jpbikerfreak's Blog

Congress' approval is the lowest of any U.S. institution

Ok we hear it on this blog, on the news, in the op-ed pieces of the newspapers, at the water cooler, and everywhere else. People have a very cycnical attitude toward government, and congress in particular.

Yet these same people constantly RE-ELECT the same congressmen they claim to have no confidence in.

Congress enjoys a re-election rate of 96-98% on average. And to add fuel to the fire, it seems people want more and more government every day. They don't think government can do anything, so they propose government solutions. And they CONTINUE to allow the two party monopoly on power in the false hopes that anything will ever really change. What's going on here?

My theory is that people have figured out how to vote their neighbors money into their own pockets. MY congressman brings home the pork, he's not the problem. It's the other 434 that are taking my money for their districts.

I for the life of me can't come up with any other explanation. What about you all?

Theories?

With a headline that shocking, I knew I'd draw attention. But it's true. Things do cost money. Why, you ask, do I have to prove myself to be a master of the obvious by making this statement? Well it's because my friends on the left don't seem to understand it.

When the subject of universal healthcare and other forms of welfare come up, the left likes to put on a parade of individuals who didn't receive adequate care, and then use that as justification for their cause. "How could you turn your back on this person?" they ask.

They then decide they have the moral high ground, and demand that everyone have access to healthcare. Sounds great, right? Unfortunately it's not reality now, nor will it ever be. The reasons are simple. THINGS COST MONEY.

Ask those on the left who advocate this policy how much they have donated to the individuals they're pardading around. Often, they say they don't have any money to donate. Even the Ted Kennedys and John Edwards of the world, who ARE filthy rich, don't donate all of their money to welfare.  They just pass laws saying YOU will. So, the next question is, who will donate it?

The answer is usually THE RICH. So, the poor are going to demand that the rich pay up (even more than they already do - the top 15% of the income earners pays about 60% of the taxes, conservatively). Or worse yet, BIG CORPORATIONS (Exxon pays 49% income tax, how much do YOU pay?) So then we demand our politicians pass laws taking money from these groups. Some of us just figure if you pass a law, money appears from nowwhere. Well I guess in fairness, it does with the government's involvement. That's option 3 - we borrow it from our grandkids.

Once the law is passed, the IRS enforces it with their private army, the ATF. The ATF will show up at the Rich's door, and our grandkids' door, and take their belongings at gunpoint if they don't pay. Why does this remind me of Robin Hood? Oh, ya, because it's theft, that's why.

But let's just say we take all the money from the rich and we continue to borrow, taking from our grandkids, until nobody will buy our debt paper anymore. Then there is no more money. Then what?

Medicaire is already going broke. Beginning this year, it is paying out more than it is taking in. We as a nation carry the most debt of any country in the history of the world. So when the rich are gone, and the debt crushes those of us left, what will happen?

Everyone will still have money, and everyone will still have a health care card. They'll just have to wait in line until they die to get treated, and their money will be as worthless as monopoly money.

But they'll have that card, and they'll have that entitlement.  And we can all rest easy knowing we care.

This just in!

We, the delegates of the 2008 Libertarian National Convention, have elected Congressman Bob Barr as our candidate for U.S. President, and "King of Vegas" Wayne Allyn Root as our Vice Presidential candidate!

We also reformed the platform, making it even simpler and less overbearing than it was.

The Barr / Root ticket is sure to generate alot of momentum for the cause of freedom and liberty!

You now have a real choice in the upcoming election. The choice is a candidate from the party of big government, the party of even bigger government, or the LIbertarian Party!

Now is the time to jump on board! With just over 160 days left, lovers of smaller government, lower taxes, and more freedom need to come together to back this incredible ticket!

BTW- did you guys see me on C-SPAN? LOL...

As an active member and leader of a 3rd party, I sometimes hear people say things like, "well we do need an alternative to the two party system". Or even more frequently, they say, "if only we had a viable 3rd party", or even "we should create a 3rd party".

Well I'd like for ANYONE to find me ANY legal document ANYWHERE that says this country is a two party system. Find me any document written that says we even SHOULD be a two party system. The only people that would have you believe we are a two party system are the members of the power clubs known as the Democrats and Republicans, which are barely distinguishable at this point.

Not only are we NOT a two party system by design, our founding fathers even warned against political factions.

The fact is that the Libertarian Party is large enough to win almost any federal election (we expect to have ballot access in 48 states again in this election). So what is your excuse for thinking we live in a two party system? What is your reason for continuing to vote for the lesser of two evils?

You want real CHANGE? Stop electing candidates from the same two parties. The only solution either of them offers is more government.

As far as I'm concerned, a two party system is 1) Party on Friday night, 2) Party on Saturday night. And our government is doing both at our expense.

Government creates the problem, government solves the problem, government solution creates new problems. Do you see the common denominator?

General ongoing chit chat

According to a poll question on MyFoxKC, over 52% of us plan to use our stimulus package to pay down debt. At face value this seems like a good idea. However I can't help but wonder what's going on in the big picture.

