background image

Thursday, October 05, 2017

Freedom:Tragedy = "Initiated Force":Good

As soon as there is a tragedy there are instantly politicians claiming that their party's stances on {name your issue} would have prevented or lessened the tragedy.

Those politicians prey on fear and use it to remove your liberty.  They do it to convince you that we need them or we would live in utter chaos like the animals in the wild: kill or be killed, eat or be eaten, fight or die.

As if there was no order in the world before "government" came to be.  It is indeed amazing, how ordered and beautiful the world is now that we have governments is it not?  There is no tragedy, no chaos, no violence, right?  We do not fight secret wars and kill innocent people anywhere on the planet thanks to the people who assume they are in charge of our lives, our livelihood, and our future.

These benevolent people do not use force against peaceful people.   Not ever.  They do not risk brave lives to enforce meaningless "laws".  They never use "laws" to remove adversaries, competition, or boat rockers.  Correct?  Any of this ringing true?

Not to me either.  Why is that?  Don't people run for office to make a difference and help people?  Sure I believe most of them think they are doing just that.  The problem is they are going about solving the problem the wrong way.  You cannot bring justice into the world by threat of force.  To do so is to be just as guilty as any thug that attacks peaceful people.

True laws have to do with pursuing justice for a person or their property that was damaged or misused by another person.  Most of the laws on the books today have nothing to do with crimes that have an actual victim.

What prompted this quick message was an email I received from just one of thousands of politician's that are using a tragedy that happened just a couple days ago as a means to a political end and it is disgusting.


Tim Canova, 
Politicizing a tragedy is disrespectful and minimizes the loss of human life as if government somehow could have stopped it with more laws (lies) or more control over everyone. 
Send out an apology and re-think this awful stance.  Freedom is not what leads to tragedy.  There is evil in this world and it cannot be stopped by using force against peaceful people to somehow miraculously stop violent people. 
Marc
Politician's aren't the only people guilty - the "mass media" propaganda machine no doubt has been spewing forth their expert opinions on what could prevent the next major tragedy all while turning a blind eye to the true tragedies that "governments" create every day: mass murder on a global scale.

We all want to feel safe - but there is nothing less safe than give the State all the power it wants to keep us "safe", especially from ourselves.  Defend the borders?  Sure!   Keep us and the world safe - absolutely not!

Thursday, July 20, 2017

Pokemon Go...something not so Liberty focused for a few minutes

Niantic released a new update today chock full of "why did you do that?", especially just days before a major event...yet again answering absolutely no popular requests for the game!

Below is what I put in my "bug" report to the feedback shy company:

Sent a bug report and the following attachment:
1) Why don't you like feedback?
2) Why can I not see the stats of my pokemon that is on a gym?  Was it too little to make the "on a gym" indicator clickable?
3) Your Gym update was all about making gyms easier for low level players - so now people can heal them remotely?  This is NOT Ingress.


Niantic,
7/20/2017


I have been a customer of yours since Ingress came to Android.  I know at first you were a Google company and Google seems to want to avoid feedback like the plague.  However, avoiding feedback denies you the luxury of building community around your game and permitting people to provide non-focus-group feedback.  Wouldn't you rather hear directly from the players in the field than just a few people who've likely never played the game?  Please open a forum where fellow trainers and agents can come together and discuss all aspects of your games.


Ingress
Did you know that many people have left Ingress because of the open chat?  The sometimes ugly outbursts in that rather competitive game drove my wife and I away from it and we have thousands of hours logged there.  Additionally we found that the people on your own team were typically the larger barrier to accomplishing goals than the members of the opposing faction.  Big field ops and people throwing random links could ruin several hours of play spent prepping a local field.


Pokemon Go  
We enjoy this game greatly, but find several things to be frustrating:
1) The rarest pokemon love to spawn in gated communities (eg:Mareep).  Sure our nearby feature isn't perfect but it's obvious where the rare spawn is based on movement and sure enough it's typically inside a gated community slightly out of reach of standard range.  There should be a way to report a spawn as inside a restricted community or deep on private property so that it can be randomly relocated elsewhere.  One pokestop near our house is off limits at night because our county thinks parking lots near a preserve are unsafe after dark.  Typically the most interesting pokemon listed on the nearby for that pokestop are just out of reach behind the pokestop while the pidgey and the spinarak spawn no problem….the pikachu though?  Nope!  You want that you better be ready to talk with the Sheriff!


2) It's very interesting how the most avid players we've met don't have spawns on or near their property but down the street where noone plays pokemon there are several spawn points.


3) The newest version 0.69.0 has to be the worst update in some time.  Do not get me wrong - it has a feature I was just saying I wish was in the game, but the rest are completely awful.
  • The major revamp to the gyms was all about making it easier for lower level players (of which I am not one) more likely to be able to take down a gym.  Personally I do not understand how having to fight 18 individual battles to remove 6 pokemon is easier than it was before the update, yet it is still a fun way to spend 20-30 minutes making other people wonder why you are standing there.
    • Granting people the ability to heal remotely goes against the entire concept of easier to take down.
    • It is obvious the idea behind fewer pokemon (resonators) that lose motivation (decay over time) needing berries (power cubes) to replenish is a nod to Ingress.  Of course the pokemon won't leave the gym because they have no motivation unlike a resonator poofing because it's out of energy.  Not sure why that would be?
    • How can a group of people possibly take off a pokemon while remote players can heal them?  Did you try playing that scenario?  While you exit the battle and try to re-fight the other team can easily heal the pokemon back to full leaving you starting the three battles against the one pokemon all over again.  How is that easier?
  • Why give us the ability to feed berries to full pokemon?  It seriously isn't that difficult to obtain the 1,000 berry badge.  I'm already more than halfway there and I only play an hour or two a week night and several hours on the weekend.  Did we really need an accidental berry sink so we can accidentally feed full pokemon?
  • Various bug fixes?  Why not specific bug fixes like:
    • Removing the awful memory leak caused by viewing gyms?  Side effects are random crashes and lock ups of the client?  Resolved only by restart the client.
    • Correcting the "Gym is under attack" message for players who helped take down a gym but then experienced an error like "Network Error".  Resolved only by leaving the area for five minutes and coming back to get them placed on the gym.
    • The ongoing bug of "No Internet" or "Network Error" when there is strong signal or wi-fi provided to the phone.
    • And my personal favorite - This is the only game I have ever played where after a while the client loses its session and the only way to resume playing is to exit and restart the game.  The built in "Retry login" does nothing.  Ingress doesn't have this issue - why does Pokemon Go?
  • What's improved about the searching?  Can we find text in beginning (yes as long as two or more characters), middle (nope) or end (nope) of a renamed pokemon?  Wildcards work? Nope!  How about the ability to search on a candy type and find all the pokemon in that family? Nope!
  • Icon about how a pokemon was caught?  Just why?  Why would that data be getting recorded to begin with?  How does knowing I caught 8 Pikachus with blue balls and one with an ultra and two with a red ball helpful to anyone?  What about all the pokemon I got rid of?  Just why?  Why not make a catch log about everything I used to try to get it?  Because it's dumb!  That's why!
  • Now for the one I actually thought would be nice.  How cool would it be to be able to click on the "On a gym" indicator and go to the gym instead of using the not so wonderfully placed gym mess on my badge/profile screen?  It would be great unless Niantic took away all the other functionality from my pokemon's information screen.

