Hypothetical Mind Exercise - The American Schism

***  NOTE: THE FOLLOWING DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY OF THE MEASURES SET FORTH, RE: THE POLITICAL DISSOLUTION OF THE AREA FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  IT IS MERELY THE MUSINGS OF AN AMERICAN CITIZEN AND SHOULD FIND PROTECTION UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. ***

Vis a vis, the 1st Amendment says that I can also just say:  fuck you Echelon or whatever you're called now-a-days (algorithm on a server in Bluffdale, UT) - that's why.

OK kids, time to bring this up the topic of what comes after, again, and it's looking more and more reasonable every G-d-damned day.  I know this is not the first time I've brought this up, so I'll refund you what you paid to read this... that's right, nothing.

No one can deny this formerly United States of ours is beginning to fray a bit about the edges.  In every locale there are those who want to tell other how to live.  I am struck by this.  I want to tell no one how to live.  Friends of mine, people I respect, are showing STUNNING levels of hypocrisy.  A proudly gay man that I know and am happy to call my friend, is stridently for the equal rights for all (as am I), but in the same breath tells those of us who own firearms: you should be registered like sex offenders.

What say we look at this from a hypothetical standpoint.  I, as stated before, am an American without a political party.  I feel unrepresented.  I am a liberty minded, equal rights proponent who believes in small government, small taxes, and maximum freedom.  I believe that if I want to drive my gas guzzling truck to a 7-11 and buy a 64 oz soda, I should be allowed to.   Also, if my doctor decides that painkillers are what I need, they should not be rationed by non-medical bureaucrats.  I think government should no be involved in the marriage business. I KNOW I am not alone in my political feelings.

I believe in due process of law.  I feel the law should be enforced equally to all people.  If something is illegal, then the criminal that performs said act, no matter their position or political standing (NBC's David Gregory and his DC Illegal 30 Round AR15 Magazine) should ever receive an exemption.  There can be no exemptions from law.  If a law requires an exemption, it is a bad law, and should be stricken.  If there are exemptions to laws, then selective enforcement is automatic.  Selective enforcement of law is TYRANNICAL by nature.  Those in power will selectively allow the law to be applied for political gain.  In modern America this happens all too often.

Currently, the two political parties are simply Pro-Statist. There is no difference between the two of them, except one is Anti-Gun, and the other is anti-Abortion and anti-gay.  Both want to limit choice and limit freedom.  Both are about the exertion of control over the population.  Fuck 'em both, I say, in the common vernacular.

What about those of us out there who just want to be left alone?  What if these political issues are insurmountable  and the controls some want to put into law are intolerable to some of us.  How do we go our own way?  Put us in KZ and reservations?  What if we tried to split up amicably?

I see it happening that the USA will, over the next few years, unless acted upon by some natural or unforeseen geo-political calamity, dissolve into 3 or more disparate units.  I see the USA continuing on, in the blue state model, of New England, NewYork, New Jersey, Maryland, and parts of Eastern Pennsylvania.  They'll be along the statist, semi / soft socialism model that currently permeates those governments.  New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine "might" eke out it's own existence, since they are more liberty and accountable government minded, but the proximity to the more (currently) economically powerful states like MA and CT might keep them in check.  the great Lakes states, to include Michigan and Illinois will also be part of this coalition.  Their Constitution will be the original document with it's modern interpretation.  They will be for higher taxes and more government services and safety nets.  (Which in the interest of full disclosure, I find rationally unsustainable).

The next major block I see forming is the new Texas Federation, following along greatly within the former states of the Confederacy (Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana).  Also adding into his block will be Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, the inter-mountain states of New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Idaho, portions of Colorado (West of the City-Sate of Denver).  Areas of Eastern Oregon, Washington and Northern California will be added quickly.  Norther provinces of Mexico might petition for entry into the Federation.  It would not be outside the realm of possibility to see the Western Canadian provinces to petition membership.   Based solely on current and near term economic projections, the States in my proposed Federation, will continue to be the economic powerhouse that they currently are.  The Constitution of the Federation will be a more literally interpreted US Constitution.  They, according to current rhetoric and political atmosphere, will be more a proponent of liberty, with smaller taxes, and fewer services.

