Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

A FedGov Apparatchik Gets Testy

Read this piece from Amity Shlaes, author of The Forgotten Man.

Now read this petulant little tizzy from a FedGov lawyer and "administrative law judge" (find that in the Constitution) from the Instapundit post linking to the Shlaes article:

I’ve been reading your blog for years and I appreciate your nuanced brand of conservatism. But lately, your attack on public pensions has me concerned. Look at it from my perspective:

When I graduated from law school and applied for a job at a Federal agency almost 30 years ago, the deal was simple: “We won’t pay you as much as you might make in the private sector, but you’ll get reasonable pay, great benefits including a generous retirement system, and a reasonable work life.” I took the deal. I started at a salary of around $20,000, or around one quarter of what new associates at big to mid-sized firms were making then. My first office was a cubicle with a WWII era metal desk. I worked hard, though rarely on weekends after my kids were born. I’ve had jobs writing administrative decisions, counseling auditors, as committee counsel on Capitol Hill, and most recently as a relatively low-level administrative law judge. My salary is now around $150,000. It makes for a good living for my family, but is not comparable to the salaries that most of my law school classmates, with comparable academic standing, now make. It is not even in the same ballpark as the salaries the big-firm lawyers who routinely appear before me make. One of them lives up the street from me in a much nicer house. But, I’m happy with the deal I made 30 years ago. I’ve had a good career and in a few years, I’ll be eligible for a comfortable retirement (although I still won’t be able to afford the house of the guy up the street).

Apparently though, some people, in and out of government, are no longer happy with the deal. Complaints and warnings about government pensions and pensioners abound. Typically, the narrative is something along the lines of: “Greedy Retired Bureaucrats Still Feeding at the Public Trough as Taxpayers Suffer!”

Well, if you’re concerned about unfunded government liabilities, I agree with you. If you think that government employee pensions are too generous, I’ll listen to what you have to say. But if you just don’t like the deal the government made 30 years ago and want out, I’ll see you in court.


Think this stooge can imagine that the matter might be adjourned to a different tribunal than that to which he is accustomed?

Perhaps some form of alternative dispute resolution between the ruling class and the country class, to use Codevilla's now-classic frame?

Or will you just let this welfare-entitlement-mindset thief plunder the lifetime earnings of your children and grandchildren?

43 Comments:

Anonymous Defender said...

Time to look at the U.S. unemployment map animation again. The little spot in the mid-Atlantic, where Virginia and Maryland touch, never gets worse than yellow while all around it for hundreds of miles things go purple (high unmployment). I think that's DC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfBZnyJg0Bw

I too started out 30 years ago at $20,000 a year with an army surplus metal desk. I worked hard and earned my way up to $41,000, which happens to be the median income in America, in the 30th year. Our professional association fought every contract negotiation period for fair cost of living raises with upper management who make a minimum of $400,000 each.
Then I was summarily laid off with a 15-minute notice.
A federal employee I know always complains about his retired-in-place colleagues. Keeping their chairs warm, is all.
Maybe we should pay certain agencies TO do nothing, in the interest of freedom.

September 7, 2010 at 7:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

His Honor didn't pay much attention in logic class and is basing his case on sample bias. According to the BLS OCO, judges and magistrates have an average salary of $110,000. Same with the average lawyer. Picking a dude with a bigger house for comparison is an even bigger mistake because he might be living beyond his means.

Seriously, is this the best he can do to intellectually defend his entitlement?

September 7, 2010 at 11:31 AM  
Anonymous Abstemio said...

Awww. He made a deal for other people's money, and he's upset that others are upset about being robbed to pay him? The gunvermin made that deal, not us, the people forced to MORE THAN feed him and his family.

Bottom line: no one has a right to collect money from other people at gunpoint. No matter who made that "deal" with them.

He's upset that he "only" makes 150,000 a year, three times what the average non-gunvermin (read: productive) person makes? Dry cheeks, here.

Sorry. The violin isn't playing because the string money went to pay his pension.

September 7, 2010 at 1:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Or will you just let this welfare-entitlement-mindset thief plunder the lifetime earnings of your children and grandchildren?"

"Hell yes!" Said by a retired soldier.

If/when contracts are changed, it must be agreed upon by both parties, long term or not.

September 7, 2010 at 2:20 PM  
Blogger daniel said...

WW2 era office cubicle. Working a couple weekends before the kids were born, but not too many afterward.

Hard core. This guy's really made some sacrifices.

September 7, 2010 at 2:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The right to contract, and for government to respect contracts, is key to our capitalist system. I think the bureaucrat is right - you must honor his pension. He should get the pay of his government - Federal Reserve Notes - while the productive members of society should be free to trade their goods and services for gold and silver while rejecting FRNs. His contract should be respected even if worthless.

September 7, 2010 at 3:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This .gov lawyer / "adminstrative law judge" needs a serious reality check.

He assumes flawed premises.

