Respectfully submitted for your consideration,
FjohnR

Ferdinand John Reinke
3 Tyne Court
Kendall Park, NJ 08824
732-821-5850 (Home Office)
781-723-3746 (Fax)

http://public.2idi.com/=reinkefj (Email form)
http://www.reinke.cc/ (Web page)
https://reinkefj.wordpress.com/ (Blog)

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16691349&BRD=1091&PAG=461&dept_id=425716&rfi=6

EDITOR'S NOTE
By: Hank Kalet, Managing Editor    05/25/2006
Primary decision: Post resists temptation to endorse.

***Begin Quote***

The South Brunswick Post does not endorse in primary elections.

I will admit that there was a temptation to enter the fray this time around, because township Republicans have so far failed to field a candidate for mayor and the June 6 Democratic primary contest between incumbent Mayor Frank Gambatese and former Mayor Debra Johnson could end up determining who will be mayor come January.

But we decided to resist the temptation for three reasons:

1. We believe that primary elections are intraparty affairs that should be determined by the political party in question.

***End Quote***

Added: Thursday June 01, 2006
Why do taxpayer pay for primaries?

> "1. We believe that primary elections are intraparty affairs that should be
> determined by the political party in question."

Then why do I have to pay for them?

If it's truly a private matter for that club, why are tax dollars used for it?

I don't monitor, nor pay for the elections at the vfw, american legion, kawanis, the local churches, the third grade class president at Constable school.

So why do I pay for these clubs to elect candidates?

f reinke, kendall park, nj