    Couldn't just make the icon clickable?
    onAgym.jpg


    Is Now:
    You have to be kidding!
    •  I mean why should I be able to see anything about the pokemon when it is on a gym?
      • CP?  nah - you have the collection screen for that!
      • Motivation?  Naw have to go to the gym icon for that!  
      • Its name?  Sure - you are permitted that, but you cannot change it!
      • Height and Weight?  Nope - but then those are goofy stats anyway!
      • How much candy you have?  Hah!   Nope - go catch another common Ampharos cause they are readily available!
      • Power up/Evolve?  Was disabled before anyway but because someone couldn't understand that it's better just to remove it off the screen.
      • Their moveset?  Nope!  That's a secret until it comes home!
    • This makes me not want to be on a gym.


It's obvious how much testing went into the new update:


Thursday, June 22, 2017

Federal & Medical - the two should never have met

This is my latest letter to Senator Marco Rubio.  I know, why bother?  For some strange reason I just feel compelled to speak out from time to time.

First Marco's response to my contact asking him to consider repealing the ACA instead of replacing it with more lawless nonsense.

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:28 PM, Senator Marco Rubio wrote:
 
Dear Mr. Bessent,
Thank you for taking the time to express your thoughts regarding health care reform in America. Understanding your views helps me better represent Florida in the United States Senate, and I appreciate the opportunity to respond.
Our nation’s health care system is vast and complex, and decisions made by the federal government regarding the system affect all Americans. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, often called ObamaCare, was passed by Democrats in Congress and signed into law by President Obama in 2010. Instead of the wonderful results they promised, ObamaCare caused millions of people to lose their health insurance, premiums to skyrocket, and now many Americans are stuck with fewer choices and less access to care. 
Since ObamaCare’s launch, average monthly premiums have skyrocketed 105 percent nationwide and insurers continue to leave the market each year, resulting in some counties without a single insurer in the individual market for 2018. It’s clear that ObamaCare simply isn’t working. That’s why I am working to replace ObamaCare with a better system that puts patients first and does not rely on a taxpayer bailout of private insurance companies. In 2015, I detailed my ideas about what a better health care system should look like: provide families with refundable tax credits to help them purchase health insurance plans; empower consumers to choose plans based on their unique needs from anywhere in the country; and enable patients access the hospitals and doctors they want without government interference. We should create a patient-centered health care system that ensures those with pre-existing conditions can get affordable coverage.
In May 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act, which would repeal and replace ObamaCare and reform Medicaid to give States more flexibility. The Senate will work on its own bill, and I believe it must be better than the disaster that we have now with ObamaCare while still protecting the most vulnerable Americans. As the Senate deliberates this legislation, my priorities will be ensuring that Florida is treated fairly, that we incentivize innovation to improve health outcomes, and States are equipped with the necessary tools to encourage more healthy people to purchase a health insurance plan that fits their needs and budget. We must find commonsense solutions that better serve all Americans. 
It is an honor and a privilege to serve you as your United States Senator. I will keep your thoughts in mind as I consider these issues and continue working to ensure America remains a safe and prosperous nation.
Sincerely,
Marco Rubio 
United States Senator 

Below is my response. I attempted to email it to him, but apparently character count (2000) is more important than sharing a full thought (5433 ).