He compares his cushy job - hands never getting dirty or knuckles scarred, with an equally crafty lawyer who has figured out how to 'game' the system 2 or 3 times to 1 what he makes ?

He paints himself the martyr at only
$ 150,000 a year - boo hoo for him.

He is a cipher, working for an agency of thieves, yet this is never evident to him as he assumes a false paradigm - based, naturally, upon mere externals, how nice one's house is & what $$ income level.

He speaks & writes, as a materialist.

Principle bows to to pragmatism, to him.

A perfect fit for a .gov lifer, no ?

Last year our family of 7 lived on - not kidding - $ 40,000.

None of us starved, but our vehicles are 15 years old & we are frugal with Wal-Mart grocery bills getting larger all the time with no $$ increase in sight.

[Of course, we home-educate our children, knowing that education done by the state, always transmits the disease of Statism - a key factor in our cultural & national decline.]

Most of my neighbors, in our middle class, but turning poor, neighborhood, are in similar economic straights.

Few to none of us have our hand in the 'federal till'.

I bet our home & our other 4 neighbors combined exist on no more than this one guys 'paltry $ 150k salary'!

All this is why this guy gets no sympathy from me.

If con job .gov agencies like his didn't exist to thieve & steal the REAL WEALTH of this nation, which is our Natural Right, under God, to have & build,

Then you & I would be free to earn probably 3 to 5 times our current wages in a truly free market.

Is it not government regulation & attitudes like this that are killing the job market in the several States ?

Yet, we must admit that this deplorable state of affairs exists, in part, due to our apathy.

He's clueless - and yet we allow the clueless to run things.

How many Americans have unknowingly given up their self-government to false figures of authority like his agency ?

Or sought favors from them, being greedy of gain, at others expense ?

We MUST start rendering obedience to GOD, which gives us the basis to STOP obeying Tyrants blindly.

Our rule to each other is love, as the Law of Christ says.

This is genuine charity that would replace the welfare state.

On this basis, we would look to God for our daily bread, and NEVER ask the .gov to provide it, or steal from others to obtain it.

If we rendered to God all that truly belongs to him, there would be nothing left for Caesar.

Samuel Adams, Jr.- Republic of Texas

September 7, 2010 at 4:32 PM  
Anonymous Mark Matis said...

If Uncle chooses to declare bankruptcy, then I agree that the existing government pensions are subject to invalidation along with ALL OTHER contractual obligations the government has made. If, on the other hand, you are proposing another GM or Chrysler, then expect that those affected MAY NOT be as docile as those stockholders were. Either there ARE laws, or there ARE NOT. And if there ARE NOT, then there will be consequences.

Do also note, though, that since about 1986 THERE HAVE BEEN NO FEDERAL EMPLOYEES added to the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS):
http://www.opm.gov/retire/pre/csrs/index.asp

All new employees since then have been put under the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS):
http://www.opm.gov/retire/pre/fers/index.asp

Existing employees were given a choice to "upgrade" to FERS, and many did. Others of us recognized Wall Street for the unethical sewer that it is (see Black Monday for an explanation) and chose to remain under CSRS.

Again, if the country chooses to default, then I have no problem giving up my CSRS. If the country DOES NOT choose to default but comes after my pension anyway, let me assure you that I will do my best to send the appropriate people to hell.

September 7, 2010 at 5:47 PM  
Blogger theirritablearchitect said...

What about the private sector schmuck, with equal education, who doesn't make NEARLY what he's making, right now?

I'm not crying for this A-hole, at all?

September 7, 2010 at 6:44 PM  
Blogger J. Croft said...

I'll see you in court... HA!

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

I don't care about your courts, your bullshit laws or your bully boys. I learned that one of the best ways of dealing with the beast wanting to wrestle you down is to simply... let it go.

No taxes. No mortgage, no debt, no obligations. I live in what some call the Free Economy-something a lot more people will be calling as they wake up to the true nature of the beast and the 220+year fraud known as the United States of America.

Our America will grow with each move of the enemy's tyranny so squeeze on! We'll bust you up then establish a True Free Republic... might even amend that 1787 constitution, turn your ultimate political weapon on you.

September 7, 2010 at 7:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Had this man and thousands like him done the job for which they were paid we would not have the problems we now have to deal with.
He and thousands like him felt they could "give away the farm" every time a case came before them.
If the government is now broke and he cannot collect his full retirement, he has only himself to blame.
Paul in Texas

September 7, 2010 at 10:51 PM  
Blogger Dedicated_Dad said...

I agree 100% with "Mark Matis."

A contract is a contract.

Let's play a little thought-game.

You've been working for BigCompany, Inc. for 30 years, and were promised a certain pension. You took on this contract - which included a significant pay-cut - because of said pension.

Shortly befor your pension came due, my little mob comes to tell you that BigCompany can no longer uphold its promises, but you should feel lucky to get ANYTHING AT ALL.

