Strangulation by regulation

Via Conservative Hideout

Full Document Available in PDF

The scope of federal government spending and deficits is sobering. Yet the government’s reach extends well beyond the taxes Washington collects and its deficit spending and borrowing. Federal environmental, safety and health, andeconomic regulations cost hundreds of billions—perhaps trillions—of dollars every year over and above the costs of the official federal outlays that dominate the policy debate.

Highlights of the report:

• Total costs for Americans to comply with federal regulations reached $1.806 trillion in 2012. For the first time, this amounts to more than half of total federal spending. It is more than the GDPs of Canada or Mexico.

• This is the 20th anniversary of Ten Thousand Commandments. In the 20 years of publication, 81,883 final rules have been issued. That’s more than 3,500 per year or about nine per day.

• The Anti-Democracy Index – the ratio of regulations issued to laws passed by Congress and signed by the president – stood at 29 for 2012. That’s 127 new laws and 3,708 new rules – or a new rule every 2 ½ hours.

• Regulatory costs amount to $14,678 per family – 23 percent of the average household income of $63,685 and 30 percent of the expenditure budget of $49,705 and more than receipts from corporate and personal income taxes combined.

• Combined with $3.53 trillion in federal spending,Washington’s share of the economy now reaches 34.4 percent.

Please take a moment and think about the figures that I put in bold. Every time a new law or regulation is written, the federal government has a little bit more control over our lives. As the power of the federal government grows, the opportunities to abuse that power also increase. And, think about the costs. Think of all these laws and regulations as a huge anchor that the private sector economy has to drag along while it tries to grow.

There is a small favor for which we should be grateful. There are so many laws and regulations that the government can not possibly enforce them all uniformly. Imagine if the government agencies like the IRS, the EPA and, OSHA had enough enforcement agents to make every citizen and business to comply with the letter of every regulation. The economy would come to a screeching halt. And so, the laws and regulations are selectively enforced. And, that in itself is a form of tyranny.

Go read the rest, it is truly sickening

 

LA Times Worried About Those “White Conservative Gun Owners”

Your pathetic op-ed of the day, week, month, year

There are, in increasingly frightening numbers, cells of angry men in the United States preparing for combat with the U.S. government. They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.

They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.

And the source the LA Times gathers this from? The Left-Wing SPLC

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has been tracking hate groups for 30 years, released its latest report on the growth of these organizations this week. Its findings were, to say the least, alarming. The center divides its subjects into militias, which are mostly groups of weekend warriors who train for combat against imaginary foes; hate groups, which target minorities; and “patriot” groups, whose beef is with the U.S. government. Patriot groups first began surfacing after the massacre of a bizarre sect by federal agents in Waco, Texas, in the early 1990s. They showed their teeth in 1995, when a patriot adherent blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City.

Ah yes,the SPLC, which has as much credibility as MSNBS does. It is a Leftist group that tries to stay relevant by playing the Race Card as often as possible, oh and the Neanderthal Card too of course

What can be done to reverse this tide of belligerent ignorance? Not much. The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights, and in fact most patriot activity consists of venting steam by meeting with like-minded Neanderthals and firing off blog posts threatening civil war.

The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights, in other words, these people are LAW-ABIDING, and love their country, yet the LA Times is more worried about them than Jihadists?

 

What Would the Father of the Constitution say to gun grabbers?

Gun control you say? The Left is pushing hard to negate much of the second amendment, and part of that is to call anyone who defends that amendment as a lunatic. Well are these people who say the Constitution MEANS what it says loony? Let us consult THE expert on the Constitution, James Madison. Via Steve

James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper #46:

But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general alarm. Every government would espouse the common cause. A correspondence would be opened. Plans of resistance would be concerted. One spirit would animate and conduct the whole. The same combinations, in short, would result from an apprehension of the federal, as was produced by the dread of a foreign, yoke;and unless the projected innovations should be voluntarily renounced, the same appeal to a trial of force would be made in the one case as was made in the other. But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such an extremity. In the contest with Great Britain, one part of the empire was employed against the other. The more numerous part invaded the rights of the less numerous part. The attempt was unjust and unwise; but it was not in speculation absolutely chimerical. But what would be the contest in the case we are supposing? Who would be the parties? A few representatives of the people would be opposed to the people themselves; or rather one set of representatives would be contending against thirteen sets of representatives, with the whole body of their common constituents on the side of the latter.

The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

Go read the rest. As a side note, it is amazing that more and more liberals are openly saying we need to scrap, or at least IGNORE the Constitution. I have long-held that destroying the Constitution is the end goal of the Left. For years, Liberals would scoff at such a suggestion. But, as the Left becomes more sure that they can render the Constitution, in this case the second amendment mute, they begin to be more honest about their disdain for our founders and their principles. The truth is the Left is as far removed from our Founders as the East is from the West. And their masks are slipping.

Nebraska students to learn about American principles, Leftists horrified

Of course, they will also be told that global warming, or climate change is a theory, which it is, and urged to explore it themselves, in other words, to think. That has the Left outraged! School is not for thinking, or encouraging kids to evaluate anything. I mean you teach kids to think and the next thing you know, they are doing crazy things. Like thinking before voting.

Students in Nebraska are getting new standards for social studies curriculum, after weeks of intense debate. The state Board of Education reached agreement on two items of controversy this week: whether to include “American exceptionalism” and how to teach about climate change, the Lincoln Journal Star reports.

The fight had been over whether to explicitly teach the idea of American exceptionalism, as one board member proposed, and whether to include information about climate change, which the current standards do not mention. The board approved the standards after making some changes:

The words “American exceptionalism” do not appear in the final draft, but the concept does. In the sixth- through eighth-grade U.S. history standards, one of the “indicators” — examples of what to teach — is the “unique nature of the creation and organization of the American Government, the United States as an exceptional nation based upon personal freedom, the inherent nature of citizens’ rights and democratic ideals.”

