There’s something so brutal about the recent Mexican bus massacres and the pits filled with bodies (72 at last count), that my mind recoils at the horror, and yes, the terror of it all. It’s the Gestapo like drug gangs halting and “tapping” folks into fodder categories, it’s the fact that it happens BETWEEN government installations specifically set up to safeguard traveling along the coastal highway, it’s me imagining my brother and I traveling with our wives on those very same buses and having our lives, everything we were, or to be, grouped into chattel, shot in the face, and dumped into pits.

I’m having a hard time even finding a suitable thumbnail for this post, the photo’s are so graphically violent I can’t in good conscience use them.

The barbarity that Los Zetas unleashes on Mexico’s innocents is terrorism; I mean, If I was Mexican and using my real name for this entry I could very well end up DEAD. That is terrorism, killing for an ideal, the ideal of intimidation and dominance…

Image Credit: ckp

Related posts:

1. Immigration Reform = Mexico Reform Besides the obvious, like enforcing existing immigration policies, or allowing...
2. Mexico's Woes Beheadings, killings, lawlessness, are we talking about Iraq or Afghanistan?  No, according...

I’ve given up talking online about certain things for Lent, basically most politics, especially Wisconsin politics. Reason being, well, has anyone witnessed such schism betwix Wisconsin Christians the last two months ever?! Probably not since the Reformation have Wisconsin Christians been so quick to remove fellow brothers and sisters from their newsfeeds.

You know how lint gets on your clothes and you can kinda obsess about it. You can even buy this sticky roller, it’s wonderful. But my point is that lint obsession can ruin your joy, you could be wearing the most amazing thing ever and all you’d be caring about is how there’s some lint on it.

Occasionally, for brothers and sisters, I believe politics is like lint in this regard; attention sucking, joy draining.

And yes, I do feel better having given up the “lint roller” of political diatribing the last few days…

Related posts:

1. A letter from Diamond Jim… On March 25th I received an email from Wisconsin A/G...
2. Diamond Jim Doyle, taxing my DLC! It appears Diamond Jim can’t get enough money from the...
3. Nominations If you’ve been following the news you’ll know that Obama...

I’m not a fan of the UN and never have been. I think the organization was founded with good intentions but is now little more than a worthless political organization. So with that in mind I find it laughible that the President of the most powerful country (military wise at the very least) is “requesting” UN support for a no fly zone over Libya… Think about that for a second… Now here is the kicker according to this Fox News article
the Obama administration will not do take action unless the UN passes the no fly zone resolution… What!?!?! Really? Does Obama have no spine? Whether the no fly zone action is right or wrong do we really need the UN’s approval?

PS. Just realized Ben wrote on a similar subject. Sorry Ben. Hopefully this post adds to your thoughts.

Related posts:

1. Exhaust Regulations The Obama administration wants to make a few changes as...
2. Nominations If you’ve been following the news you’ll know that Obama...
3. Obama on Abortion Its a sad day when abortion is monetarily supported, but...

“Will the UN declare a no fly zone over Libya, or is non Western involvement the ticket? Will there even be a victory? Or will both sides content themselves with portions of control?”

I wrote that opening title and thought almost two weeks ago, much can change in the span of several international days. During that time I’ve read many editorials extolling both the merit and folly of US intervention and at the end of all this reading, sweating, and pondering I’m almost always left with one particular thought. Where is UN and Arab League leadership? The way I see it, European and Middle East involvement in Libya’s affairs is a no brainer, both altruism and Realpolitik work; dual reasons of humanitarian conservation and oil flow preservation are equally convincing propellants.

I wonder if Europe no longer believes in either altuism or Realpolitik?

Another thing I’ve thought about is how Libya truly exposes America as the backbone of the world. No other nation on the planet apparently has the resources or budget to fight for anything, Britain certainly doesn’t, last I heard they had one airplane and barely enough logistical support to get a handful of expatriates out of the country. Luckily they got their eight SAS members returned to them, which probably constituted the whole of their special forces community.

