Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Friday, 7 October 2016

Vote NO on the UNMH Mill Levy

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 1:15 AM (01:15)

Vote NO on this mill levy.

Tell UNM to get that 95 million from the legislators’ pensions, the film subsidies, the Local Economic Devlopment Authority, oil and gas subsidies, NMHIX, the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, among other places.

The politicians love to load up the bond issues and mill levies with the popular stuff – buildings, infrastructure and “services” that “must” done by government, because “no one in the private sector can or will do them” – police, libraries, senior centers, community centers, sewers, storm drains, flood control, and so forth.

We all know that’s hogwash, to put it delicately.

Once the politicians load up the bonds and levies with the popular stuff, that frees them to use more from the general budget for their pet projects, their legalized vote-buying schemes (each City Councilor in Albuquerque is allocated ∅1-2 million annually for “needed improvements in their district), making sure that someone in the inside loop gets the contract for the next “necessary” project.

And when was the last time that taxes in Bernalillo County actually went down? Between the City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, we’re paying some of the highest gross receipt taxes in the state – currently at 7.3125 percent.

Now they expect us to pay even more?!

Tell the politicians that for every new tax they want to impose upon us, at the very least, get rid of an equivalent tax, so that the overall burden doesn’t increase.

Or – and I know this will be taken as pure insanity by the Political Classholes – they could actually CUT taxes a bit. (AND cut some spending, too? Would that really be too much to ask?)


  1. Approximate reading level – 12.5
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Facebook [page / profile] / Liberty.Me] / / Tea Party Community / Twitter /
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Twitter /
    3. Libertarian Party –
      1. New MexicoBlog / FB page / FB group
      2. Bernalillo County, New MexicoBlog / FB page / FB group
    4. Duke City Fix

Copyright © 2016 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with medit and Notepad++.

Wednesday, 28 January 2009

“Fair” is a Four-Letter Word

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:14 PM (22:14)

For about 200 years now, liberals[1], free-marketers, libertarians ands capitalists[2] have been pilloried by statists and collectivists for supporting the removal of state controls over the market, as markets are “inherently unfair” without regulatory and taxation schemes sanctioned by those same statists and collectivists.

What I’d to know from the advocates of government control over the market is this –

What is your definition of the word “fair” ?

After all, statists and collectivists, both on the “left” and the “right”, from Barack Obama and Ralph Nader to John McCain and George Bush, use the word on a regular basis, as though it has a commonly-understood, objective meaning, like the equation 2 + 2 = 4 in mathematics. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth – “fair” is a word loaded with emotional content and is defined subjectively – Obama and Nader will more than likely offer up definitions markedly different from those of McCain and Bush, while libertarians such as Ron Paul will differ from all four of them.

So what’s “fair” ?

What probably applies from the Wikitionary page for “fair” is definition two –

3. Just, equitable. – He must be given a fair trial.

The Wikipedia page for “fair” takes us to a disambiguation page, where we find disambiguation page for “fairness”.

Distributive justice
Absence of bias

So what’s “just” and equitable” ? Again, these words are subjectively defined, depending on one’s worldview. As such, I’m extremely reluctant to use it when putting together any sort of policy proposal. I shudder to think of what the incoming Obama Administration will do by using the word.

To get as far as he did in the morass that is Chicago politics, Obama had to at least pay lip service to the idea of economic equality – that “it’s not fair” that one person makes more money than any other. Will The Barack really tax the Kennedy clan, the Kerrys, and the big-money donors that contributed to his campaign at a rate of 100 percent, and start passing out the proceeds to gas-station attendants?

It’s obvious to anyone with a working gray matter cell that he’s NOT going to do this, yet his supporters still seem to think that the idea will actually be implemented.

If “it’s not fair” for one person to have more cash on hand than any other, as the Obamaniacs seem to think, then why aren’t they calling for legislation to wipe out the Kennedy clan’s tax loopholes.

It’s funny that Ted Kennedy calls the accumulated wealth of someone like Bill Gates “unfair,” yet never seems to get around to donating his share of the family fortune in support of the people he professes to care about when he’s on the campaign trail.


  1. I’m referring to classical liberals here, such as Benjamin Franklin and Frederic Bastiat, not the Rooseveltian fascists who hijacked the word in the 1930’s.
  2. I’m referring to Randian capitalists here, more properly called “free-marketers” here, not the favor-seeking plutocrats excoriated by Bastiat and Marx.