The mid-Atlantic states are the toss-up.  Ohio, Kentucky, the Carolinas, the Virginia  even into the Missouri and even eastern Colorado.  They represent a good deal of resources (tax-base) and agricultural wealth to whatever country they end up being a part of.

I would hope that the schism could be reached amicably. Why shouldn't it - as the debt load we are assuming eventually will cause a default anyway?  Each of the new countries would create a new currency, the basis of a new economy.  Those enlightened new founding fathers and mothers hopefully would forgo the influence of the modern international banking cartel, but who knows... those bastards have more than a little responsibility in the mess we are currently in.  Each of the former states of the union assume all of the infrastructure and military assets contained within their borders.  Of course, Wyoming, Montana and the Dakotas could become the most powerful nation on Earth, when you takes the missile fields into account.

hahahahaha...  I really crack myself up sometimes...  It won't be amicable, it won't be nice.  Object lesson of the 1860's provided in many history books for you.

My point is this, this country as we know it is only here for a limited time.  It, like every other creation of man has a finite life.  What comes next?  When?  To assume the Experiment of the USA would continue into the infinite, especially in it's current, corrupt form, is illogical at best, delusional at worst.

I still believe in American Exceptionalism  but America has never been perfect.  Slavery and resultant racism was a blight for the majority of our history.  Various groups put down by the evil majority of democracy (I believe pure democracy is just as evil, if not more, than other forms of government, 'cause in a pure democracy, the majority - ethnic, religious, economic - always rules).

So I ask you, dear reader...  Even if it involved moving, where would you like to live?  The Free City-State of Miami? The Democratic Republic of Los Angeles?  The Republic of Deseret, of the Texas Federation?  The Duchy Of Duluth?

Just some musings on a Thursday night and a Friday morning...

More to follow...

Business in the XXIst Century, Part III

Well, I had a good long post all sketched out...  then I saw an incredible piece in Forbes.

Sums it up.  You also know you're in trouble when you find yourself and the majority of your coworkers in this list.  Leadership and Loyalty are absolutely a two way street.  You cannot have loyalty unless a good leader inspires it.  You cannot have effective leadership, unless you have loyal followers, willing and able to be led.  You can lead through fear, shaming and  intimidation, but only for a short while.  Your people will either rise up and quit, in the case of the modern workplace, or set you up for humiliating failure.

Personal anecdote:  It is never a good sign when pointing out the disparity between two operating groups of the company to joke that the entrance door to where the downtrodden toil should be ensconced with the words, "Arbeit Macht Frei", and the Human Resources Director, after inquiring what it translates into (Work Makes You Free), has to be explained as to why that's not a good idea...

Oh, historical context...

Then I notice another stellar article in Forbes, this one dealing failures and misconceptions in leadership.

Then this one that talks about the 7 most common habits of ineffective corporate "Leaders".  This one sticks with me because it's astounding that the companies I have worked for that eventually failed, all failed when their "leaders" started crossing these off as "accomplished"...
Read up folks...

Crazed American, out!

Change of pace - still outrage, though...

THIS IS WRONG.

Sums it up.  So you want to clone an Neanderthal? Great.

This child, when born, will be literally a science project.  They will always be at the beck and call of scientists.  They will never truly understand freedom.  He or she will have thoughts, feelings, a life.  He or she will grow up at a rate we have no concept of.  They will be able to speak.  They will be able to want - what if they are wired to find us ugly?  Will they be able to live freely, own a house, a car?

What fucking right do we have to do this?  They won't be a person, will they, what being a different species and all...  Hate to get all Jurassic Park preachy, but this is a BAD, BAD thing.  Let's say the child is born, shows incredible intelligence and superb physical ability.  Why not grow a couple thousand more and equip them to fight America's wars.  Drones are one thing, but Cloned Neanderthal?  Still not actual people doing our killing for us.  Awesome.