Marco,
The only bill that will be better is the one that completely removes the federal government from interfering with the medical profession what-so-ever.  The states or the local municipalities should decide what is required to "practice medicine."  Then we can have at least 50 and possibly thousands of "political labs" where the best and most cost effective solutions can be fostered, grown, and shared.  There should be absolutely NO DECISIONS made by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT regarding "the medical profession."   Technically doctors and hospitals operating within a State are not subject to the misuse of the Section 8 "Interstate commerce clause."  But, I get it - the federal government "has to do something"; who cares about Liberty?  I mean we are the land of the free so government regulation is necessary to keep us safe, right?  Without the most "intelligent" people in the nation making rules and keeping the rest of us safe in virtual and physical cages how could we possibly survive?  After all consensus science has only promoted the health and welfare of the people, correct? 
But freedom aside, what should really be done to "fix" the medical system?
1) REMOVE THE REASON LAWYERS LOVE MALPRACTICE: Doctors should be contracting privately with their clients without state coercion and the court system should dismiss lawsuits where gross negligence is not proven and eliminate punitive awards.  Really don't appreciate my money going to award people millions for mistakes or more appropriately the doctor's inability to actually be God.
2) DEREGULATE RECORDS: The farce of privacy that is known as HIPAA should be actually called hypocritical.  Oh, sure it sounds great on the surface, but it has more to do with providing government an excuse to access our digital records than it prevents unnecessary access.  Of course that lovely code comes from a federal department that shouldn't even exist.
3) REMOVE REQUIRED INSURANCE: Insurance is a complete sham.  Required insurance is slavery, especially insurance to cover the fact that one is alive.  Insurance should never have been about covering day to day medical expenses.  Auto insurance doesn't cover oil and tire changes, volunteer repaints, or engine rebuilds... and yet there is a very small percentage of American's who do not drive a car.  Who doesn't own a computer and why are they so cheap?  We have phone insurance that is a tiny amount per month covering $400+ dollar phones that are dropped regularly but what it doesn't cover is why it is so inexpensive...well that and it doesn't have an empire of force behind it requiring everyone to get it.
4) DEREGULATE THE ENTIRE MEDICAL SYSTEM: In reality the only thing that has ever forced medical expenses to rise is government interference.  The "we must do something" mentality has brought us to utter devastation of what was once the world's greatest example of a medical system.  Most people pay more in copay than they used to pay for the entire office visit while paying nearly $20K a year between their employer and direct premium for insurance.  This isn't reasonable and it is 100% due to government interference.   Government interference started the war on affordable medicine and ever since then it has never become more affordable.  Insurance destroyed the required relationship between the doctor and patient to decide the fee together and as a result the price fixing behind the scenes is damaging.  Deregulation is how you give people incentives.  Throwing money with strings at researchers isn't how you figure out better solutions; it is how you control outcomes.
5) GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS USE THE SAME SYSTEM: While we are near the subject I would only be impressed if congress voted to permanently eliminate their own unconstitutional "compensation" which includes all benefits that are unlike anything the average citizen would receive especially the nonsense of retirement.  The position of elected leadership in government was never to be considered a job.  It is supposed to be a temporary position with compensation for expenses incurred, not a living.  Your only sworn duty is to ensure the rights and safety of the people are enforced.  Everything else being legislated is unconstitutional and has nothing to do with the role of government.
News flash: if the current US government simply closed up shop and never re-opened the people and the land would continue on and I see no reason to believe it would not be much better off.  Please work on removing it from our daily lives - it was never intended to be this oppressive or this involved with individuals.  Government does not help and was never intended to. It was intended to raise a military from our existing militias when an imminent threat existed, provide LIMITED copyrights, maintain a Navy, regulate and borrow (oh and pay back) money , ensure people can communicate (post office), and open or restrict commerce between (not within) the states and between the US and foreign nations (but I'm being redundant).  The problem with the commerce clause as originally penned is regulating capitalism leads to corruption.  Capitalism should be left unchecked until the rights of an individual have been infringed upon and then defensive force should be brought only upon the infringing party and not upon a field as a whole.
I could go on, but I'm sure you aren't reading this anyway.
Respectfully,
Marc Bessent

Thursday, December 01, 2016

Kratom - the ever expanding ever failing war on plants

The DEA is entertaining comments about placing "Kratom" on Schedule I (temporarily) - much like Nixon placed Cannabis "temporarily".  I sent in my thoughts.  I get that people know drugs can be bad and some can kill us on overdose - like alcohol.  We do not need a government helping us, at the end of a barrel, protecting us from ourselves - it is not a solution it is just another problem that grows unchecked due to the tragedy of providing a group with a monopoly on violence duties it was never meant to have.

Today is the last day to get in a comment regarding your concerns on this new DEA rule.  Keep in mind that Trump's pick for Attorney General is a pro-drug war zealot - the last thing he needs is another Schedule I drug to give him "reason" to go after peaceful people.  Vices are not violence!

Based on the criteria Schedule I does not apply to "Kratom".  Any attempt to place Mitragynine and 7-Hydroxymitagynine into such a schedule only meets political or emotional goals and does not have any basis in scientific findings.  Doctors have demonstrated that this compound helps with withdrawal symptoms from opioids (drugs derived from opium) - that provides evidence against "The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." 
The People of the United States no longer favor support for the war on drugs.  The war on plants ("drugs") has produced no scientific evidence that it has resulted in the reduction of availability of schedule 1 drugs.  The war on the free market (war on drugs) has produced no scientific evidence that it has resulted in the reduction of overdose.  The war on drugs has resulted only in large costs for innocent bystanders, buyers, sellers, producers, and law-enforcement in dollars, loss of life, loss of liberty, and loss of opportunity.  Scientific study of the prohibition of alcohol proved that prohibition is not a solution.  Our federal government, knowing better than science and reason, passed riders on unrelated bills and created the war on drugs, a power not granted to it by our Constitution nor by any Constitutional amendment. 
Please get out of the business of caging and killing peaceful people and instead focus on assisting the States with defending against violent criminals.

Thursday, May 28, 2015

Dear Pro-NSA, Pro-USA PATRIOT ACt, Anti-American Marco Rubio

Marco Rubio,

No to the NSA, no to the "PATRIOT/[Give Government everything it wants to rule outside of law] ACT".

You just do not get it.  You represent people from the State of FL, not the Federal Government.  You are bound by law to keep that Federal Government working within the bounds of the Constitution.

For some creepy reason you and several hundred other "law makers" are confused and befuddled as soon as your heart is appealed to.  Suddenly all logic goes out the window and you believe that if the government can do something it must do it.  Can is defined here as "able to but not necessarily legally permitted."  That it makes you and the federal government operate outside the Supreme Law of the land is apparently of no concern to you.  

You are at the helm of a rogue entity and not a republican government.  Rule of law applies to everyone in a republic, not just the citizens.  More so the rule of law applies to those serving in government.  How can you purport to uphold and defend the Constitution when your vote is attached to many a bill that flies directly in the face of that document and strips the people of their rights and liberties?

Apparently the wisdom of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and others who know the fact that government is the use of force and not eloquence is lost on you.

You are upholding tyranny.  Is there any other way to view it?  How can we fight terrorism when our government is spreading tyranny?  How can we tell the difference?

You and your cronies in Washington sicken me and more than half of this nation.  Why else do you think 51% of the people no longer vote?  Because they have already decided they want nothing to do with the rogue entity of the state.  They want their liberty back.  They want their nation back.  They want their government to return to the chains of the Constitution.

The NSA and the "Patriot Act" (better labeled the "Pro-Government Act") have done nothing good for this nation.  They have helped a lawless government become a tyrant.  I wish you would perform your duty and begin dismantling the unlawful entity that has risen up from the ashes of our republic.