Copyright © 2009 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Monday, 18 August 2008

American Slavery Lives On

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 11:29 PM (23:29)

Every 19 June, the American black population (some prefer to be referred to as “African-American”) celebrates “Juneteenth” as the day that their ancestors were finally freed from slavery in the post-“Civil War” American South.

Except that it’s something of a false celebration – slavery wasn’t wiped out on 19 June 1865, in America or anywhere else. It was turned from chattel slavery into other forms. The chains and whips had changed from the obvious to the discreet.

The physical whips and chains were replaced by those of the regulatory and legal kind. In the South, it was the Jim Crow laws. But alas, American slavery became race-neutral over time, and it started even before black chattel slavery was abolished.During the “Civil War” of 1861 to 1865, Abraham Lincoln (AKA the “American Lenin“), instituted a national draft in order to form the “Grand Army of the Republic.”

A side note about Lincoln – his apologists say that he was foursquare against slavery, but that seemed to be true only after the War of Northern Aggression wasn’t ending quickly enough for his tastes –

  • In the 1857 Lincoln-Douglas debates[1], “Honest Abe” said that blacks and whites would never be social and political equals, and that the black population should be “repatriated” to Africa[2].
  • All during the War, black slaves were kept busy maintaining and repairing the U.S. Capitol building in Washington D.C.
  • Lincoln had said that if keeping slavery around was needed to keep the Union together, then he would have found that an acceptable compromise.
  • Lincoln’s 1863 “Emancipation Proclamation” wasn’t anything but anti-Confederate agitprop, as it only “freed” the slaves in areas that were under Confederate control. The states of Kentucky, Missouri and Maryland were slave states, but as they didn’t secede in 1861 to join the Confederacy, Lincoln allowed them to remain slave states until the end of the war. It’s as if the oft-invoked WWII German Chancellor had declared America’s 1942 income tax null and void – mighty nice of him, but he had NO power, either de facto or de jure, to actually enforce that decree.

But wait – wasn’t the 13th Amendment[3] supposed to fix this? After all, after its passage, only convicted felons were (and are) supposed to be pressed into involuntary servitude –

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment or crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


In 1941 and 1948, the Congress instituted conscription as a way to provide personnel for military service in order to fight wars abroad. It’s bad enough that Charlie Rangel, the Democrat from New York, wants to bring the draft back, but that’s compounded by the recurring call for some sort of mandatory “national service” program. In 1998, it was Colin Powell championing “national service.” Now it’s Barack Obama.

But wait – that wasn’t (and isn’t) slavery. That was “serving your country” and “answering the call of duty,” wasn’t (isn’t) it?

Funny how the supporters of “freedom” have no problem using military slavery as a means to defend that liberty. Still, it’s a piss-poor way to get the job done, a fact noted by many in the military during the Vietnam War.

Funny how the descendants of slaves want to reinstitute slavery, so long as it’s in a form that they approve of.

How about the income tax? After all, aren’t taxes “the price we pay for living in a civilized society,” right?


In 1894 the Tariff Act included an income tax provision, which was struck down in 1895 in the Supreme Court case Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan Trust Co..

The present-day income tax sprang from the 16th Amendment[4] came to us in 1913, along with the Federal Reserve System, from the Wilson Administration. It requires you fork over one-quarter to one-half of what you earn, depending on how much you make. For every eight-hour shift you pull, two to four hours’ worth of your pay goes to Uncle Shithead.

How much relief from this sorry state of affairs are we going to get from Barack the Mad Obomber? None.

How much relief from this sorry state of affairs are we going to get from the Manchurian Senator, John McClown? None.


  1. Lincoln was running against Stephen Douglas for U.S. Senate
  2. Never mind that most of the slaves of that time had been born on American territory. Perhaps the Siberian-American population would like to have me “repatriated” to Central Europe? Also, John Randolph and Henry Clay had already tried that with the American Colonization Society’s founding of Liberia. How well did that work out?
  3. There’s a theory that the currently-recognized Thirteenth isn’t the real one – see these links / /

  4. There is some question as to whether the Sixteenth was properly ratified – see this link :
  5. Reposted –
    1. KCUF Media – Xanga

Copyright © 2008 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: