Net Neutrality Isn’t Neutral at All

People are being hoodwinked into thinking that the government getting involved regulating the internet is a good thing. Who could be so gullible? People that read headlines instead of analyzing what the consequences will be once government gets involved; less access, more expense, and intrusion into the free market and best frontier for small businesses to compete. That’s right, the same people the advocates are pretending to protect (the small business and individual) is the same person that will be crushed by the FCC. The law of unintended consequences will rear its ugly head.

The reason people are concerned stems from concerns of bandwidth usage by content providers like Netflix. This type of content gobbles up bandwidth and impacts the performance of ISP’s, and has forced ISP’s to consider charging their customers more for this bandwidth service or not offering these services at all. Either choice for the ISP will be an issue for their business. But to have the federal government get involved is the wrong answer.

There is a red herring argument as well being used that large companies will dominate and control the information people seek on the internet. For example, large ISP’s could restrict other ISP’s services or access to them. Here’s the rub; they haven’t so far because they know if they do customers will flee to another provider. The market has worked and all of these people using the class warfare and evil corporation arguments are speculating and underestimating the power of the market to control itself. The same people that don’t think individuals can take care of themselves are the same people pushing net neutrality. All of the most liberal organizations are supporting this hand over of control from private companies to the FCC to our peril.

Details

Broad Brush = Broad Failure

The federal government approaches everything they do with the “broad brush” approach. It is one of the reasons the founding fathers were so against a large centralized government. They knew from history, experience, and facts that the larger the central government the more likelihood of a broad brush approach, and eventually tyranny and failure.

It is the reason for the tenth amendment and the Bill of Rights. The focus of our republic is on the individual’s rights, and state’s rights that encourage different approaches to government to better serve the people. It is why Madison stated “the powers of the federal government are few and defined”. Madison knew a central government would be inefficient in serving the people. It is too far removed from the individual and state’s needs. It was seen as better to rely on individual ingenuity. The common defense, common laws on the transport and taxation of commerce, were an example of where they saw a relevant need for the federal government.

Our founding fathers were prophetic. But anyone with a sense of history, human nature, and a grasp of reality knows that their prophesies were not as magical as they appear. Why? Because they are based on the principles of human nature and natural law. The more things change, the more they stay the same. The only reason we keep going back to these failed “communal” and centralized planning policies is because there are always humans that believe they are the chosen ones to make it work “this time.”

Details

“Whatever it takes”…

I have been watching the news and cringe at the interviews where a reporter is standing in a terminal interviewing a traveler regarding security procedures. These words have become all too common and frankly scare me, “whatever it takes” to keep us safe. OK, let’s explore that sentiment.

The government creates a new security force that is assigned to do “whatever it takes” to keep us safe. A knock comes on your door and it is one of these agents that want to search your home just to make sure you are not a terrorist. You have nothing to hide so you let them in because they are doing “whatever it takes” to keep you safe.

Details

TSA Says When We Buy an Airline Ticket we Surrender Some of Our Rights; really?

The citizen outrage over the TSA “pat downs” and use of X-ray machines that create X rated pictures is completely justified as American citizens protected by the constitution are being molested and abused by representatives of our government. This argument is not about security it is about rights, and what we are willing to accept as a “price” for security. There are better ways to keep planes safe than the ones the TSA uses. But I want to focus on a particular comment and policy of the TSA.

The recent publication of a passenger telling a TSA agent “if you touch my junk I will have you arrested” has caused me the most constitutional concern. The passenger decided he wanted neither the enhanced pat down nor the X-ray option. He wanted to go through the metal detector just like 80% of the passengers at San Diego airport were allowed to do. He was denied that option so he chose to get a refund and was escorted to the American ticket counter to do that.

Details

Washington, Jefferson, and Obama’s Expense Report

As I watch the president of the United States jet off to India and Asia I couldn’t help but be reminded of the sharp contrasts to two of our former and greatest presidents, Washington and Jefferson. The contrast is telling and it shows how far away we have drifted from the true intentions of our founding fathers and principles.

Anyone that has read about Washington and Jefferson (school books excluded) knows that these two men spent their individual fortunes on activities that were carried out for the good of our country. In some of their letters they struggle and feel guilt for submitting their “expense reports” to the US Treasury for reimbursement. These two great men loved their country and were fiscally prudent about anything related to the newly formed republic. They considered the funds they used the people’s money. They knew everything they spent was a gift of the hard labors of the American people. They would be appalled at the current trip of our current president.

Details

Slavery? Really?

The president has been invoking references to slavery to get his “base” ginned up for the November election. I find it extremely insulting to the people that actually lived in slavery to compare a grass roots political movement, grounded in financial prudence and limited government (Tea Party) to the struggles of slavery. He is minimizing the reality of slavery by comparing the plight of the today’s “poor”, youth, and unemployed. Is he suggesting that the people that are about to clean his clock at the polls are trying to return the country to slavery? I don’t get it? It is more like the people the president is fear mongering against are the people freeing people from the bondage of government programs. The true source of today’s “slavery”.

Details

Without the “Rich” Who Pays?

This endless assault on the rich is pure ignorance. The rich aren’t selfish or greedy or taking anything from you; most rich are paying their share and more. Most of the people that complain about the rich are frustrated under-achievers that think the world would be better off if we all suffered the same together in poverty.

Most rich people get that way because of a brilliant idea, the willingness to risk, and a lot of sweat and tears. Rich people create the jobs most Americans usually work at. Name me a person that has created a job by sitting around and complaining about the rich? Bill gates created tens of thousands of jobs as well as countless millionaires that toiled in the beginning in humble surroundings for very little pay.

Details

The Party System is Being Trumped by the Constitution

The GOP is showing its true colors as the Tea Party continues to throw the old guard out in primary elections. They are taking the ball and going home. They are giving up a number of fights by withholding money from the duly elected candidates in the Republican Primaries.

It is a circle the wagon attitude by the two parties as the political class is being thrown from power by the power of the people. Both democrats and republicans that have enjoyed the power given to them by the people and are now criticizing the will of the people by inflicting harsh attacks and tactics against the same people they supposedly work for.

Details

Words Mean Things…

The process of writing our constitution was painstakingly debated because words mean things. When you choose words it is important they reflect the meaning you intend so it is no wonder there is a concerted effort underfoot to change the meaning of words and history by the enemies of our constitution, and it is happening every day, every chance they get.

Take for instance the president and secretary of state discussing our right to “freedom of worship” as opposed to right to “the free exercise of religion” as stated in the constitution. At first glance they may seem similar but freedom to worship is not the same as freedom of religion. There are many religions that define the terms of how they worship therefore free to practice their religion. Freedom to worship is not religion specific and taken to the next step could be defined by the government since it is not tied to religion. For some this may seem trivial but for thinking individuals it is the difference between protecting their religion and losing their religion.

Details