Wasn't there some idiot that said something dumb about trading liberty for security?  Guess you never heard of the dumb guy either.  What did he know?  He lived before 9/11.  I mean after all there were no wars or terrorist acts way back in the 1700's.  Life on this planet has totally changed and a government of the people, for the people, by the people couldn't possibly work anymore, right?  We need complete subjugation to 545 tyrants in DC to make life better with police officers shooting people who don't obey their demands and teams of people searching mass surveillance for whatever keywords matter that month to ensure that the Democrats and Republicans (parties of the minority) remain in power.  Keep working those unconstitutional laws while the nation's currency and international relations continue to crumble - heaven forbid you not get your bigger piece of the ever shrinking pie!

It must be the citizens who are getting worse, not the government, right?  If the people are getting worse then that destroys the argument that law makers are so much better than they were in 1787 and thus know better than those small men who lived so long ago.  Last I checked government was just made up of people - fallible, terrible people.  People who have no right to exert their will on other people just because some other people voted for them.  The only rights a government has is to uphold the Supreme Law and ensure the rights of the people are upheld while providing a path for justice following an infringement.  Defense sir, defense - not offense under any label including pre-emptive strike.

Didn't you learn in kindergarten that violence is not the solution?  Force is violence and the government is nothing but force.

Marc

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Marijuana - not the evil that Dupont said it was?

It saddens me that people still buy into the government lies that this plant is a schedule 1 narcotic.  It is absolutely laughable to think that this plant provides *no* medical use.  Only a buffoon locked away in an isolation pit still believes this.  It has never been proven that Marijuana has any physical dependence properties.  At least nothing to the extent of caffeine or nicotine.

Lesser of two evils?

The true evil in this drug war is that people are killing people and animals in a feudal attempt to stop the growing and sale of plants.  It is evil squared when good intentions are enforced at gun point.  Morality belongs to the individual and not society as a whole.  Argue that as you will, however the reality is that morals do not belong to a fictional group as long as any individual in the group does not accept the moral as legitimate.

Life Greater than morals

I argue that human life is greater than protecting people from their vices.

The valedictorian and president of my high school class was high regularly.  Obviously a terrible drug.  The arguments against recreational marijuana use are being proven as nonsense everyday.  Will long term high utilization cause issues?  Well what being smoked would not?  How about vaporized use?  No one knows yet as this is too new of a utilization method.  I guess the American Indians were fools for using the substance to relax and focus - clearly the congresses of the 1930's and beyond are smarter than any people who ever existed before.

Nothing to excess

Me?  I believe in a simple principle - nothing to excess.  Nearly everything on this earth has a benefit for us and too much use of it will have a negative effect on us, however studies of the marijuana drug are proving that you cannot kill yourself with it from overdose and the long term effects are not what Dupont and their buddies sold to congress in the 1930's.

Lies

To see where the real problem lies it makes more sense to follow the motives of the people who fought it and not the droves of people who climb on board.  Dupont wanted to push their synthetic ropes and make oil based plastics the winner.  To do that they had to 'prove' that there were too many things to fear from the most abundant and fastest growing plant on earth so they could push their inferior products on the public which produce more pollution, have killed more people, and ruined more lives than cannabis abuse ever has.

Lethal force - the only power government has

I can never agree that LETHAL FORCE is acceptable to possibly prevent a few people from using a substance I think is bad.  Anyone who thinks that way needs to reconsider priorities.  Human life is greater than protecting people from their vices.

Emotions

If you feel that it should be illegal to keep people from using it, then I propose you consider that it is your emotions that make you feel this way.  Then realize that feelings are over-riding your logic.  Educate and warn?  Yes.  Illegalize and kill to "prevent"?  Is it working?  The evidence shows the war is lost and innocents are paying for it by loss of life, family, and money.  How is this preventing the problems that you have experienced?   It is merely shifting the evil from abuser and abuser's family suffering to government inflicted suffering.  No net gain there.


Corruption

Let's all not forget about the myriad of law enforcement officials that abuse their authority to plant drugs on people solely to meet quotas or to punish people they want taken down.  Why give the government such an evil tool?  The "land of the free" imprisons more people per capita than any other nation on earth... all over a war on plants.

Property confiscation without a trial - just another right trampled by the war on drugs.  Another right taken away without congress ever voting on a bill about it.  Instead confiscation and seizure laws passed as riders on "If you don't vote for this bill you hate puppies" legislation.

Planes are confiscated without ever finding drugs just because the DEA thinks it might have smuggled something once.  What a racket.

Biblical Interpretation

Furthermore, I think of this verse when it is argued we should use prohibition:

"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and  commanding to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereupon thou hast attained. (Paul: 1 Timothy 4:1-6)"

Also:
"Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; that which cometh out of the mouth defileth a man." (Mat. 15:11) and similar in Mark 7:15.

For these alone I cannot understand why a Christian would ever be pro-prohibition.  Enforcement of morality is not following Christ.  Morality is achieved out of a voluntary relationship with God and can never be forced by men on men.  Even God Himself refused to enforce morality on us.  Who are we to stand up in righteous indignation and propose we know better than the Almighty?

Isn't it more important to keep that person alive and together with their family to give them time to come to the Lord than to push them away and use the force of man to punish or kill them for their vice?  Morality at gun point is evil and this is attested to by God repeatedly in the bible.  What did He say about casting stones at a woman for "adultery" or for not providing aid on the Sabbath?

If you do not oppose the sword being used to enforce morality then you are condoning it.  You may as well pick up the gun yourself and go join the fight for you are just as guilty as the aggressors you are permitting to do the deeds for you that you argue you support because you agree that drugs are "bad."

Conclusion

We humans are horrible at administering justice and we should limit it only to the times that a persons life, property, or liberty are being infringed on by another and stop with preemptive meddling.

Monday, March 03, 2014

My traceroute [v0.75] (mtr)

I discovered a small nicety with this program today.  It is undocumented but you can scroll up and down a lengthy result list using + (plus or shift+equal) and - (minus).

Also, with num lock on the plus and minus on the number pad work fine.

All this confusion started when I accidentally got it to move down the list using {ctrl}+{alt}+{shift}+{=}, but {ctrl}+{alt}+{-} could not reverse it.  Yes, mtr will scroll until there are no result showing.

If this can save anyone else the 15 minutes I lost on this today then I am glad to have helped.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

Want big business out of government?  Remove government's controls on the market.

Want big labor to quit pushing their interests through our government?  Remove government's controls on business and education.

Want to end the oppressive morality laws?  Remove government's control on personal behavior.