Tell me you wouldn't be (hypothetically) tempted to go shoot the place up!

Now... If BigCompany really WERE in trouble -- enough to be forced into bankruptcy -- that would be different. You'd have to take what the bankruptcy court decreed, and be happy with THAT!

Sorry, but this man is no different.

He worked under certain promises, knowing that bankruptcy was the only thing that could undermine his contract.

Much as I hate Leviathan, barring the fed.gov declaring bankruptcy, his contract MUST be honored.

This man deserves to be paid.

Flame on...

DD

September 8, 2010 at 2:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The system can only be rectified when our "lawgivers" decide what is the role of the federal government vis-a-vis the 9th and the 10th Amendments. This can only be determined by our "law-
givers" in Congress. These are the same pirates who crafted the 16th and 17th Amendments, helped FDR create the New Deal, and have been lining their pockets ever since. Check out the ELASTIC CLAUSE. This system cannot be "RESTORED". How do you go against judges who are appointed for life? This moke chose to ride the gravy train and it's still going for him. Any suggestions how we derail the federal gravy train?

September 8, 2010 at 3:20 AM  
Blogger Concerned American said...

The FedGov would never change a deal unilaterally -- never:

Gold Clause cases

SCOTUS: Social Security Only A Tax, Changeable At Will

Chrysler Bondholders & Obama

Lose your illusions.

Only by perceiving reality correctly will sound plans be possible.

September 8, 2010 at 4:05 AM  
Anonymous Defender said...

How to keep the U.S. solvent so all the bureaucreeps can get their pensions?
A Congresscritter who I believe is on the lit of Democrat Socialists, proposes a one-percent bank transaction tax.


http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/lanny-davis/107351-a-debt-free-america-yes-its-possible

September 8, 2010 at 6:13 AM  
Anonymous Reg T said...

I'm a little confused here, and am willing to be straightened out, if necessary. I worked as a Registered Nurse for almost ten years at a VA, helping vets with psych and PTSD issues. A few of the vets even said I saved their lives - not because of any incredible skill on my part, but simply because I was there for them, treated them with respect and compassion.

I wasn't given any choice on what retirement plan I could have - FERS was it. For those of you that don't realize it, FERS consists of a small Federal payment, your Social Security, and whatever you saved yourself in your 401K (called the "Thrift Savings Plan"). Not the full retirement VA employees used to get under CFRS.

If I am still alive in two years, when my retirement will start (I quit two years ago, but am too young to start drawing my retirement), I'll get four or five hundred a month, unless the government goes bankrupt first. Which I expect will happen before I get a dime.

Does this make me a bloodsucker? Does the ten years of working graveyard shift almost every weekend, and a lot of overtime (my choice) count for anything? Does the fact that I could indeed have made more money if I had gone to work for a regular hospital in a big city make a difference? I really don't know, I'm simply asking. Am I entitled to the small retirement that I was promised, paid partly by my taxes along with everyone else's?

September 8, 2010 at 6:41 AM  
Anonymous Defender said...

Speaking of waste, fraud and and abuse:
Attack of the Son of Junk Science:
Department of Energy to award half a billion dollars for carbon capture research.

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/09/07/3011242/doe-giving-575-million-in-carbon.html

September 8, 2010 at 7:23 AM  
Blogger DMS said...

Whatever "deal" this man had was with the pack of criminal sociopaths running Washington, not with me. A "contract" I never agreed to, much less signed, is not binding on me and means nothing.

On a more fundamental level, a "contract" for the future delivery of stolen goods is by its very nature null and void, and in fact makes the signer an accessory to the crime. If someone contracts with a third party to extort money from me, they're just as guilty as the thug they in effect hired to hold the gun.

And no, this individual won't ever see me in his illegal kangaroo "court." I'll be just another one of the many who are intentionally living below their productive potential, starving the infernal machine he serves of its fuel until it collapses of its own foul weight, taking him and his ilk with it.

Dave
III

September 8, 2010 at 12:13 PM  
Anonymous GardenSERF said...

Since the government is adopting AUSTERITY as the official "plan", then what's good for the goose is good for the gander and that means MR. FedGov pension has to lose something as well ;-)

http://gardenserf.wordpress.com/2010/08/11/you-will-work-until-you-die-or-you-will-not-eat/

This is the way a stacked deck is dealt out.

September 8, 2010 at 1:00 PM  
Blogger SamenoKami said...

Ded.Dad sez - "You've been working for BigCompany, Inc. for 30 years, and were promised a certain pension. You took on this contract - which included a significant pay-cut - because of said pension."

That's a private company. Not the people's gov't.
A better analogy would be for you to give me your checkbook and all your credit cards and let me throw YOUR money away. All the bills are yours, but you will have no recourse and I won't listen to one thing you say.
The gov't pays ~1.5X the comparable civilian wage and the retirement age is in the '50's and they draw more money total, after retirement than they made working. And why should the gov't care, it ain't their money.

Just so you'll know, I hired on with the hopes of getting a $250K-500K company provided profit-sharing pension. They trashed it and 'gave' us a 401K, which ain't working out too good.

September 8, 2010 at 1:57 PM  
Anonymous Defender said...

Reg. T., you weren't one of the policymakers who got the government into this situation so I say you shouldn't be penalized.
The media company I used to work for fell on hard times -- through not being responsive to market needs -- so they urged the rank-and-file to forego cost-of-living raises and even consider salary cuts, even as the big executives who made the bad decisions continued to take their half-million-dollar salaries with a SLIGHT decrease in BONUSES (and called that THEIR major sacrifice). The bargaining unit voted no, and layoffs got rid of about 40% of the work force. The remainders got their 2% raise.
It's not really the lower-echelon government employees we're disgusted with, any more than I hate those people who wanted to be treated fairly by their millionaire managers. We want the insulated higher-ups to share the pain.

September 8, 2010 at 2:35 PM  
Anonymous Abstemio said...

DMS, bullseye.

September 8, 2010 at 2:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A bunch of great reflections !

The comment I most appreciate was
DMS at September 8, 2010 12:13 PM.

It's worth a second read.

Key Principle:

A contract to receive stolen goods, paid for by a third party, is NOT binding on that third party.

We must renounce every vestige of dependency upon .gov, that is 'civil government', federal, state or local.

Just because your group of thugs is 'local' changes nothing.

The real government came down from the mount with Moses, confirmed by Christ.

(Deuteronomy chap. 1 & 17:14-20; Matthew 28:18 & 19-20)

Isn't this where our "Inalienable Rights, endowed by our Creator" descends from ?

Isn't this where 'all men equal before the law' comes from, no elites ruling our lives, just Law (& grace) ?

The Declaration of Independence assumes we believe & act consistent with such Truths.

The US Constitution rests upon these Moral & religious Truths: "The Laws of Nature & of Nature's God."

The Real Government is you & I, in our conscience obeying God's voice, instead of our own whims.

Real Government means teaching our children Right moral action - to listen to the voice of God, in their conscience, building upon "The Laws of Nature & of Nature's God."

This was the historical state of family government.

This was 'normal' in America 1620-1900, causing the rise of civilization, out of a howling wilderness, unparalleled in all history.

Like those early Colonists & Americans, we can build wisely upon that foundation & choose to live by the 10 Commandments that frees individuals & families (teaching them moral restraint), thus keeping .gov in a box

OR

We can have secular Humanism, which lies to each of us about our profound need of moral restraint & that we answer to no God after death - which produces what we see fleshed out vividly here each day !

The middle ground is disappearing, brothers.

That this .gov "Judge" could be so morally vacuous, receiving stolen tax dollars as pay, while decrying dishonesty of the same system AGAINST HIM, is a fit example of our moral hypocrisy.

How is there any hope of a National Restoration, if we don't repent before God ?

I shudder at our oncoming peril, if we falter now !

The Sons of Liberty, led by Samuel Adams, cried:

No King, but King Jesus !

Samuel Adams Jr.

September 8, 2010 at 4:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dedicated Dad: "Much as I hate Leviathan, barring the fed.gov declaring bankruptcy, his contract MUST be honored."

Let me rephrase that: "Barring the Confederacy being militarily defeated, blacks must still remain in slavery to fund whites' retirements." Is that more clear? I think you've been bamboozled into thinking that somehow you gave your consent, and so this "contract" morally binds you. Even if you liked the civil service system that's not consent, because if you disagreed with it, it wouldn't stop.

Reg T, VA Nurse: "Does this make me a bloodsucker? Does the ten years of working graveyard shift almost every weekend, and a lot of overtime (my choice) count for anything?"

You worked honestly in the system you found yourself born into. You didn't make a party out of your entitlement. You have caused collateral damage to taxpayers, but you weren't given much of a choice to avoid it.

"Am I entitled to the small retirement that I was promised, paid partly by my taxes along with everyone else's?"

You didn't pay taxes, you filed tax returns. You are a net tax recipient. Your pay stub said you receive half of this other number named "gross pay", but all of it came from taxes. The illusion that you paid taxes is accounting fraud. You are not entitled to be a tax vampire, no matter how you got into the situation. Why did you believe a politician's promise, especially after you saw what the government did to the vets?

September 8, 2010 at 4:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, when you do get that big judgement in court, assuming that you will be allowed to sue the federal government, how are you going to collect? Start stealing office supplies now to sell on the street because when it defaults, there won't be any money to pay you with. Anyone wonder why this lawyer went into government service?

September 9, 2010 at 2:59 AM  
Anonymous Mark Matis said...

It's good to see that many of you have your heads so far up your f**kin' asses that you can see daylight. Whining about the Federal wages when for the past 15 years (at least) the Federal government has been OUTSOURCING all jobs that are not "inherently governmental". That means that most clerical, janitorial, and food service jobs ARE NOT government employees. While those jobs ARE INDEED ESSENTIAL to a functional organization, they ARE NOT necessarily highly paid. As a result, while those jobs ARE INCLUDED in private-sector wages and drawn down the average pay, THEY ARE NOT included in the public sector (at least for the federal government) wages and as a result those average wages are higher. As an additional factor, there has been an intentional choice to run up the "average federal wage" by costing in day-care centers and exercise which are equally-accessed by the contractor employees of the government. IRREGARDLESS of whether the federal employees wanted the God Damned things in the first place.

Do also note "Reg T" who has TOTALLY funded whatever meager pension she will get.

While I am more than willing to help clean out the sewage that is destroying this country, UNLESS Uncle declares bankruptcy as an end state, be assured that I will be more than glad to come after you as well if you try to steal my pension. And I would suspect you might be surprised at HOW MANY OTHERS would do so as well, and just how capable we all might be. Understand that, in spite of the racist "Affirmative Action" programs, the federal government has also been proactive in hiring veterans.

But just to emphasize ONCE AGAIN, if the federal government declares bankruptcy or defaults on its obligations, I FULLY understand that ALL contracts are off.

September 9, 2010 at 4:05 AM  
Anonymous Reg T said...

To the "anonymous" who posted this:

"You didn't pay taxes, you filed tax returns. You are a net tax recipient. Your pay stub said you receive half of this other number named "gross pay", but all of it came from taxes. The illusion that you paid taxes is accounting fraud. You are not entitled to be a tax vampire, no matter how you got into the situation. Why did you believe a politician's promise, especially after you saw what the government did to the vets?"

What the government has done to us vets doesn't change what vets have done for this country, and what they were promised in return, "for having borne the battle."

I'm still unclear. If I gave my labor - my effort, time, and concern for those I cared for - for 40+ hours a week, am I not entitled to some form of reimbursement, a paycheck? Yes, that paycheck came from taxes stolen from all of us (and since I worked for what I was given, I don't quite follow the "accounting fraud" part.)

If I did nothing of value, or was taking money for doing something that penalized or stole from people, like working for IRS or ATF or FDA, I could understand your point and agree with it. But since I was actually giving something of value, something promised to our vets (like myself) for their having given of themselves to defend America (as much as we were allowed to), how does that make me a tax vampire? I'm willing to learn, but I just don't see that.

September 9, 2010 at 4:24 AM  
Blogger Dedicated_Dad said...

Anon@4:50 -- your example is both vacuous and inflammatory, ultimately not worthy of a response.

FTR, as abhorrent as slavery is to any decent man, at the time it was legal and the slaveowners (even the black ones) had a right to be compensated for loss of their property.

If Lincoln wished to free the slaves, he could have done so by paying their owners fair market value for the loss of their property.

He could have done this at far less cost in dollars and saved over 600,000 lives. He didn't even consider this because he was a tyrant - instead choosing numerous illegal and unconstitutional acts which resulted in unimaginable death, suffering and loss.

We are - SUPPOSEDLY - a nation of laws. What we are talking about here is simply following well-settled contract law. Barring bankruptcy, *ALL* contracts must be honored.

If you disagree, then you think what was done to GMs bondholders and Chrysler shareholders was OK? Or, are you saying it's OK for the .gov to screw individuals but not corporations?

If the .gov is permitted to welch on its contracts to employees, precedent will be set that will come back to haunt all of us in the private sector as well.

A contract is a contract, and barring bankruptcy, must be honored.

PERIOD.

DD

September 9, 2010 at 5:14 AM  
Anonymous Mark Matis said...

And I also ask do you refuse to pay retirement to "Reg T" and other veterans who served their career in this country's military? After all, they WERE working for Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmeh Cahtah, Bill Clinton, and Barack Hussein Obama. Or should they have just died in the service and made things easier and cheaper?

Again, if the Federal Government declares bankruptcy or defaults on its debts, I do understand that retirement benefits are null and void if handled in accordance with constitutional law. That includes defaults on government bonds to both domestic and foreign owners of those bonds, and NOT just some hack decision as was done with GM and Chrysler.

September 9, 2010 at 11:48 AM  
Anonymous Abstemio said...

Dedicated, I just took 1/3 of your income and sold your house for $100,000. Please respect the contract. Move out and let the new owner move in.

See? You can't make a binding contract for other people. I am not bound to cover promises made by the State.

My signature isn't on any contract the State drew up. You'll have to find some other sucker to bloodlet.

September 9, 2010 at 9:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dedicated Dad you wrote:

We are - SUPPOSEDLY - a nation of laws. What we are talking about here is simply following well-settled contract law. Barring bankruptcy, *ALL* contracts must be honored.

....Or are you saying it's OK for the .gov to screw individuals but not corporations?

If the .gov is permitted to welch on its contracts to employees, precedent will be set that will come back to haunt all of us in the private sector as well.