So here we are, reading about the stuff of rebel nightmares, an un-toppled tyrant resurgent. Col Gadhafi’s ultimate victory may very come to pass in Libya as UN security heads tremble in their security seats.  Maybe I should have titled the blog

“Libya’s Long Shot”

Update: It appears that 8 hrs after I posted these thoughts, the UN, with 5 countries abstaining, approved a No Fly Zone over Libya…

Related posts:

1. The USA and UN I’m not a fan of the UN and never have...
2. Billions of Dollars of Waste So a US senator had a very interesting comment about...

Hear ye, hear ye! Oh Progressives, your patron saint, the man who birthed all your collective babies was against federal bargaining; yep, your very own FDR.

FDR, sage that he was, knew private sector collective bargaining could not transfer to the public sector. If it did, what would make public police and fire, post office and teacher any different than bastard mercenary groups refusing to work unless they got paid what they thought they outta; as Daniel DeSalvo writes:

“Prior to the 1950s, as labor lawyer Ida Klaus remarked in 1965, “the subject of labor relations in public employment could not have meant less to more people, both in and out of government.” To the extent that people thought about it, most politicians, labor leaders, economists, and judges opposed collective bargaining in the public sector. Even President Franklin Roosevelt, a friend of private-sector unionism, drew a line when it came to government workers: “Meticulous attention,” the president insisted in 1937, “should be paid to the special relations and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government….The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.” The reason? F.D.R. believed that “[a] strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to obstruct the operations of government until their demands are satisfied. Such action looking toward the paralysis of government by those who have sworn to support it is unthinkable and intolerable.” Roosevelt was hardly alone in holding these views, even among the champions of organized labor. Indeed, the first president of the AFL-CIO, George Meany, believed it was “impossible to bargain collectively with the government.”

Imagine if you will, the A-Team being in charge of all the Republics vital services. Sure, it might be cool hanging with Mr. T for an episode or two, but before long you run out of your A-Team money and the A-Team moves on. Or, even worse, they don’t move on and instead tell your community to pay “this” amount in order for us to “protect” you or “teach” you or “run your prisons” or “put out your fires” or “deliver mail”  “or else.” Compare these selected musings with those of a 1943 New York Supreme Court Judge:

“To tolerate or recognize any combination of civil service employees of the government as a labor organization or union is not only incompatible with the spirit of democracy, but inconsistent with every principle upon which our government is founded. Nothing is more dangerous to public welfare than to admit that hired servants of the State can dictate to the government the hours, the wages and conditions under which they will carry on essential services vital to the welfare, safety, and security of the citizen. To admit as true that government employees have power to halt or check the functions of government unless their demands are satisfied, is to transfer to them all legislative, executive and judicial power. Nothing would be more ridiculous.

Daniel DeSalvo continues:

“The very nature of many public services — such as policing the streets and putting out fires — gives government a monopoly or near monopoly; striking public employees could therefore hold the public hostage. As long-time New York Times labor reporter A. H. Raskin wrote in 1968: “The community cannot tolerate the notion that it is defenseless at the hands of organized workers to whom it has entrusted responsibility for essential services.”

Think about it, prison guards and teachers who threaten, and do, walk off the job. In Iraq, you could pay contractors for personal protection, but you had to pay them what they wanted, how is this any different than what goes on stateside? FDR saw this, why not the modern progressive? Nothing could be more ridiculous indeed…

Related posts:

1. Tea Party and Me Shame on me for my lack of attendance.  Have you...
2. Public Employee Pay Just found this must read article: http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/mzuckerman/articles/2010/09/10/public-sector-workers-are-the-new-privileged-elite-class.html?PageNr=1 All the private...
3. Department of Education, One of our Largest Banks? Suppose your job is student loans, you’re employed at a...

Mubarak will not capitulate, he has absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose. Consider last week how President Obama asked Mubarak to consider his “legacy”; legacy matters in a democracy of course, for it is we, the people, who write our leaders history. But if you’re Mubarak, living in dictatorship, who cares about legacy when you’re a tyrant who already gets to write your own administrations presidential history?

Mubarak is just going to drag this thing out till the protesters run out of food, money, and will. Napoleon once said that an army marches on its stomach, protesters probably march on something similar.

I truly hope something positive for Egypt comes from this democratically aimed protest, but I remain pessimistic.