Want to stop redistribution of wealth?  Remove government's involvement in "charity" that is better known as subsidies that benefit big business more than it ever has individuals.

What one step could be taken to remove the US government's interference from billions of peoples lives here and around the world?  Obey the Constitution as if it was the Supreme law of the land.

Want to end the wars?  Look at all of the above and remove governments funding for interventionist tactics.

I am tired of people using force thinking that will provide them with a security blanket.  How can anything good ever come out of making people do what you want?  History has shown repeatedly that progress built on the backs of others always crumbles...but then what does history know?  Humanism has all the answers and it is smarter than anything that has ever come before it.  We are so much better as humans than we were just 70 years ago, right?

Until humanity gives up on coercion as the method of government they will never be able to nurture all in society.

Saturday, April 06, 2013

Rush says America is Dying? Where you been?


Dying? Free America has been dead for decades – it’s first nail in the coffin began in the 1850′s. Forcing people to remain in a union they do not agree with is imperialism, not liberty. All hail the first American dictator, Lincoln.

Force when used for other than defense produces broken results. When are people going to realize that? Meanwhile our lawless government will continue using force.


  • force to fight poverty (redistribution and theft)
  • force to cage people for their vices (war on plants)
  • force to keep dropouts in school that just disrupts education for other kids
  • force to be molested or radiated before traveling
  • force to submit to inspections while driving near boarders
  • force to prevent people from exercising their freedom of speech including caging Mark Schmidter here in Orlando for handing out FIJA flyers outside of “free speech zones”
  • force to create free speech zones
  • force to prevent law abiding citizens ease in protecting themselves and their families - giving the bad guys and edge
  • force to keep kids in schools defenseless
  • force to collect several bribes to be able to drive a vehicle
  • force to collect bribes to open a business
  • force to listen to or read any conversation without due process
  • force to teach scientific theory as fact
  • force to build mass transit that will never operate for less than it can charge
  • force to prove we are not guilty
  • force to perpetuate racism as if everyone alive is guilty of it
  • force to donate money we do not have to countries we should not be in league with
  • force to be the world police
  • force to interfere overseas
  • force to break-in to homes at 3 am to “serve warrants”
  • force to seize property for merely being suspected of involvement in the war on plants
  • force to donate money to companies that are too big too fail or just adored by politicians
  • force to make the rich richer
  • force to keep people on the defensive fighting to keep their rights that the government should never be able to consider infringing
  • force to destroy the monetary system on a whim
  • force to grant politicians bigger pieces of the ever shrinking pie while the people suffer
  • force to destroy liberty in the name of safety
  • force to jail anyone indefinitely without charges
  • force to enlist other countries to suppress rebellion or unrest within American boarders
  • force to train other country's military in how to beat us
  • force to spend the retirements collected by the US government as social security and spend it other unconstitutional projects and then reduce illegibility for the retirement money stolen from us
  • force to create problems that are then "solved" by creating more government
  • force to control the education of our children
  • force to push laws through as riders on other bills that are never debated (RealID/War on Plants)
  • force to play God
  • force to make this a democracy which it was never intended to be
  • force to perpetuate an unneeded postal service
  • force to take the right to choose away, except for abortion
  • force for nearly any “feel good” sounding plan that “public opinion” comes up with


The rule of law, the Republic: the Constitution, was designed to prevent this nonsense. Thus, I submit the America you romanticize has been dead for decades.  What we saw for the last 60 years was the shell being gutted slowly so that most Americans would believe it was still free. It began when the Constitution was usurped and the US was incorporated - the enemies of freedom had a major victory that day.  They were working hard in the background before then, but this enabled them to put America in perpetual debt to them. Hey, as long as we have Starbucks and Internet we are free, correct?

By not resisting these uses of force we aide the aggressors the only proper action as a Patriot is to resist these tyrannical uses of force through all peaceful means.  The list above is only a small sample of the misuse of force, I do not have the patience to list the nearly 2 million abuses of force that are accepted as "law" in this country.

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Property Rights Make No Sense?

This is an excerpt from a discussion I had today with someone touting fair redistribution as the proper way to have property.  Their initial argument was that property rights make no sense, but then throughout the discussion they stuck to their guns that once it was redistributed to you it was yours to keep and no one could (or should) steal it.

I'll give 10 reasons why Property Rights make much more sense than life without them (Communism/Collectivism/Socialism)

1) You cannot distribute resources without first taking it from someone that already had it. There aren't enough free resources floating around in the world to meet the "fair" distribution theory - millions will be forced to give up their resources for others.

2) Property rights are not fiction, they are observed in nature. If you were a bear and you wandered into another bears territory and tried to take up residence you wouldl have a fight on your hands. Same is true for all predatory species and even Beta fish. It does not take much logic to understand why this is. a) You have a right to your life thus b) you have a right to your body and thus c) you have a right to obtain and own things that you need to sustain your life and d) you have a right to work on achieving more than you need through contracts and fair bartering.

3) Rationing has never led to a wealthy country or wealthy community, except for the ruler. Equal distribution cannot either. It will consume more resources and require the elimination of privacy to attempt to ensure equal distribution than it ever will to simply live free and work for what you want.

4) Communism is a beautiful idea on paper, however when attempted in reality it encourages sloth at the common levels as there is no incentive to produce more as all you do is end up owing more to the common pool as a result. Got a great idea that will result in a new product - great! Now the equal distribution factories have to churn out one of each for every person in the society. Also communism must be overseen and unfortunately those in power are only human and they will fall to greed and corruption.

5) Communism (collective society - same thing) pushed on an entire society will require force and the elimination of any who oppose the idea for it to begin. Then it requires socialism with a strong government that has the right to take and redistribute things "equally". The idea is that in the end everyone will have the same items at all times and eventually the government could be dismantled and all will live happily and receiving their share of everything that is produced by the society.

6) Without natural reward there is no reason for a society to produce more than exactly what it needs and rarely enough to survive. This has been proven time and again in history, however people love to ignore history and instead think capitalism is what needs to be attacked.

7) You cannot trade off your unwanted items in a collective society as then suddenly someone would have an excess and this would have to be corrected by the government through confiscation and redistribution.