A contract is a contract, and barring bankruptcy, must be honored.

PERIOD.


DD

My comment:

I couldn't agree more with you.

I wish the attitude you express were held to by ALL of our fellow citizens, whether they work in .gov or privately.

Some here are speaking Prescriptively and others are speaking Descriptively.

In short, we are caught up in a nasty 'What is', and yearn for a better 'Should Be'.

There is also the tendency to think that the .gov will have some inherent morality, that is somehow greater than the sum of it's parts.

This is, of course, impossible.

You know, the thought that we can each 'do our own thing' - and that somehow NOT negatively affect society at large ?

If private morality has ceased to be held honorable - then it MUST depart from the government, as well.

CS Lewis observed:

"We laugh at honor, and are shocked to find traitors in our midst."

Too many of our politicians are on the take, because too many of us are, also.

[Maybe, just maybe, they do represent us, far more than we are willing to admit.]

Consider the Moral wisdom of the Founders - and let us imitate them:

". . . Virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone that renders us invincible. These are the tactics we should study. If we lose these, we are conquered, fallen indeed . . . so long as our manners and principles remain sound, there is no danger." - Patrick Henry

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our constitution as a whale goes through a net." John Adams

(Q: Is the Constitution failing, or has it's necessary underpinning, a Moral, biblical foundation been removed, causing it to fail ?)

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

"Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private morality, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics." - John Adams

"[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.... "
- John Adams

"Men are qualified for civil Liberty, in exact proportion to their willingness to put moral chains upon their appetites." - Edmund Burke


Our home-educated son & daughters are being schooled in these Principles - I cannot expect the State to, so my wife & I must.

There is so much we can do to 'Restore the Republic' - beginning at the only place we have total control - our self & family sphere.

Defense of Liberty & our families is top priority - of course, physically, (like many of you, I can place 80% of our hits in an 18" plate at 500 yards), but also ethically & spiritually, too.

See Isaiah 58:12, telling of those days not yet to come in this land:

"And they that shall be of you shall build the old waste places: you shall raise up the foundations of many generations; and you shall be called, The repairer of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in..."

Our challenge is to seek Wisdom from Above & from Behind (our worthy ancestors....) and pass it forward undiminished.

Win THAT battle, and the physical one may be moot.

Godspeed fellow Patriots,

Samuel Adams Jr. - Republic of Texas

September 10, 2010 at 12:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reg T, in my opinion, the fact that you did nursing care rather than tax collection is evidence that you did not have strongly evil intentions. This barely changes what crime you committed, but it radically reduces the punishment you deserve, down to zero.

Government promised you a pension in return for honest work performed, but when it made that promise it lied to you. Those future tax collections were not the government's to give. If you want to be angry, direct it at the legislators who swindled you.

There is no financial juggling that can make all the government promises come true, no matter how much taxes are stolen. That's why the government is bankrupt.

"Yes, that paycheck came from taxes stolen from all of us (and since I worked for what I was given, I don't quite follow the "accounting fraud" part.)"

The accounting fraud part was the government's claim that you paid taxes. You didn't pay taxes, you received taxes. I'm talking about where the cash flowed from and to, that you worked hard doesn't alter where the cash came from. If you still insist on being paid a pension out of taxes, now that you understand that taxes are theft, that would make you a tax vampire.

DD writes: "[For the record], as abhorrent as slavery is to any decent man, at the time it was legal and the slaveowners (even the black ones) had a right to be compensated for loss of their property."

You have your principles in the wrong hierarchical order. The principle of unforced human consent is supposed to be on top of all others. If it were, you would see that the slaves never consented to be slaves, and so were not property. Every legal claim downstream that depends on humans being property is void, and the claimants liable for damages for kidnapping. If the slaveowners lost only money rather than their lives, they should count themselves extremely lucky.

This dispute is between slaves and slaveowners. Humans who are neither slaves nor slaveowners are third parties, and their opinions have no legal standing. A group of humans may choose to give aid and comfort to the slaveowners, thereby entering the dispute on the immoral side, making them the 10%-ers for the slaveowners. Historically, this group of humans identify themselves as "the government".

Imagine if today the imprisoned non-violent non-offenders guilty of non-crimes: the drug users, the prostitutes, the tax evaders, the illegal immigrants -- anyone who has refrained from picking pockets and breaking legs at least as well as Reg T, yet is imprisoned -- decide to break out of jail, and resolve to militarily destroy anyone who tries to stop them. Will you refrain from joining the immoral side?

September 10, 2010 at 7:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

(Second half)

"If you disagree, then you think what was done to GMs bondholders and Chrysler shareholders was OK? Or, are you saying it's OK for the .gov to screw individuals but not corporations?"

The amount of coercion involved there is smaller enough that the moral situation is qualitatively different. Big business and union labor contain their share of coercion, but it's not a centerpiece like in chattel slavery. Issuing the GM bonds and stocks did not require enslaving human beings. In my view, the GM creditors should have been paid out according to settled bankruptcy law.

