Catherine

And you have just PROVEN my point: that a fact-based argument from our Founding Principles gets turned into "You're just a Know-It-All!!!" followed by more name-calling. Frankly, you didn't even deserve this much of a response.

I do not watch mainstream TV and have not for years -- too busy, and I got far too sick of the blatant leftist bias. My time is worth more. I read. What's the problem with what Sheriff Mueller wrote? Article VI of the Constitution states that all laws "made in pursuance of this Constitution shall be the supreme Law of the Land." The key phrase is "made in pursuance." Laws antithetical to the Constitution (which document includes the Bill of Rights by full incorporation, see Article VII) are, in Madison's words, "usurpations of powers NOT granted; therefore null and void." The Sheriff states he will not allow the enforcement of soi-disant "laws" which are actually merely usurpations. He thereby upholds the Constitution, as he swore to do. How is upholding the supreme Law of the Land paranoid? Why is standing by the oath one swore suspect? You need to look at your basic principles -- do you really think one should swear an oath, NOT intending to uphold it? Or that being forsworn is no big deal? Really? There is no honor and no integrity in that stance; how can you then call yourself an honorable person; one of integrity? Or are those merely old-fashioned, meaningless terms as well? They are NOT; not to me. As for the Republican party today -- they have been almost entirely taken over by the "Progressives" -- and the Democrat party has been completely subsumed by that same group outlook. Read a bit about the history of the Progressives and their antecedents, the Fabian Socialists. That ought to give you a serious case of the willies. Their stance is one of utter contempt for humanity; eugenicists and tyrants all. One of their members and spokesmen, George Bernard Shaw (yes, the famous author) stated flat-out that everyone should be required to go before a panel, yearly, to justify their existence (showing how they had produced more than they had consumed) and if they could not so do, they should be killed, as a service to humanity. Humanely, of course. They are despicable. If you understood what these people stand for, and how they have been working to destroy this country from within (for decades) you would recoil in horror and do everything in your power to bring their plans out from under the rocks they hide beneath, and to stop them.

http://www.countysheriffproject.org/

Rabbi Daniel Lapin says, "The more things change, the more we must rely on the principles that never change." Do some reading on the Constitution and its principles -- I've cited web sites, books, articles, YouTube videos; take your pick. Yes, the _world_ has changed -- but the principles of freedom, morality, self-government, self-regulation, responsibility including our duty to aid our fellow humans -- NONE of those have changed one iota. THOSE are what the Constitution is founded upon.

There was a great cartoon in The New Yorker magazine a couple years ago: two cavemen sitting & talking. Once says to the other, "I don't get it. We get lots of fresh air and exercise, the water and air are clean, everything we eat is organic and free-range -- and no one lives past thirty!"

The Supreme Court is NOT the final arbiter of whether or not something is Constitutional. That job is NOT part of their assigned duties (read the Marbury vs. Madison case of 1803; just a couple of pages of clear text; available at Justia Law). The states and people can nullify, and -- believe it or not -- the county sheriffs are the final arbiters/sentinels of what is or is not Constitutional in their counties. See the County Sheriff project for info.

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. Abraham Lincoln Gettysburg, Pennsylvania November 19, 1863

KC -- First THANK YOU for the link to the Galveston County program; I had been looking for that and couldn't find it. Next -- here in Mass we have had way too many House speakers, Senate presidents, and other officials leave office only to shortly thereafter end up in the hoosegow for illegal activities while in office. I was told some years ago that the Democrat Party in Mass (we essentially have single-party rule here; the Republicans have a scant handful of office holders and no Independents at all) _wants_ ethically challenged petty (or not-so-petty) crooks who could not get elected without strong party support -- because they TOE THE LINE and do what they are told by the party -- else they lose their cushy jobs and all their chances to enrich themselves illegally. Once out of office, the party doesn't care what happens to them -- so off to Club Fed they go. So we end up with rep's stuffing their bra's with bribes, on camera. Rep's appearing at press conferences without their trousers to bi+ch about how "the man" is against them. Rep's claiming to know nothing about their in-law's illegal businesses and having no idea where their personal wealth (from the spouse working in that illegal business) came from... et cetera. It is disgusting.