 Capitalism is what produced the richest nation in the history of the world that had the lowest poverty level of all time. Face it very few of America's "poor" suffer from lack of basic needs, but rather from their inability to own everything they want. Capitalism did not exist before the US. Feudalism and Dictatorships were all that existed - the people were the property of the sovereign. Only in the US were most of its citizens a sovereign with full rights to themselves at their birth.

9) The difference between Liberty (right to one's self) and "collective society" is that one does not utilize force in its execution. Voluntary communes can exist in a Liberty based society, however it would be impossible for Liberty to exist in a collective/commune based society.

10) In a forced "ism" society you will still see a type of capitalism - the black market. The government will put people caught using it in cages and state it is for the good of society, however is it really good for society? Why can't people trade? Why can't people attempt to make a profit? Why should they be punished for success?

11) The idea of a collective society is that all should be equal. In a free society we all start out equal (with minimal things and many of the same opportunities) and are allowed to acquire what we work for. In a collective society you are equally given things but are a slave who cannot decide what to do with their things.

The bottom line is you do not have more rights to my life than I do and therefore I do not have to concede to your use of force to make me share what I do not desire to share with others. To do so is morally bankrupt, aggressive, and evil. To cloak it as "sharing" and not theft is to support the concept that the ends justify the means and that being human means you owe everyone else a debt for your being alive.


***Update****

Interesting, but not unexpected response:  Paraphrase of their argument:
Rights of property and self ownership do not exist.  Magic does not bestow rights on us.  Defend as you may someone bigger can take what you have.  Society is why your stuff is not taken away. Society created the plan we live under and society can change it and it will still be valid.  If living collectively sustains a species or society then it would be moral and necessary.

My response:

Interesting argument - force is necessary for sustaining a species?   Protecting it from attack, yes, but using it on itself to obtain goals?  A just society will band together to defend each other using force.  How can it be argued that a society that will band together and use force to take from people what they have justly acquired is acceptable?

If I had been given a choice to voluntarily join society to ensure my right to ownership was defended and then that society stole from me in the name of collectivism I cannot imagine anyone defending that society. But since I had no choice but to support a society it is okay?

A voluntary society where I could subscribe for the services I wanted - mutual protection for instance - and pay X amount for it would be amazing.  Instead I am in a society where I have put my life on the line and pay X times 1000 or more  to support things I find repugnant or that go against my beliefs.  The last thing I do is agree with the current or even the past laid plans of society.  Any time society uses force other than in defense of the individual it is at the expense of those it was created to protect.

Your argument is almost compelling except that now I am trading one bully for a bigger bully "society" and I am expected to believe that ownership is a privilege bestowed on me by a "protective" society.

It is called a right because it is essential to survival of the individual which in turn ensures survival of the society.  Without a right to ownership we cannot achieve more than serfdom or obtain a sense of security.  Just because a right can be infringed on does not  negate the fact that it is a right.  A just society works toward the one goal of protecting the rights of those who chose to join it.

Right now we do not have true ownership and it is a major reason why our society is broken and grasping at anything that sounds like a good deal.

I know people have a right to the enjoyment of their vices, such as smoking.  However, without their own private property they would not have an area to exercise their right since smoking is an infringement on other's right to fresh air.  Without property why plant a crop that could be redistributed tomorrow at no benefit to yourself?

Moreover, without rights then society would not need to exist for if ownership is not a right then theft is fine and no one should defend you, not even yourself.

My stuff is not taken because I defend myself and I have friends and neighbors that I will defend and who will defend me, not because of society or government.  The government has never helped me after I was robbed as a matter of fact, other than one mailbox and a wallet, the government is the only entity that has ever stolen from me.

Collectivism is a fallacy as many ideas would have to be overlooked while ensuring everyone had equal access to each thing made and people would never live equally as there would always be a wait for new things and food as with any society those in favor would still have more and those second rate people would wait until it became available - whether it be food, medicine, transportation, shelter, or toys.

Again, attempts at living collectively have proven to create extreme poverty.  Why would America suddenly be able to get right what so many other cultures have failed miserably at?

To clarify a bit, there is no such thing as society. There are leaders who wield power "granted" by those who do not resist or choose to ignore the problems.  Active resistors are discredited, put in cages, or killed. The lack of active resistance is what empowers those in charge and without being checked the leaders will naturally do more and more horrible things until the people who granted them power punish them and cast them out. The current functioning of a social group is not de facto justification nor is it granted validity just because it is.


-=-=- Another reply
paraphrase: You mentioned rights are for survival, but survival does not need more than minimum.  Capitalism leads to people with more and people with less than needed.  Fair market favors the majority.  It has flaws.

My response:


It sure does have flaws, but it doesn't support the use of force to achieve its goals.  True capitalism is simply people working together without coercion to achieve goals and typically where both parties benefit.

However I believe you have made my argument for me in capitalism the majority is not poor.  In collectivism the majority is poor.  In capitalism I can support charities to help my fellow people who need a boost to live.  I've helped build houses for people and I've donated much to charities I believe are effective.

I believe that the failure of churches and other organizations who desire to help those in need are in large part due to the broken idea that that government should do it and we should be taxed whatever it takes to make it happen.  "I gave at the office" is exactly what that is about.

 I guess there is perhaps a disagreement on the definition of "rights".  There are a few I appreciate:
1) That which is morally correct, just, or honorable
2)  In accordance with fact, reason, or truth
3) In a just or proper manner; justly

My argument is also that they are unalienable - they cannot be sold or bartered away for political expediency.  To do so would destroy the civilization that was designed by the people who realized these rights were to ensure survival and foster growth of wealth unlike the world had ever known before.

Moreover life, liberty, and property are natural rights: any right that exists by virtue of natural law.  Natural law is something that has been pushed under the rug and hidden from the common person in this day and age.  Natural law is a principle or body of laws considered as derived from nature, right reason, or religion and as ethically binding in human society.  These rights are the result of study of human nature, discovered by reason, and not by revelation.

When natural rights are ignored or actively refused bad things come to pass.  It happens where collectivism is attempted and it happened throughout history when people were denied these simple rights.  It isn't a theory or a concept, it is simply scientific study of what people do when denied these things.  The magna carta was the first major result of this study and nothing has changed in human nature over the 800 years since it was written.