"If Lincoln wished to free the slaves, he could have done so by paying their owners fair market value for the loss of their property."

Where is the fair market located that determines the value of a slave, after the slaves are freed? When the slaves were freed, the price fell to zero. The price on the day before is no longer correct. And where do you propose to collect this money from? More tax theft from people who were Union or Confederate tax cows rather than chattels.

"A contract is a contract, and barring bankruptcy, must be honored.
PERIOD.
"

If you're willing to keep chattel slaves in bondage because it was the law, are you also willing to gas Jews, gypsies, and homosexuals when the law demands it? Do you admit to any limits whatsoever on the power of a legislature?

Mark Matis writes: "And I also ask do you refuse to pay retirement to "Reg T" and other veterans who served their career in this country's military?"

If I can. I certainly didn't hire them to go stir up trouble elsewhere. I think they should have stayed home and burned their draft cards.

September 10, 2010 at 7:21 AM  
Anonymous Defender said...

Dad, your comment about Lincoln buying slaves' freedom got me thinking. Obama's trillions in spending of money we don't have. If he had just ordered that every American be given the X-million-dollars that breaks down to, look at that! No more poverty, people buying again really stimulating the economy, plenty of money for cancer research and FREE health care for everyone.
We know the ponderous welfare bureacracy started in the '60s hasn't reduced poverty one bit, but enlarged government quite a bit. Giving that money directly to the poor has been suggested. IF quality of life were of any concern to biggov.
Solutions to all secular, material problems are within our grasp, if politicians would just get out of the way.

September 10, 2010 at 8:34 PM  
Anonymous Mark Matis said...

For Anonymous 12:49 and 7:21:

Rot in hell. And I'll be glad to help you get there. You are every bit as bad as the filthy maggot pigs who refuse to honor their oath to "...preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution..."

September 10, 2010 at 11:00 PM  
Anonymous Reg T said...

Anonymous@7:19:

Thank you. I sure am glad to know my willingness to help my fellow human beings, the veterans I worked for, wasn't such a horrible crime, that my intentions in caring for men and women who needed that care weren't "strongly evil". So, as a nurse I was only "weakly evil". What a relief. Lord only knows what punishment I would have "deserved" had I treated my fellow vets with respect and compassion out of "strongly evil" intentions.

I still haven't heard any logic in your discourse. Unless you are a complete anarchist, the fault of the system does not lie in those taxes used for those contractual obligations that are a legitimate function of government. Those contracts are not at fault for the fact that government has misused what taxes (tariffs, whatever) that it might legitimately accrue. Nor are those contracts at fault for government using taxes for purposes that were not Constitutionally valid functions of government.

And I have much better reason to believe that our CIC was born in Kenya than I do to believe the 16th Amendment was not ratified (as much as I hate it.) The biggest fault of Federal income tax, if I understand it correctly, is that it was only supposed to apply to people like me - people getting a Federal paycheck. How the government misuses those tax monies is an entirely different issue.
(To be continued)

September 11, 2010 at 2:06 AM  
Anonymous Reg T said...

(Continued from last post)

I agree with Dedicated Dad: if the government becomes unable to pay its contractual obligations, as with any _private_ entity, the promised retirement contract becomes null and void. I think it may already be at that point, hence my fear that I will get nothing from FERS or Social Security (perhaps not even from my personal contributions to my 401K, if they confiscate or "nationalize" those as well, as I hear they are contemplating.) However, if Congressional retirees continue to be paid when I am told there is no money available for those of us who actually _worked_ for a living, I'm going to be pissed. Then it will be time for that great line from Shakespeare: "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

BTW, I'm a 50+male former EMT, San Diego police officer, communications for the California Highway Patrol, commercial helicopter pilot, draft horse breeder, shooter, reloader, and - most recently - a registered nurse. Quite happily married to a lovely woman, in case you were worried about that ;-)

September 11, 2010 at 2:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

He'll "see you in court" ? If we ever come to blows with the Leviathan, it won't be a court or a judge he'll be seeing.

Ever hear of the Tree of Liberty ?

DAN
III

September 11, 2010 at 3:08 PM  
Anonymous Abstemio said...

Mark Matis wrote:
"Rot in hell. And I'll be glad to help you get there. You are every bit as bad as the filthy maggot pigs who refuse to honor their oath to "...preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution..."

You mean the people who sent you to war?

Amazing how those "filthy maggot pigs" have such wise judgment that is so very trusted by the men sent to do their wills, thousands of miles away. I believe Orwell called the phenomenon "Doublethink." The ability to simultaneously hold and believe two contradictory ideas.

You're a bloodthirsty man, Mark. Tone it down. Embrace the truth. It's hard, but much better than remaining within the insulating cocoon of irrational and emotional ties to the State.