Since the federal government is running a deficit (as usual), this money can be considered borrowed. So aren't we borrowing money to pay off our debts?  My dad used to say you can't borrow your way out of debt. But I guess that isn't true when the federal government is involved.

What's that old saying about robbing Peter to pay Paul? The modern version is robbing our grandkids to pay the credit card issuer. It's only a matter of time before the Chinese and Saudis own this country through our debt paper. Hopefully they won't want to foreclose.

Almost all Americans agree: It's time to get tough on illegal immigration. Yes the federal government, as always, has been slow to react. The feds have let this problem grow unchecked until it has become a complete political nightmare. And the silent majority has been, well, just that: silent.

Predictibly, the backlash has started. Next comes the rallying cry of reactionary government, "do something, DO ANYTHING". Well the ANYTHING now at the federal level is a huge waste of our tax dollars. I'm talking about the fence that is being built on our border. Anyone who has spent a day on a farm knows fences only keep in animals that want to be kept in. The same is true of people. Especially when they're hell bent on breaking through that fence to milk our welfare system and basically invade our country without ever firing a shot. These people will do ANYTHING to defeat the fence, including using dynamite, tunnels, planes, and anything else you can imagine.  Most estimates say that it will only slow a person down by a few minutes.

So what is the solution? Well surprisingly enough, it's not something the feds can do for us. (They COULD, if they'd bring our troops home and station them on our BORDERS where they belong). But the reality of the issue is that our borders are lawless and completely open.

While the feds waste our time and money building a fence that won't last 10 years, we can do something here at home. Let's crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegals. There is a bill pending in the KS legislature (SB 458) that seeks to do just that. It will make knowingly hiring an illegal a FELONY. The jobs go away, the money dries up, the illegals go home. They can then seek to enter in through our FRONT door rather than our BACK DOOR.

SB 458 has sailed through committee so far (last vote was 40-0). As the legislative session winds down, please remind your elected officials that THIS is a step in the right direction.

It's time for the silent majority to stand up to the race-card playing illegals and defend our sovereignty.

OT part III

Thanks again to all of my most awesome friends here!

You see it every day of your life, but you've become so accustomed to it you don't even realize it. It's everywhere. This insidious discrimination permiates our society and must be exterminated by any means necessary. It is dispicable and deplorable. Worst of all, it's for NOTHING.

Our schools indoctrinate our children from a very early age to disciminate. We tell them "it belongs last" when in fact, if anything, it should belong FIRST. We lie to ourselves to cover our shame; all the while knowing deep down that what we're doing is WRONG.

I'm talking about the number zero. Look at your telephone. What do you see? ANSWER ME! WHAT DO YOU SEE? Oh, you see a zero allright, but where is it? It's AT THE END, after the number 9. Why you ask? That's whad I would like to know. I'm asking the question everyone is contemplating in silence but won't dare utter aloud: why is zero always listed as the last number when in fact it's the first?

Zero has been pushed to the end on our telephones, our radios, and computers, and sometimes even our elevators. But zero is the first number, not the last. It's time we took to the streets. Wake the neighbors, sound the alarm, be the standard bearer in your community. Take action. If not you, who? If not now, when?

Now is the time for the common man to rise up against the AT&Ts, the Microsofts, the Dell computers, and the Otis elevators of the world. "Big" telcom and "Big" computer have had their foot on zeros neck for too long.

Join me in ending this insanity before it's too late.

I AM NOT A LAWYER.

Friends I have done a lot of research on firearms and weapons laws. Being a law abiding gun (and other weapons) owner, I want to make sure I'm legal when I'm carrying or storing my weapons. What I have come across is a tangled web of ridiculous laws that make it almost necessary to have an attorney with you at all times when you're carrying firearms.

For instance, the state of Florida issues non-resident CCW permits. This is the cheapest, easiest, and fastest way for anyone to get a permit. If you've got a clean record, $117.00, and a hunter's safety card, a dd214, or simliar document, you' can get this. Kansas and Missouri both recognize Florida's CCW, BUT, Kansas says you have to actually LIVE in Florida for it to be valid. Missouri doesn't care where you live, but doesn't honor Florida's weapons policy (Florida's permit is a concealed cary WEAPONS permit, which includes stun guns, knives and billy clubs, etc). So a Flordida permit holder can live in Kansas, legally carry a gun in Missouri (but not a knife), but not in his own state. If he moves to Florida, he can come back and carry in Kansas.

But if he crosses state lines it becomes a federal issue. Federal law dictates that a person must transport firearms unloaded and locked in trunk. So if a Permit holder crosses state lines between two states who honor his CCW, he should stop at state line, unload his weapon, lock it in the trunk (God help him if he's on a motorcycle), cross state line, take it back out, load it and put it back in his hiding spot?

Then there is the endless list of forbidden carry places. Some are places in which weapons are needed the MOST (college campuses and churches come to mind), others are fairly reasonable (courthouses) and common sense. Then there are the ridiculous city ordinances. Overland Park does not allow tasers. But a CCW holder can carry a handgun. But not a fixed blade knife.