Stop the world, I wanna get the fuck off.

Pissed,

Crazed American, out.

Mark your calendars

“Make no mistake about it, everyone. I repeat, make no mistake about it, the  number of gun deaths in New York State will decrease because of the bold actions we take today,” Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck) said.

Okey-dokey.  Actual facts.

I am sad that the Government of the State of New York decided to do this - in the dead of night.  If it's so important, if it's so critical, why not take your time, why not persuade us?

It ain't about guns.  It's all about control.

Interesting times.

Crazed American, out.

The law of unintended consequences... of law?

CNN Video here

Schadenfreude?  Pelosi: We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it.

ObamaCare forbids firearms registration?!

Senate amendment 3276, Sec. 2716, part c.  

"‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None of the
authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that
Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the
collection of any information relating to—

‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm
or ammunition;
‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition."

Thinking Harry Reid ain't such a bad guy - I mean I disagree with 99% of him otherwise... What else is in that damn law?

So the next time you are in a doctor's office and they ask you about guns in your home, unless you know them personally and they are trying to buy an early Mauser from your collection, you can refer them to the above statue, or tell them that you have no evil, icky guns.

Senator Harry Reid, whether or not his position has changed, did us a solid by putting that little nugget of an amendment in there.  

CRAZED AMERICAN, out. 

Dictation

The Vice President, has stated that the administration can and will take unilateral action on a Constitutionally protected, FUNDAMENTAL right.

This would be bypassing Congress, and spitting in the face of the third branch of government, the Supreme Court, which has ruled TWICE to uphold the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Some readers (if I had any) might say, "hey Crazed American, they're just going to ban certain kinds of weapons and magazines.  They won't do away with all of them!"

Why in the name of G-d would I ever trust this government to stop there, if they are going to unilaterally decree that legally owned, possessed and licensed things are illegal???  Also, please see NDAA, Patriot Act, illegal detentions, the Drone War, etc.

Also, they'll figure out that a .223 AR-15 is shit compared to a .264, .270, .308, .30-30, .30-06, etc...

I'd be equally mad if they just decided one day to outlaw gays, abortions, Jews, veterans, or **insert name of group or activity not 100% loved by everyone**, BY UNILATERAL DECREE.

As a law-abiding citizen, presented with a law passed by the Congress and our nominally-representative officials, that's one thing.  I will rail, I will spew invective, I will work to get an unjust law overturned.

But obey a decree by the Executive Branch, that bypasses the Congress, AND the Supreme Court?  That comes from outside the system, and ignores our very governmental process.

Some would say that the Administration is no longer governing, they are literally RULING BY DECREE.

That is an illegal, and immoral action.  It cannot be obeyed.

Dangerous ground, folks.

CRAZED AMERICAN, out.

Tri-cornered hats on standby...

Took place - January of last year:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/05/us-shooting-utah-idUSTRE8040FO20120105

One pot-using and asleep criminal (who was also a veteran of the US Army) vs. Narco-Strike Force

I am of the mind that resistance to gun seizures would overwhelm and stop measures to seize guns. The government knows this.

This was ONE vet, who was illegally growing (and using) pot - no value call - those things are illegal.  He had a Beretta 92F (for the uninformed - a 15 shot 9mm self loading pistol - standard issue pistol of the US military).

No-knock warrant was served, by a law enforcement anti-narcotics "Strike Force".  They were all kitted up (body armor)and had massive fire superiority (M4's true, select fire assault rifles, shotguns and .40 cal Glocks - more powerful than the 9mm at least objectively).  

The criminal (and he is a criminal - I do not excuse his conduct, just using it as an example - he was growing for distribution and using a illegal drug), was awoken from sleep by the police smashing his door in.  

Skip to the end?  Five officers seriously wounded and one dead.  