You make several excellent points (and I'm with you on the vacations and paying off the cards monthly). The one point I'll make here is that capitalism is based on PRODUCTION, not consumption. The Keynesian economists have this exactly backwards. (Read Peter Schiff's "How An Economy Grows and Why It Crashes" before tackling von Mises or Hayek; it's where I send my daughters' friends when they have questions.) Quick proof? The iPod. No one was clamoring for it before it existed. Production first; then comes consumption. Proof some more? FedEx. The guy who started the company got an "F" on the project where he laid out the business model; the prof said flat out that "no one needs documents overnight and besides there are fax machines." Production (here, of a service -- that now has a huge air and truck fleet too) first.

That debate was long and arduous. It was held in 1787, when a convention was called to re-vamp the Articles of Confederation, a "perpetual union" that was falling apart after only ten years. That convention came up with the Constitution, which was presented to the states and ratified in 1789. Read the works the Framers read (Aristotle, Plato, Marcus Aurelius, Cicero, Bastiat, Locke, etc.; I have read portions of their works and am in absolute awe over the breadth of knowledge of the framers -- there is NO equivalent group today) about the structure and purpose of government, the history of governance, inherent rights, the origins of civil society, the causes of breakdowns of civil societies over the ages... You'll not do much better than they did no matter how long you take. As for your very valid question about OK damages -- yes, they _would_ do well with no Federal help. Look at recent history: after Superstorm Sandy, church groups and private charities got to _more_ places and gave _more_ aid than the feds did -- and the help they gave was pertinent to that specific spot's needs. Was there one over-arching group over all of them? No. Did some places get missed? Probably. Do places (and people) get missed when the feds are in charge? Yes. Do people scam the system? Yes; more likely to succeed with larger agencies. Private groups _will_ step in to fill voids. If the feds backed off, more private groups would step in. There was a drought in TX during the administration of Grover Cleveland (Democrat). Congress voted $50K in aid to be sent for relief. Cleveland vetoed the bill, saying there was no Constitutional justification for that aid coming from the feds. In response, private groups raised and sent over $100K to TX in relief. So TX came off two times better relying on private aid alone. Here is a link to a great true story involving Rep. Davey Crockett (of "Remember the Alamo!" fame): http://personalliberty.com/2010/04/09/sockdolager-a-tale-of-davy-crockett-charity-and-congress/

You may have all the colors, but you have demonstrated time and again that (1) you have no understanding of the principles that this country was founded upon, and (2) that you are mainly not interested in discussing issues when you have the option of ad hominem attacks. What Herman Cain accurately calls the "SIN" tactics: Side-step the issue, Ignore facts, and Name-call.

The Patriot Act is a complete and utter violation of the 4th Amendment. If we understood the Constitution, we would declare it "a usurpation of powers not granted, therefore null and void" (see the Federalist papers, possibly #44 or #43, for Madison's words on this topic). Who is the "we" here? The states, which (together with the general citizenry) CREATED the federal government and whose creature the fedgov't is. 10th Amendment, (paraphrased; full text in many places) "all powers not delegated to the feds, nor forbidden to the states (Art 1, Section 10, mainly), are reserved to the States and the People." So far as giving up liberty for safety, Ben Franklin said that best: "He who gives up a little essential liberty for temporary safety deserves neither -- and that is what he receives, in the end."

Judy (and Bulldog Tom, too) -- If I can figure a way to extract individual pictures, I will post a couple. The folks who run that web site only have this download-it-all slideshow, unfortunately. It is safe, but they don't have the certificate set up right so there is a warning message "are you SURE?!?!" from your computer.