Survival of man does require more than necessary - it requires that we be given a chance to seek out happiness.  Sadly, most of us have tons of things and have found not only are we not happy as a result of it we are more burdened than we were with little.  Collection of things is not the only path to happiness.  How do we distribute traveling allotments equally, fuel equally, or recreational equipment equally?  It is up to the individual and not society to pursue what makes them happy.  Collectivism is only able to hinder that goal and thus will suppress all of man natural rights.


Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Beeping Sounds just out of audio range. Conspiracy or just a sign of the age?

At my house we have been "suffering" from a repeat offending sound.  The sound would go off every 34 minutes for approximately 5-10 seconds, without fail.  It did so for a total of 4 months.  Two months late last year and late November and January.  I was to the point of seeking a person to scan for bugs just to get rid of the sound.  I figured it must be a radio frequency device that was failing - at least I hoped it was so that it could be found.

For the first two months it was happening, September - October 2012 my wife and I lost several hours preparing for the next event.  At a few minutes prior we would take up stations and attempt to pinpoint where the sound was coming from.  Unfortunately it was at such a high frequency and so quiet that it was near impossible to hone in on, even with the entire family helping.

Halfway through the first round of this repeating event we began to strategically unplug items, then moved to turning off entire rooms, and finally went with turning off the entire house.  The sound continued to occur - every 34 maddening minutes.  We researched for cataloged "phenomena" online.  The wife asked online friends through networks if anyone had heard of such things.  Aside from the re-assurance that we were at least having a mass delusion experience and not just one of us was crazy, nothing was determined.

Then, suddenly near the end of October it just quit.  No more sound.  My wife and I were relieved.  Not thrilled since we had not solved the mystery, but relieved it was gone.

Halfway through November the sound suddenly began again.  This time I dug deeper online and found people convinced it is the government testing brain-altering waves or tapping into their brain waves.  Honestly I couldn't imagine what the government would want to hear from my brain.  ;0)  I think they would rather avoid listening to conversations about peaceful people wanting Liberty - kind of a boring topic for a statist.  I even downloaded an app to record the sounds from my phone.  Unfortunately it never picked up the sound - thus convincing me that 7 people must be going slightly insane.  Finally we gave up and began just waving hello to the sound with sweet gestures of the hands.

The good news is that this story has a non-conspiratorial ending.  Last night I removed the batteries from my Gyration remote as we had recently replaced it with another Universal Remote that works on both infrared and radio frequency.  We no longer needed a remote that could unreliably control a PC.  Half-way through our evening I realized I had not heard the sound at all and decided to see if it was the remote.  I put the batteries back in and pressed the mouse control button and immediately the gyro inside began producing a high-pitch vibration.

Now the only question remains is why did it go off every 34 minutes for months?  The 3 week gap between the regular occurrences is logically deduced as a result of the remote being bumped and re-aligning the gyro such that it would not hum, but run silently as they typically do.  The one complaint I've had about the Gyration remotes is that they are easily knocked out of alignment resulting in mouse pointers that cannot be controlled. Now, it appears this can also result in obnoxious noises.

The offending device - the gyro is in this module.


video

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Walk the Walk

Although I do the research, this little site ISideWith.com is pretty nice and has the ability to select or even add options that are not in the default answers.

I don't just talk the talk and vote for someone I don't agree with.  Why should you?  Take the quiz....then vote for that person.


People are working hard to ensure you can make your decisions based on principle and not labels.  There is no longer a reason to claim ignorance of the positions of candidates.

Happy quizzing!

Marc

The Parties Are Now Screaming The Truth

of their disregard for the rule of law...and yet the party members continue to believe it is not all that bad! They have both had their conventions and they demonstrated they could careless about their members. They both enacted rules that were not clearly supported and they did so by ignoring the people that make up their parties. The Republicrats and Demicans could not be more clear about their top-down strategy of rule. Yet, millions still believe this is a democracy. ROFL. How brain-dead do you have to be to still believe these two parties care one bit about America?

Ah, but then we cannot afford another four years with the racist socialism fueled by Obama cries the blind members of the Republican party that are convinced their fascist, bank-owned candidate will be better for the country. Don't be too concerned my dear confused friends. Romney has the support of the banksters and thus he will win the election.

Months ago I was certain only Obama could win. I believed the polls that only Ron Paul could beat him in a direct race as the majority of his message is readily accepted by most Americans regardless of political affiliation.

Sadly, as we all knew would happen, the neo-con fear mongering convinced the right-wing self professed "Christians" into remaining fearful of a true national defense (which is both Biblical and Constitutional), so they turned their backs on the only conservative candidate for the repumocrat nomination and went with someone that would continue fueling the war machine. The establishment hand-picked candidate Romney was put into power amidst a scandal of rigged votes and corruption.

Romney's baggage of corruption, consistent position flipping, and progressive voting record was ignored and the candidacy was limited to one issue - unconstitutional war. Unconstitutional war was made greater than Liberty. How many people did you hear say it over the last year? "I love what Ron Paul stands for and what he says and has done, but I don't agree with his foreign policy so I can't vote for him." One issue. This country loves war. That is all there is to it. I am disgusted and repulsed. The majority of the Republican party hates Liberty and loves sending their kids off to die. That is the only message that can be true. No one can convince me other-wise. Either the people actually voted that way or the corruption of the party completely covered up the election results and forced their choice on America. Unfortunately I have spoken with too many "conservatives" to believe most of them are not convinced that offense is better than freedom.

Now, however I see that Obama has been given the order to lose the election. It is so obvious. He is literally spewing drivel every day to push away his base. He has been saying things that give even his most ardent supporters pause and reason to reconsider voting for him. I could be wrong, however it appears obvious to me. The race is still close, right now, but I don't think it will remain that way.

Finally, to counter the argument that now more than ever you must vote for Romney to remove Obama and you should not "waste" your vote on a candidate you agree with in principle.... 
Romney = Obama with right-wing ignorant backing = NDAA^10
(NDAA to the tenth power)
The Republican party was a pitiful third party once and it has had its turn. The argument of voting for someone you don't believe in only because they have a "chance to win" holds no water. It is the same dead argument of "this election is too important!" No, it isn't. The United States of America that was built on the principles of Liberty and Freedom for all is dead and has been for decades. Romney will do nothing to revive it anymore than Obama has. He brought socialism and fascism to Massachusetts and he will do nothing less in DC. Neither of the big parties care about their members anymore than the Senate cares about the country.