One vet, non-combat arms MOS, one pistol - think he was Signal Corps.  No insult intended to SC - the SC guys I knew were good soldiers and communicators - just that most of them spent their time playing video games and calling their girlfriends in their air conditioned Humvees... They didn't get a lot of range time, and no advanced pistol training was given to SC soldiers (or anyone else for that matter).  Most soldiers, sailors, Marines and Airmen are not hard-charging killing machines.  Most of them are technicians, doing things that do not require guns.  A very few veterans have any meaningful "killing skills".  Even fewer know anything about CQB and MOUT.    There are more civilians out there with more meaningful "combat", "non-permissive, disruptive environment" training out there, than one cares to contemplate.  Assuming you could get everyone working (from Green Beret to Office Manager to landscaper to dog catcher) for the .gov to drop their office job, and pick up an M4 to raid the homes of law-abiding gun owners, after a handful of instances with results like these, you'd get a lot of resignations.  

Understand that a goodly percentage of .gov employees are law-abiding gun owners.  A not-unsubstantial number of those people would refuse the unconstitutional, unlawful, and immoral orders.  

Point is:  the Government has to think that registering / confiscating the weapons of people (combat vets or just armed citizens) might be a fools errand.  Imagine sending a Strike Force like that against someone with a touch of training and an M1A?  168 Grain FMJ vs. body armor at 10-20 feet?  The .gov has to take that into account!

I'm hopeful that reason will prevail.  

Contact your representatives.  Contact the White House.  Make noise.  Let your voice (no matter where you stand on the issue) be heard.  

My favorite Englishman...

...Jeremy Clarkson.

...apparently broke his finger punching my least favorite Britisher in the face.

Some say he downshifts only when he's near a Prius to watch them cry for Gaia.

I love that guy.

The Economy Sucks in Argentina?!

Then it must be time to rattle some sabers!!

By way of the Telegraph, this link speaks on a subject I do know something about...

So the economy sucks, future is bleak in Argentina, so what does Madame Kirchener decide?  Let's take back islands that haven't been ours in a couple of centuries, and we fought a short, and bloody war for back in the early 1980's.  Rattle sabers!

Granted, the nation Formerly Known as Great Britain, is in no shape to defend her possessions   There is a squadron of British fighters on the island, but the none-to-shabby Argentine Air Force and Naval Aviation, if done with a touch of the old commando style small unit airfield raid, get air dominance damn quick.

The Argentine's are no dummies.  They have a decent military, and I'm sure no one in Flag level positions in the Argentine chain of command didn't sit the 1982 war out.  Long story short, if the Argentines are willing to risk a bit, they could have those islands back, pretty damn quick.

The US President has also, through his use of the term Malvinas, and well known distaste for the British, indicated just where his administration stands.  Aside from it's submarines and a few surface ships, the UK can't project power.  No more carriers, no more carrier aircraft.

Unlike in 82, when Reagan helped out a bit, they shouldn't count on much from us, this time, NATO obligations included.

Interesting times, we'll see what happens...

Crazed American, out.

Business in the XXIst Century, Part II

This one is a quick one - but it's pithy.

If you cannot sum up your business idea in a single, simple sentence, it's too complicated.  Corollary = change is not always good, even when it's unavoidable - it should be MANAGED intelligently, never diluting the core business plan.

Practical example:  I have worked for a few companies that could, when I started with them, sum up their entire business plan in a single, clear sentence.  Over time, scope and mission creep began to set in, as the brains of the operations began to expand into other niches. Different niches translated into different requirements, which translated into more overhead and more payroll and people.

One business expanded their way into arrogant extravagance and ultimately bankruptcy, the other one "took it to the next level" which saw payroll expand by a factor of 2.6 and saw it's brand diluted and revenue drop by 10%.

Change has to be managed, especially in the current economic times.  It is going to get more and more expensive to have employees in the future, and the constant / infinite growth paradigm is being shown to be a falsehood, born by a very specific set of non-repeatable factors.

Next up, Loyalty: a two way street...

Crazed American, OUT