The ammo companies say they are running full capacity -- but yes, there is trouble getting ammo and shops are limiting what each person can buy so that they don't sell out a case to the first person who walks through the door. The MIT college team supplier had to search high and low and long and hard to be able to buy enough for next year's collegiate practice and match season! The pit crew spends the whole match in the pit and are completely safe. It's a concrete bunker. The targets are mounted on frames that extend way above the bunker. They wear ear protection, so they stand facing the backstop area (big dirt berm behind the targets) to see what's going on. When they see a "poof" of dirt behind their target, they pull down on the frame, taking the whole target down. Spotter, paster, score marker.... and back up it goes, 'til the next "poof" hits. Each shooter has 22 shots (2 sighters, 10 "record" shots), fired in pairs (right, left, right, left). A team is six people -- doing the math, that is 22 x 6 = 132 holes per target for the full match. The only "injury" I ever heard of happened to my older girl; it was raining that day, she lost her grip on the frame, and whammed her hand against the lower part of the frame. Not even a bruise but she had a few very colorful words at the time. We've all whacked our hands against car doors, kitchen counters, etc., just as hard. But yeah, they stand for 2 1/2 hours in a concrete bunker with bullets whizzing by far overhead, perfectly safely. They have plenty of room and there's even a porta-potty stationed down there (you might have time, if you're quick, between pairs of shooters).

Glad y'all liked the pictures!

There are two firing lines _behind_ this one (not in use, of course!) -- at 300 and 600 yards. From _those_ distances, you don't stand up! Prone only. There used to be a 1,000 yard range in Woburn MA but it got taken decades ago by the state as Rt 128 (the inner ring road around Boston) goes right through where it used to be. I hear there is one in NH somewhere, one in NY somewhere, and we know some folks trying to get another one built in NH. That might be fun to try someday. I haven't shot at those distances before; you need to learn to read the wind at the longer distances. There are wind flags in several places at the Reading club where the EMRL matches are held. The bright jacket was a birthday gift from my husband a few years ago. I figure if I can't out-shoot them all, at least I can out-class them with my sartorial elegance.

Nah; if I get mad I will use my drill sergeant voice and deafen you! No way I'd risk my license just 'cuz I'm mad!

Oops; forgot to include that. 200 yards. Caliber depends on the shooter; most folks these days use .223 (just a bit larger than .22, but more powder to have a steady trajectory in the longer distances); some still use .308. A couple of folks have very old Springfields of I-don't-know-what caliber but they have quite the "boom!" and muzzle flash! Many of the rifles you folks see in the pictures are the oh-so-scary "assault" rifles. "Assault" is NOT a rifle type; it refers only to cosmetic details such as type of grip and whether or not there is a place to affix a bayonet. Both my girls spent several years as "pit crew" -- the folks who pull and score the targets. After each shot, they pull the target down, find the new hole, put in a spotter, put a "paster" (sticky paper spot) over the old hole, and put an orange scoring disk in the right spot to tell if the shot was an X, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, or 4. 2 1/2 hours of non-stop work but they got good money for it and liked the job.

Pictures from the Eastern Mass Rifle League (EMRL) matches are out. We had perfect weather this year; no snow, no torrential rains, no freezing cold, no high heat/humidity, no scads of blackflies or mosquitos. A little cool at times, a little grey at times. Go here: http://www.readinghighpower.com/ and look for "Eastern Mass 2013 Photo Flip Book." You'll know me by the purple and teal jacket, short stature, and purple rifle. A word on the targets, which can be seen from a number of the pictures. They look, in the pictures, like they are tiny. Tinier still are the little black dots in the center which are the 9, 10, and X-rings. In real life, they are 3 feet side by 4 feet high, and the black bulls-eye is a full foot across. They look like pindots in your sights... Catherine

Ever MORE reason to force the federal behemoth back inside its Constitutional limits! Perversions of the 14th Amendment have given the "rights" of natural persons to corporations. Those perversions must be rejected and nullified. That gets corporate money out of politics. Who has that power? The States and the People, see the 9th and 10th Amendments (plus various of the Federalist Papers).

My bank (a credit union) has had "PC Deposit" for some years; very convenient. They now have a smartphone deposit app but since i don't have a smartphone it doesn't help me. My older girl uses it, though.