Vote your conscience as only voting for the person you believe represents you makes any sense. George Washington told us the detriment a two party system would be to a country based on individual sovereignty and the entire argument of voting for someone "most likely to win" only serves to underscore the validity of his message. If people voted for candidates that supported their principles this country would be richer than it has ever been and we would be free. Life would still not be perfect but there would not be a police state in the US.

Forget about the lesser of two evils argument - try the definition of insanity. Repeatedly doing the same thing to achieve different results. How has the two party system been working out for us so far?

I want to be represented, not ignored.  Therefore I cannot vote for someone that will never represent me.  Your vote is your message.  What message are you sending when you cast it for someone you don't believe in?

This is what the truth is about people who keep voting against their own principles:
Disregard the title - there truly is nothing funny about abuse whether it be from a controlling significant other or a political body.


Not to leave this posting as just a diss at the current establishment of freedom hating government I will leave you with my second choice for President.  Ron Paul was my first.

Not convinced?  Listen to this young man who states the case so aptly:



Thursday, June 28, 2012

Supreme Court Continues to Demonstrate the Anarchy of Goverment

Not to be swayed by the Constition, the partisan politics ruled the day and left the law in shambles as the Supreme Court of the Federal Goverment decided government has the power to require people to pay a monthly fee to be alive.


Authoritarian Anarchy - that is our government. Land of the Enslaved and home of the plantation dwellers. None of us can survive and get the healthcare we are "due" without our master's providing it for us with our own tax dollars.  Is our current healthcare system good?  No.  Is it because of the free market?  No.  We do not have a free market - we have corporatism and cronyism.  A free market would not have guarantees of immunity and bailout by our own tax dollars.  A free market would not have an income tax.


When people finally realize that forcing others to do anything for them is against natural law then and only then will freedom stand a chance to grow.  People cannot use force to make others provide for them, or do what they think is moral.  This is against natural law.  It is wrong.  Only when force, except for defense (not pre-emptive defense), is abandoned will we see the end of slavery, the end of the "need" for government, and the beginning of freedom.

That paradigm shift is a long ways off, unfortunately. The churches should be leading the way, but instead they are busy preaching Romans 13 and accepting tax dollars to fund their activities. Freedom is long dead and the Christian Faith that promoted the notion is busy ignoring its Savior's Words. The united States of America has abandoned Liberty and I fear another cycle of violence is the only recourse many deem the solution. That course will fail miserably and result in yet another tyranny. We must disobey peacefully to achieve our freedom. Ignore the self-proclaimed authority and irrelevant it will become.

Here are a couple more outstanding articles to read:

Columns By Chuck Baldwin - read any of these to get your eyes opened to the reality of your "freedom"

Anti-Intellectual by Tom Mullens

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Statism vs. Liberty

Family, friends, readers, there is only one true decision to be made here - are you for Liberty or are you a Statist? A statist is a person that advocates Statism. Statism is defined as " concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government often extending to government ownership of industry."

I support Ron Paul because he believes in each of us to freely make our own decisions. I do not see anywhere that Obama believes in us at all. He signs in bills that suppress our civil liberties and expand the growth of the police state. (NDAA, Obamacare, ACTA Treaty - without Senatorial approval, the outright takeover of General Motors, continuing bailouts of the Extremely Rich with our tax dollars.) President Obama permits the expansion of security at the elimination of liberty. The TSA is expanding its power to become the United States version of the KGB and only two men in government are fighting it - the Paul family.

If you want to perpetuate Governmental Anarchy, by all means continue to support Barack Obama and the status Quo.

Thursday, December 01, 2011

John McCain - you are at top of my least admired list.

I used to think that McCain was fun, cool, and I liked how he bantered with John Stewart. Then he ran for President and I quickly discovered how liberal and neo-con he was. He couldn't help it, the vile words against Liberty just streamed from his mouth. Then he and Obama became best buds and pushed the first $700 billion bailout bill through the Senate all smiles at helping their big banker buddies at the destruction of the middle class. I figured he was a puppet and a bit lost.

Now he has pushed through one of the most ridiculous and thoughtless bills of all time. From secrecy to law in a few weeks this man who claims to have fought for freedom just stripped our ability to be secure in the knowledge that our own military could not act on us. (Granted the Mexican and Canadian ones could thanks to treaties signed in secret nearly 10 years ago) You have decided "National Security" is more important than "Security from rampant government". Arizona, get that ass out of government NOW before he destroys any more of the American Dream of Freedom and Liberty for all. Oh, by the way - please strike that from the social-liberal Pledge of Stupidity many people recite trying to believe in something that is long dead. Justice? What Justice?



Hope the non-awake people are thrilled with their brain-dead government. Bye, bye Posse Comitatus. John McCain, who was a prisoner of war, clearly thinks it's alright that an American Citizen can be held indefinitely and without reason by the US military. Last I checked, to be a prisoner of war you are supposed to first join a faction that is at war with the army that captures you. Now, however anyone can be labeled a enemy combatant for any reason and they are put away.

Could someone name one reason why we would need such a law? What in the world is our government so afraid of? How is it they can pass laws that fly so obviously in the face of the bill of rights? Fifth amendment? Not needed when you are never given a chance to be called guilty and who needs due process?

Hell, even war criminals used to be charged and held after due process. But those rights should only be reserved for higher ups, Joe American doesn't need that - Corporal Buddy over there with no training in the law should be able to declare you an enemy combatant and be judge, jury, and executioner or just get his superiors to buy into holding you indefinitely cause you might be a terrorist.

Fourth amendment? Don't need proof, so they don't need to search anything - hearsay is good enough!

Don't believe me? Here it from McCain himself:


But, hey it's unimportant to give people the right to a trial if someone decides they might be an enemy.... and as long as you keep your nose clean, they'll never come for you or your family, right? After all we live in a Republic and the laws of a Republic are designed to protect the rights of the minority from the opinion of the majority!

The bottom line is WHY does the government NEED this power? Why is it they think they can give themselves a power that the Constitution clearly states they cannot enact?

Part of security is knowing you are secure from your government arbitrarily picking you as the current group to be labeled, and right now Americans who believe in the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land are not viewed favorably by the Government that rules in anarchy.