The Old Testament speaks of an Egyptian Pharaoh, who in the face of mighty plagues, refused to give captive Israel its freedom. My fear for Egypt is a Mubarak who, like Pharaoh, denies captive Egypt its freedom. For if I remember correctly, the escalating plague that finally broke Pharaoh’s hold, was the killing of Egypt’s sons…

Related posts:

1. Trust Government and Trust the Gun The reason you should own a gun, if you are...

Wall Street Journal this week had a short piece concerning the Army’s desire to finally move on from it’s current M16/M4 battle rifle platform. This is a great idea; Iraq taught us the 5.56 bullet hasn’t the knockdown energy and Afghanistan taught us the 5.56 hasn’t the power to effectively reach past 600.

In my opinion though, this is a fourth quarter substitution making little to no sense; it’s just too late in the game baby. We have a handful of troops in Iraq and we’re leaving Afghanistan in July. What war then are we fighting that justifies a new battle rifle? The ones we just left? I believe, out of necessity, we are entering an era of Department of Defense budget cuts that won’t fund foreign wars or gun projects; rightly so. I’m ready for about a decades worth of staying home and letting the world figure out their problems without US troops and guns. (That last sentence was indeed nothing more than a rant faced bunny on a trial, apologies)

More in Parenthesis

(Does the UN still matter? We’ll find out what we always secretly knew, without our troops, guns, and money, it doesn’t. I can’t be too hard on those other UN members though, they don’t have any money either, they spend it all on healthcare, for better or worse)

All that to say this project should have been funded and decided upon five years ago. So, in closing, I couldn’t agree more, and ironically less, with a new US battle rifle…

Related posts:

1. Budget Cuts and Dry Erase Boards Last week, a Professor of mine found himself in a...
2. Karzai Corruption Vs. Taliban Sharia Law Americans wonder should we leave or should we stay in...
3. Stimulus Jobs I can’t help but poke fun at this article because...

“We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”

When there is a shooting, instead of putting all the blame on the criminal shooter, we instead blame the failure of our laws or our society not the person who broke those laws. Isn’t that a oxymoron? The shooter broke the law, how would more laws have stopped him? It is not society’s fault that he went out and shot people, it is his fault. Stricter gun laws won’t stop him from getting a gun. He can steal one (from police, legal gun owners, the military, the FBI) or buy one illegally (ala blackmarket).

The Arizona shooting is tragic, but it wasn’t a failure of society or our laws. It was solely the fault of the shooter.

Related posts:

1. DC Gun Laws Well it looks like Washington DC has slightly better gun...
2. Chicago = Restricted Chicago is well known for its crime; they got the...
3. Citizens Can’t be Trusted! I highly recommend this article by The Onion. Normally...

Photo courtesy of Getty Images

Looks like more basic freedoms are being infringed on in the UK. Basically the government wants to put a law into place that will allow them to monitor all internet, email traffic and telephone conversations, in the name of fighting terrorism.

There is a disturbing trend among governments to add more invasive “security” measures all in the name of national security. For instance, airports adding the full body scanners, completely disregarding privacy concerns and the potential health risks from the radiation dose you get. The scanners are totally unnecessary. Airport security right now is very good and there hasn’t been any hijacked or terrorist acts for years (other than a few “scares”). So why add more?

Don’t let your hard earned freedom be taken away so easily. Refuse to submit to full body scans and campaign against this invasive UK law.

Related posts:

1. Disturbing Surveillance Trend Large cities are constantly adding more and more cameras. Most...
2. Tax Burden, by State The awesome Tax Foundation recently published a “Facts & Figures...
3. Billions of Dollars of Waste So a US senator had a very interesting comment about...

It’s funny, but I believe the Federal Government did for Ford what Ford could never have done for themselves, get me to buy one of their cars. The reason for this hit me the other day while starring at the bumper of an F150, simply put, Ford didn’t take a bailout when all others were…

Related posts:

1. Bailout or Simply a Bad Loan? Charlie Sykes has an interesting piece on the auto industry...
2. Bail ME out, I'm to big to Fail! This is my new bumper sticker idea, I would seriously...
3. It's so easy to be a Democrat… As I read this story on FoxNews.com, the idea for...