Category: Things that matter

I’ve just read the best commentary on the DC gun ban ruling I’ve seen (out of the very few places that have covered it) over at the Reason magazine web site. As the real root of the article, the author wonders why the federal appeals court ruling the gun ban unconstitutional is “interpreting the Second Amendment broadly,” as The New York Times reports. After all, as he points out, actually protecting free speech rights or unreasonable search and seizure rights would not be seen as overly broad interpretations of First or Fourth Amendments.

This oddly bifurcated view of an enumerated constitutional right helps explain why the gun control debate in this country is so acrimonious. When one side considers the Second Amendment a nullity and the other side thinks it counts for something, there is no safe middle ground.

. . .

The court did not say Americans have a right to own anti-aircraft missiles or nuclear warheads. It did not even say they have a right to carry guns publicly (although that does seem to be implied by the “bear” part). It said they have a right to keep guns in their own homes for self-protection.

Continue reading “On the DC gun ban ruling”

Year after year, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) pursues tactics which drive away music listeners or turn the listening audience to other entertainment venues. Sueing the demographic most likely to listen to and purchase music in recent years wasn’t enough. Now to drive more potential customers away, recording industry representatives have plans to set music royalty fees so high that the vast majority of American-based internet radio stations will have to shut down. This move was originally planned for a few years ago, but the otherwise unthinkable ally of Senator Jesse Helms worked to block legislation that would have allowed this in 2002.

Continue reading “Recording industry again trying to chase off their audience”

I have my own planned article on the firings last year of 8 Attorneys General. In the meantime, try to learn a little bit how this event differs from the standard clean-up of federal prosecutors that takes place with each incoming President.

There is so much disinformation and misinformation floating around cyberspace these days about the firing of eight federal prosecutors that you would almost think people on one side of the debate and the other are writing about and analyzing two completely different stories.

. . .

…let’s all stop trying to compare the “Reno 93” with the “Gonzales 8.” Even Republican lawmakers are growing uneasy with that inapt comparison. One legal scholar after another, and one veteran Justice Department watcher after another, has come forward to say that it is extraordinary for a White House to fire a federal prosecutor mid-term, or even mid-presidency, absent some extraordinary misfeasance or malfeasance on the part of the U.S. Attorney. Here is just the latest to do so.

One important thing to note about these 8 attorneys is that they were republican appointees. I mention this, because I know some people feel they should have been fired when Bush took office since Clinton appointees should not stay in under the new President. Just trying to share some information with those that haven’t read up on a lot of the controversy.

Way back in time, when I first started caring about politics, policitians, and all the things the government does to screw us, I decided I should watch some documentaries from this Michael Moore guy. Some of the liberal folks I worked with said they were good. The conservatives I spoke to had nothing valid to say about them, because they hadn’t watched them (criticism after watching them would carry weight with me, but such commentary based on “I heard XYZ said…” did not). After Moore said he wanted people to download his movie Fahrenheit 9/11 if they wanted to see it, I decided that is where I’d start.

About 5 or 10 minutes into the movie, I was already fed up with the movie, as I heard a number of things I just didn’t believe, so I put the movie away. I tried several times to come back, but I found the movie more and more annoying each attempt to watch, even just selecting random areas of the movie to watch. Now I understood why the conservatives didn’t bother watching the movie. I can’t recall now the problems I had with the movie, but I could probably try again to watch this fictitious historical account of the days following the 9/11 attacks if someone disagreed with my belief that a lot of the movie is just made – sensationalism done at history.

I’ve tried watching a couple other Moore “documentaries” since then, but just can’t stomach them now. So given my personal background with Moore’s displays of his reality, I found this mention of others’ attempts to make a documentary on Moore turning into a tale of displeasure.

Canadian filmmakers Debbie Melnyk and Rick Caine unveiled their newest documentary entitled Manufacturing Dissent about legendary filmmaker Michael Moore at Austin’s South by Southwest Film Festival on March 10 2007.

According to a report from the Associated Press, the filmmakers are huge fans of Michael Moore who initially set out to make a biography of their hero. However as they learned more facts about Moore they began to question his ethics and his tactics and began to make a more hard-hitting film while chronicling the filmmaker on his 2004 Fahrenheit 9/11 and Slacker Uprising tours.

. . .

His career was launched by the documentary Roger and Me, released in 1989 and detailing his unsuccessful efforts to talk with Roger Smith, then chairman of General Motors. The only problem was, as Manufacturing Dissent points out, Moore did successfully meet with Smith. He decided to leave out the footage for the final cut in an editorial decision.

Now it remains to be seen when we can see this and get a better look at how Moore works, from former fans.

[tags]Documentary on Michael Moore, Manufacturing Dissent – former fans of Michael Moore look at how he works[/tags]

Straight from the evil-overlord’s mouth, here are the “dirty dozen” tax frauds that you should strive to avoid. The IRS will be watching for these especially carefully. Here’s a sample:

3. Phishing is a technique used by identity thieves to acquire personal financial data in order to gain access to the financial accounts of unsuspecting consumers, run up charges on their credit cards or apply for loans in their names. These Internet-based criminals pose as representatives of a financial institution — or sometimes the IRS itself — and send out fictitious e-mail correspondence in an attempt to trick consumers into disclosing private information. A typical e-mail notifies a taxpayer of an outstanding refund and urges the taxpayer to click on a hyperlink and visit an official-looking Web site. The Web site then solicits a social security and credit card number. It is important to note the IRS does not use e-mail to initiate contact with taxpayers about issues related to their accounts. If a taxpayer has any doubt whether a contact from the IRS is authentic, the taxpayer should call 1-800-829-1040 to confirm it.

12. Frivolous Arguments: Promoters have been known to make the following outlandish claims: the Sixteenth Amendment concerning congressional power to lay and collect income taxes was never ratified; wages are not income; filing a return and paying taxes are merely voluntary; and being required to file Form 1040 violates the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination or the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. Don’t believe these or other similar claims. These arguments are false and have been thrown out of court. While taxpayers have the right to contest their tax liabilities in court, no one has the right to disobey the law.

If you don’t do your taxes yourself and want to try to avoid unethical tax preparers that might suck you into these or other tax abuses which will lead to trouble, I’ve been a fan of Consumerist for finding reliable consumer help on practically anything. Searching the site for “Tax preparation” yielded a few potentially helpful threads.

[tags]IRS Dirty-Dozen tax schemes, Avoid these illegal or unethical tax frauds[/tags]

Slowly but surely, other countries’ governmental leaders are realizing that the secrecy and anti-Islamic behavior of many of the worlds leading governments are in part responsible for the growth of world-wide terrorism. From Canada’s Security Intelligence Service head:

Canada’s spy master, of all people, is warning that excessive government secrecy and draconian counterterrorism measures will only play into the hands of terrorists.

“The response to the terrorist threat, whether now or in the future, should follow the long-standing principle of ‘in all things moderation,’ ” Jim Judd, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, said in a recent Toronto speech.

He admitted officials do not yet fully understand a crucial element in combating terrorism — the process of radicalization that can lead individuals, especially young Muslims raised in Canada and other democracies, to embrace terrorism.

Continue reading “Leading governments are fueling terrorism”