This is what the Left hates apparently examples of what to teach — is the “unique nature of the creation and organization of the American Government, the United States as an exceptional nation based upon personal freedom, the inherent nature of citizens’ rights and democratic ideals.”

In other words they are going to teach about the founding, the government, the, GASP, constitution, and that there is, brace yourself, liberty in America! Come on man! The Left is trying to turn out good little brain dead Marxists, and Nebraska schools might get in the way of that! Oh, but it gets worse for the Left.

Likewise, climate change appears in the sixth- through eighth-grade geography standards, but is presented as a theory, not as fact, asking students to evaluate “recent global climate change theories, and evidence that supports and refutes such theories.”

What? You cannot tell these kids that a theory is a theory! And instructing them to evaluate evidence on BOTH sides of the debate? OUTRAGEOUS! How dare Nebraska encourage open mindedness. I mean the Left has been trying to educate indoctrinate our kids for decades now. Stories like this scare them. Just peruse the comments at the link, the stupidity and hate will stun you

 

If you thought you hated back seat drivers before….

Wait until the federal government is back there, monitoring your driving. Chris at Wyblog is not happy

Every turn you make. Every exit you take. The Federal Government will be watching you. Starting on September 1st all new cars sold in the U.S. have to come with a Black Box, to record your activities in the event of a crash.

The thing is though, it’s always recording. So now when you get pulled over the cop doesn’t need to consult his radar gun, he can just download your speed from the ever-present electronic spy.

Not good, not good at all. Our liberty takes another kick in the pants in the name of “progress”. Chris sums it up

This is known as “progress”. It’s for your own good.

Yep, well, until those inevitable unintended consequences start rolling in, and this time we can blame Republicans and Democrats alike!

Our government, BOTH parties, and their dishonesty needs to go

H/T  Conservative Hideout for this story of how our government, and big business collaborate to screw small businesses and hide new laws, and their consequences from the people

Buried deep in the transportation bill was an amendment which was added to the legislation which will change the definition of cigarette manufacturers to include those who own and operate roll your own cigarette machines, effectively shutting down these small businesses all across the country.

    For those who do not know: Loose tobacco is taxed at a much lower rate than cigars and cigarettes and because of this many people have opted to save money by rolling their own cigarettes and this led to a boom in the roll your own cigarettes business. Entrepreneurs went into business for themselves by purchasing rolling machines which afforded smokers with the opportunity to roll many cigarettes in minutes while paying half the price for name brand cigarettes.

  Needless to say, “big tobacco” wasn’t happy about small businesses moving in on their territory and they lobbied the government to crack down on these small businesses, and let’s face it, the government doesn’t really want people to quite smoking because quite frankly the government would lose too much money. The government simply wants the people to pay more to the government for theprivilege to keep smoking and because many people found a way to legally avoid paying taxes on cigarettes the government had to step in and do something about this.

  So naturally the federal government was more than willing to partner with “big tobacco” to take down the little guy. The federal government and “big tobacco” are the winners here and the losers are the small business owners for they can no longer compete. And it mustn’t be forgotten that this bill was passed with bipartisan support, the Republicans are just as guilty as are the Democrats for putting tax revenues and special interests ahead of the people.

Absolutely despicable. there is no place in our republic  for this. Of course this is what happens when bills become so massive no one can fairly be expected to know what is in them. We need some reform that disallows amendments, which have nothing at all to do with a bill, from being attached. We also need to end this practice of government using taxes to pick winners and losers, or to favor large businesses over small. Our Congress is out of control. They are no longer representatives, they are slave masters. This is nothing more than hiding legislation from the people. I will let Matt have the last word

So, this story has it all, intrusive government that causes people to lose their jobs, and closes businesses, with a heaping helping of crony capitalism.

This story reminds us just how deep in the pit of big government we are.

Liberals really do not get the First Amendment

But, as a public service, we here at The Daley Gator are going to set them straight, with help from Silverfiddle

In the Church-State debate sidebars that have broken out on the fringes of the 2012 culture wars, a common liberal argument recurs:

“You can’t have it both ways. You can’t demand government stay out of religion, and then attempt to insert your religion into debates about government. The Wall of Separation between Church and State applies to church as well as state.”


That is wrong for a couple of reasons. First, there is no such thing as “a wall of separation” in the constitution. Here is what the First Amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, contrary to progressive arguments, it is legitimate and constitutional to bring one’s religious values to the public square. You can even bring them to the House of Representatives, the Senate and the Presidency,  secure in the knowledge that you are a good American acting in accord with the US Constitution.

The second error in this statement is related to the first. The Constitution prohibits the federal government from establishing or prohibiting religion. It places no such strictures on citizens, so it doesn’t go both ways.

Consequently, We the People can have it both ways, freely exercising our religious rights in all public arenas while demanding government stay out of our business.

See, it is really VERY simple. The Founders deliberately gave us a constitution that is not too tough to figure out. And, frankly, let me add my two cents worth here. Those on the Left who argue that a Nativity scene on a courthouse lawn, or a student mentioning God at graduation violates the Constitution need to read the first amendment. It very clearly states that CONGRESS shall make no law…….. A high school student is not Congress. A town that has Santa in their Christmas parade is not Congress either. Sorry Liberals but the ACLU is wrong when they sue over a picture of Jesus in a school, or over a church using a school building for church services. And any judge that sides with the ACLU on such matters is wrong as well.

Again, the First Amendment is very clear.