You WILL need a plan when SHTF time arrives!

"SHTF" is a commonly known and used acronym for "shit hits the fan", which, in modern survivalist parlance, refers to the time when the police-power forces of government1 and the citizenry actually start shooting at each other. In other words, when the revolution begins. "WROL" is a survivalist term which means "Without Rule of Law".

Since the debt-as-money oligarchs' duopoly henchman OKenyan and his leftist myrmidons, acolytes, "freebie" addicts, ragtag band of race-hustling vermin, and RINO enablers have decided to "double down" on destroying the U.S. Constitution and disarming the American people, it is important to take at least some care in maintaining 1st Amendment protections for this speech in the face of extreme government1 hostility and propensity for overreaction to the subject of overthrowing the traitorous scum who have overthrown the U.S.Constitution.

ShareThis

Arrogant government scumbaggery tries to shut down venerable oyster farm — UNacceptable, INtolerable!

In a dramatic injustice and prototypical example of political manipulation, the U.S. Department of Interior is trying to shut down the Drake's Bay Oyster farm so the "First marine wilderness in continental U.S." could be designated.

When I lived in Marin County in the late 1970s, I used to buy oysters there weekly, when it was known by the locals simply as "Charlie Johnson's oyster farm". Consequently, I am highly offended by, and vigorously resent, the political1 scumbaggery and lawlessness behind the closing of the oyster farm. This blog is my effort to hopefully do something about such government lawlessness, while simultaneously serving as something of a tutorial in showing people how to effectively fight government arrogance and lawlessness.

The Framing Of An Oyster Farm - Drake's Bay Oyster Company - Vimeo video

ShareThis

Obamacare — the mechanics of how it is evil, un-American and unconstitutional

Evil is a powerful word as used in the context of this essay, so, per Voltaire's famous "If you would converse with me, you must first define your terms" admonition, I will explain my definition of evil. But first, a small digression.

Culture's dividers, demonizers and destroyers are fond of using language to create imaginary political dichotomies, such as "secular" vs. "religious", "theist" vs. "atheist", "liberal" vs. "conservative", "communism" vs. "capitalism", "left" vs. "right", etc. Let me demonstrate the obfuscatory and intellectually useless nature of such deceptive garbage by proving that atheism itself is in fact a religion.

"World view" = how you believe the cause-and-effect material universe around us actually functions. "Atheism" = "world view". "Religion" = "world view". I submit that if a = c and b = c, logic dictates that a = b. When you look at it that way, all the wannabe-clever little talking points, jingoistic slogans and dogmas of the "atheism vs. religion" faux controversy are distilled down to the substantive essences of two competing world views or hypotheses. In other words, do you believe the Earth is round or flat, and what, precisely, is your empirically observable factual evidence which supports your opinion?

ShareThis

Energy technology is neither a "Left" nor "Right" issue — the troubled years before the deluge

Per the title of this blog post, energy technology is neither a "Left" nor "Right" issue. So it has always irritated me that the so-called "caring and altruistic" Left seems to think renewable (aka "sustainable") energy is their exclusive domain, while the "evil and greedy" Right seems to prefer centralized, government1-controlled energy sources such as oil, nuclear, coal, etc. My irritation is compounded by the fact it seems that so many, perhaps even most, of the actors and musicians whose work I admire most lean to the left politically2. So I thought it was time to clarify the propaganda-induced confusion and faux "controversy" a bit.

At the outset, the one thing I wanted to make sure I did not fail to emphasize is the great amount of credit that I believe is due to the role-modeling of "star3" environmental activists such as Ed Begley, Jr, Daryl Hannah, Jackson Browne, and many others. They put their money where their mouths are, and try very hard to be good examples of their "green" political gospel. Ed even has two shows, "Living With Ed" and "PlanetGreeen.com" where he tries to demonstrate for his audiences what is possible. Having said that, the bad news is that there is so much they don't talk about that their approach to the issue is so extremely simplistic that it borders on deception. And, the folks whose work I admire aside, there are plenty of fascist4 scumbags5 wanting to profit from the sale of deception and manipulation to the more naive, ignorant and intellectually lazy among us.

ShareThis

A Lèse Majesté Amendment and the grassroots restoration of the U.S. Constitution to full force and effect

According to Wikipedia, "lèse majesté" is the crime of violating majesty, an offence against the dignity of a reigning sovereign or against a state. Of course, in the minds of most tyrants, for example good old "L'Etat, c'est moi" (I am the state) Louis XIV, there is no difference between the state and the tyrant's person.

In the "old days", the offense was considered so serious, that the punishment was the most severe and torturous possible, such as skinning alive, or drawing and quartering. The obvious intent of lese majeste laws was to sufficiently terrorize the general populace that they would not dare entertain thoughts of changing the established social order — which is, in reality, merely a pecking order — with a revolution.

Since the advent of more modern theories of government, specifically since the implementation of the U.S. Constitution with its Bill of Rights and the constitutions of the various states, it is past time to reconsider the concept of lese majeste and reverse the roles of who is the state/majesty/rule and who is the subject. For example, the beginning of ARTICLE II of the Colorado Constitution, immediately followed by Section 1, says: "In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the principles upon which our government is founded, we declare: SECTION I. That all political power is vested in and derived from the people; that all government, of right, originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole."

ShareThis

Minor v Happersett: "Natural born citizen" = BOTH parents & baby must be born in U.S.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution says:

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

In the case of Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874) in the only on-point U.S. Supreme Court decision of which I am aware, the Supremes ruled that the term "natural born citizen" means that BOTH parents AND the baby have to be born in the United states. Not only was Barack Obama most probably born in Kenya, but his father certainly was, as was most of the rest of his extended family except for his white American mother and her parents. His family in Kenya say, and are quite proud of the fact that Obama was born in Kenya.

ShareThis