September 11, 2010 at 10:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Unless you are a complete anarchist"

I am a libertarian who has followed libertarian ideas all the way to their ultimate conclusion -- the complete rejection of coercion over peaceful people. That includes taxes to fund retirements.

"our CIC"

You mean your CIC. He's not my CIC, I didn't hire him to represent me. What are you going to do if I disagree that your government is my legitimate ruler, enslave me or destroy me? How is this different from what many claim the Muslims want to do to me?

"The biggest fault of Federal income tax, if I understand it correctly, is that it was only supposed to apply to people like me - people getting a Federal paycheck."

Juries for tax evaders operate by the sin of envy and the spirit of communism, not by what the definition of income is in the IRS code. The prosecutor points to the accused and says "he shirked his fair share!". The jury convicts.

"BTW, I'm a 50+male former EMT, San Diego police officer, communications for the California Highway Patrol, commercial helicopter pilot, draft horse breeder, shooter, reloader, and - most recently - a registered nurse."

Is it possible to be a LEO anytime in the last 50 years, and not act in contradiction to the plain written and historical meaning of the 2nd amendment? What if some person guilty only of gun crimes decided that he was going to kill anyone that tried to kidnap him and place him in a cage?

September 12, 2010 at 6:04 AM  
Anonymous Reg T said...

Anonymous said:

"Juries for tax evaders operate by the sin of envy and the spirit of communism, not by what the definition of income is in the IRS code. The prosecutor points to the accused and says "he shirked his fair share!". The jury convicts."

Then you should be supporting and stumping for FIJA (as I do). The jury box is where nullification of these bad laws (any bad laws) could be accomplished without us having to resort to the cartridge box to defeat those who would enslave us - and you are right, they have already done a pretty good job of enslaving us.

I'm not saying I approve of Federal taxation, although I know there are certain limited functions that a small state and federal government can and should perform for the nation. Like defending our borders (where I disagree with many Libertarians), maintaining roads, and such. That requires some monetary resources.

You forget that retirement is simply income paid to a worker that is deferred. If the worker is worth his wages, then he is entitled to that part of his wage that is promised - but isn't paid until he retires. If my employer wishes to pay me a slightly higher wage so that I may provide for my own retirement, that is fine. But retirement is simply a benefit that employers provide to attract employees. If you feel there are employees that aren't worth their wage - union, federal, or otherwise, then militate against _them_. Don't tell me that I don't deserve that part of my wage which has been deferred instead of being paid to me upfront.

September 15, 2010 at 4:42 PM  
Anonymous Reg T said...

(part 2)

I also believe we, as a nation, have the same right of self-defense that we possess individually. Libertarians like open borders. I do too, if that means proper immigration.
But illegal immigration and jihad by birth rate will destroy us just as surely as invasion by military force. They must be stopped, as must terrorism. I don't agree with the draconian loss of our rights that the government uses to "fight terrorism", but I do agree that we should go after its source and destroy it. That includes Saudi Arabia, with its promulgation of Wahabiism, and Iran in its quest to destroy Israel and America with nuclear weapons.

Finally, yes I was in law enforcement, but as a peacekeeper. Back in the day, there were many of us who did it not to hassle our fellow citizens, our true employer, but to try to keep them safe. We enjoyed taking violent criminals off the street, but I spent more time helping to find runaway and lost children than I did pointing my gun at home invaders and convenience store robbers, by taking drunk drivers off the street and _not_ arresting those folks I ran across who had some marijuana in their possession. I quit law enforcement when it began to turn into "law enforcement" instead of keeping the people I worked for safe.

September 15, 2010 at 4:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can't deserve tax-funded wages or retirements, because taxes are stolen property. It doesn't matter what you did to earn it, because you can only have title to stolen property that is old enough to be yours by adverse possession. You don't own the retirement payments for work done 20 years ago, because retirements are funded as they go and those monies haven't been stolen yet.

"I know there are certain limited functions that a small state and federal government can and should perform for the nation. Like defending our borders (where I disagree with many Libertarians), maintaining roads, and such."

I believe you will see with time that the arguments for smaller government contain no minimum size limits. The arguments make sense for shrinking government all the way down to zero.

"I also believe we, as a nation, have the same right of self-defense that we possess individually."

The ideas behind the word-phrase "we, as a nation" are the essence of collectivism. I believe you will see with time that collectivism is evil no matter if Germans, Russians, Chinese, or Americans are the ones doing it.

"jihad by birth rate will destroy us just as surely as invasion by military force."

The source of jihad by birth rate is voting. Stop rule by majority vote and then it won't matter which culture has more babies.

"That includes Saudi Arabia, with its promulgation of Wahabiism, and Iran in its quest to destroy Israel and America with nuclear weapons."

You've been successfully distracted. Neither Saudi Arabia nor Iran passed the laws that created the federal reserve, the housing bubble, the housing crash, unpayable amounts of national debt, the draconian loss of our rights that the government uses to "fight terrorism", etc. etc.

September 20, 2010 at 6:43 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home