The kid I got supposedly worked for VITA while in school. Mainly I wanted him for document scanning, upload/download to/from Gruntworx, and collating of final pdf-printed returns (print to paper, duplex as I prefer, highlight places to sign 8879, make the CD with password-protected pdf's, etc. However, my girls grew up with a tax office in their house and know what needs to be done, how I prefer to do it, and more about what is and is not important for taxes than my MA-in-acctg temp. They also know better how to read a balance sheet and P&L. Gave my temp a P&L from a client and asked him, "what stands out to you as being a problem?" Both my girls saw it immediately (separately, and not in front of my temp); he had to be shown. What was the problem? --Expense account named "reconciliation discrepancies" with a balance of over $15,000. (This client's bookkeeper does NOT know how to reconcile credit card accounts, but she owns a piece of the business so they can't get rid of her.) So he was hired for document processing, NOT tax prep. You are right about employer-sponsored health insurance. That issue is another government-caused problem! Back in the Depression, FDR instituted wage controls (thinking this would get companies to hire more people). So companies went looking for other ways to reward good employees and assuage the demands of unions; the fledgling health insurance industry was happy to help. So the _entire_ industry grew up around this employer-sponsored model. Thank you, FDR (not). The problems caused by government interference cannot be cured by further government interference! You say "GOVT." like it is one monolith. First off, the federal government has NO jurisdiction here; that is one of the most-areas-affecting-people's-daily-lives places left to the states. We could run 50 experiments and see what works! Single payer -- G-d forbid!! Look at the statistics from countries with single-payer systems: woefully behind ours! Look at the SIZE of countries with the best single-payer systems: Germany's population is less than Texas; Denmark is about the size of Massachusetts... This is one area where the larger the bureaucracy, the WORSE the results. Ever tried to talk sense to a doctor's office that made a mistake billing? Not too horrifically bad. Ever tried to talk sense to a hospital's billing department? Better take your blood pressure meds first. Ever dealt with a state agency -- here in Mass there are plenty of horror stories. The problem is exponential depending on size of bureaucracy. If we get single-payer here, we'd all best plant medicinal herb gardens. There is a great book (written by a lifelong Democrat - and liberal in the now-common parlance) called "Catastrophic Care" by David Goldhill. I recommend it. Was it you or someone else who asked what former Iron Curtain folks I had spoken with? --Regardless, the ones you need to speak to are the ones who risked their lives (that is NOT hyperbole) and abandoned everything they had to defect/escape. The ones who "merely" emigrated after the fall of the Berlin Wall and Iron Curtain are mostly too young to remember the horrors. I visited the USSR when it was the USSR - and was able to speak to people as I studied Russian for some years. NOT a place you would want to live; NOT a life of fear you would want to lead; NOT a country whose "free," "universal" health insurance was worth anything.

The worker threatened to send a state agency to her, yes. But the worker herself was with a federal program. This was a number of years ago and I do not recall the details (except that it was one of the triggering points for my turning from a "why won't the government do X" to "how do we get the government OUT of X" stance). As for your friend -- very sad and all too common today. What you have left OUT of the picture, however, is the horrific burden that excess regulation and taxation has on employers (indeed, on all of us, in terms of being able to save for our own rainy days). Most of my business clients need new workers -- and cannot hire them. Too near the state mandate of 10 FTE's for health insurance requirement (and rates have skyrocketed here since the mandate, just like they are starting to do "out there" with the O'care regs going into effect this year); too much regulatory burden to prove a,b,c, and q; too many mandates for full-time so hiring part-time instead; too much this too much that too much the other. Insufficient cash flow to both pay employees within the state-mandated 7 days from end of pay period plus employer taxes. State UI rates are through the roof; one household employer pays close to 10%!! and so cannot give his nanny a raise she deserves -- the list goes on and on. We've all seen it with our business clients; tax and regulatory burden killing business, making it harder to hire (don't forget how hard it is to _fire_ the wrong person, too -- and the potential to be sued when someone claims it was for discrimination -- one client a couple years ago paid $10K-plus to lawyers to defend themselves from a state investigation into a baseless claim by a sluggard they fired for non-performance [i knew the guy; they kept him too long; he was a real loser making trouble and he made plenty of it]). I myself will NOT hire help I desperately need as I cannot afford the time and money to comply with all the regulatory nonsense, especially for a seasonal or part-time hire. Got a twice-a-week kid from Accountemps this year (no his name was not Bob) and he was OK. Worked hard but clueless -- and this with a master's in accounting! Had to give him stuff my girls could handle in middle school. Gwen or Fiona I WOULD jump through those regulatory hoops for, in an instant; they're that good. But neither of them want to be accountants, doggone it.

"The power to tax, once conceded, knows no limit: it continues until it destroys." Chief Justice John Marshall, 1819

I didn't say update -- I said return to.