Kansas has a law saying that employers may not forbid employees from having guns in their cars in their parking lot. Kansas says that if a gun is unloaded and fully encased, a person cannot be prosecuted for having it in his vehicle. If it is loaded, however, it's up to a judge to determine if it's considered concealed carry.

Or my favorite, a person may have numchucks if they are locked up, out of reach, and he is a certified martial arts instructor on his way to and from a class in which he regularly teaches 5 or more paying members.

Ridiculous.

We all know about the war on tobacco. We hear about the smoking bans going into effect all over the city, we hear cries every year in the state and federal legislature to raise the taxes on tobacco. Kansas has even considered a statewide smoking ban. All of this is done of course in the name of discouraging tobacco use.

On one hand proponents of higher taxes and more restrictions on tobacco claim they want the industry out of business. On the other hand, they have made our social programs dependent on this revenue (see: SCHIP for example). To make matters even more convoluted, we continue to subsidize tobacco farmers.

But with more and more people quitting smoking, and the rising cost of obesity - doesn't it make sense to start taxing junk food? Obesity will soon cost us more than smoking, if it doesn't already. I hereby propose bans on eating junk food in any establishment open to the public. I don't want my kids seeing someone eat a piece of pie. I also propose a $10.00 tax per bag of 5lb sugar, and a $5.00 tax on every candy bar. Furthermore, the obese should be required to pay extra on their income taxes - $50.00 for each pound of excess fat.

All of this money will of course go to the children. It can be used to fund programs like SCHIP (despite the fact that over 600,000 ADULTS receive SCHIP) and educational programs aimed at teaching kids the evils of junk food.

If you disagree with this, it means you don't like children and you think they should all be fat. So what do you say? Should we tax the BLEEP out of junk food and ban it in public places, or let our kids die premature deaths?

[editor's note: for those who cannot seem to pick up on it, THIS IS SARCASM, but based on the truth]

WWBD? (What Would Barak Do?)

That seems to be the question the media is asking itself with every current event. Every time I turn on any news media outlet, it seems within minutes I hear something about Obama, or a soundbite from him. I was watching the news on the flooding in Missouri this evening and half expecting to see Barak's comments on the flood, and, predictibly, him blaming it on Bush and the Republicans.

Well I'm fed up with it, and I'm not going to take it any more. The media bias has never been more apparent to me in my 37 years on this planet (most of which have been spent following politics). I often wonder if anyone else is even running for the office. We know Ron Paul has been virtually blackballed. Hillary Clinton grabs her fair share of coverage, but even to the harshest critic it's apparent that the media's darling is her Democratic Rival from Illinois.

So who exactly is Barak, and why is the media working overtime to get him elected? Well, let's see. He served in the Illinois State Senate from 1997 to 2004. He was elected to the US Senate in 2004. He began campaigning for US President in February of 2007. So, after just over 3 years in the US Senate, and 7 years in a state legislature, he thinks he's ready to be the leader of the free world.

I don't blame Mr. Obama for milking the media for all it's worth. I DO blame the media and the American public for buying into his bill of goods, which amounts to nothing substantially more than "change" and "hope".

It's time for the American people to wake up and see the media bias for what it is. The media routinely blackballs candidates, chooses to cover some but not others, presses some with nasty questions, and lobs in softballs to the chosen few. Try as they may, I don't think the media will be able to succeed in its propaganda campaign. As the old saying goes, "You can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time"

I'm voting for Wayne Root for President in 2008. I encourage you to google him so you can consider a candidate who will never see the light of a media flashbulb in any official debate.

Some in the Kansas Senate apparently think so. There is currently a bill pending in the Senate Judiciary Committe that would make the second offense of ecstasy posession a felony - even if the first offense was under a city ordinance.

implementation of this bill is estimated to cost taxpayers $700,000.00 to $1,300,000.00. With Kansas decreasing revenue and increasing debts, does this really make sense? Should we fill a cell with someone who was caught with a drug so we can let a rapist or robber go free?

HB 2545 should be defeated. We need to call the members of this committe and fill them in on the news - the drug war is a failure. Drug abuse is bad, but the war on drugs is worse. If you live in Johnson County, odds are your senator is Barbara Allen, who serves on this committe. Her office can be reached at 785-296-7353

Please stop wasting my tax dollars.

If you were to donate $1 million, who would you donate it to?

Which charities come to mind? The Red Cross, The Shriner's Hospitals? Doctors Without Borders? Harvesters? Make a Wish Foundation? 

There certainly are a lot of good ones, aren't there? But what about this one: The US federal government? Would you consider writing a check for $1 million to the welfare system?

If not, are you in favor of the welfare state? If you would not donate the money to the welfare department, but you are in favor of our welfare system, is it because you're donating someone ELSE'S money to the welfare system every time you vote?

Most people would never consider donating a dime to the welfare department,  yet for some reason we can't seem to get rid of it. Comments?