"Super Committee" Failure to Trim Deficit

As was expected, the "Super Committee" has failed to come to an agreement on how to reduce federal spending. The current federal budget is about $3.5T per year. They were tasked with coming up with saving $1.2T, but it was not $1.2T per year, it was $1.2T over a 10 year period.

It would be easy to save $1.2T over just a single year -- all we would have to do is cut the funding to EVERY federal department by 1/3rd. The government has become too bloated and it needs to be cut back. Cutting everything by a third would be a really good way to start doing this.

Of course, there are some federal departments and expenditures that need to be cut more than others. Some even need to be entirely eliminated. For example, we could entirely eliminate the BATF, IRS, and foreign aid.

• IRS -- By eliminating the IRS, we could save $13.1B. We need to switch to a strictly consumption based tax system (e.g. FairTax.org) instead of the current repressive income based tax system.
  


• BATF --The BATF by it's very definition is an infringement upon our RIGHT to bear arms and as such, is totally unconstitutional. By eliminating the unconstitutional BATF, we would save $1.1B per year.
  


• Foreign Aid -- Why should we be supporting foreign governments? Let them sink or swim on their own accord. At best it is just a form of bribery and even so, they aren't honest enough to actually do what we want them to do after we bribe them. It's a waste of money. By getting rid of foreign aid payments, we would be saving $47B per year.

So, just eliminating these three things would save us $61.2B per year, or $612B over 10 years. Only took me 15 minutes of research to save half of what this "Super Committee" was supposed to come up with. Doesn't seem that difficult.

Birth Tourism?

I just read an article on the Houston Chronicle today that described a new twist on the immigration issue. It seems that some companies are providing "birth tourism" packages for pregnant women from foreign countries to come to the US for a few months around their expected delivery dates. By doing this, the child gets US citizenship and all the benefits associated with it. It is their belief that this gives their child education and other benefits. It seems that the State Department will not refuse to grant the women a visa just because they are near term on their pregnancy.

Personally, I do not agree with this. We have more people in this country than we need already and we don't need more coming here making it overcrowded like other countries around the world. We need to tighten up our immigration policy and one way of doing that would be to make it such that US citizenship is not automatically conveyed just because you are born here. I think that we should make it so that to be a US citizen at birth, your parents must be US citizens. As long as we're at it, we might as well define what it takes to be a "natural born" citizen. I propose that to be "natural born", it means that you must be born to parents who were also born in the US and who also had citizenship at birth.

Maybe we need to define it something like this:

1. Naturalized Citizen -- a person who meets the current regulatory requirements to become a citizen through specified immigration procedures.


2. Ordinary Citizen -- a person born in the US to parents both of which are either Naturalized Citizens or Ordinary Citizens.


3. Natural Born Citizen -- a person born in the US to parents who are both Ordinary Citizens.
   

Of course, only Natural Born Citizens would be able to be President. This change in definition would be a bit more restrictive than is currently in place. In fact, the term "Ordinary Citizen" is even more restrictive than what is currently used for "natural born citizen". There are some of the past Presidents who might not be classified to hold office under this new definition.

Islamic Terrorism? What's in a Name?

Well, it seems that Bama-Boy is saying that we should no longer call what his Islamic friends have been doing to us "Islamic Terrorism". I guess someone thinks that it just is not politically correct to call something by what it obviously is. Come now, what motivates these people? Their religion, of course! Maybe we could just call them "Camel Fucker Terrorists"? Is that politically correct enough for the idiots in DC? I don't seem to remember there being all that much of an uproar by the Irish when the IRA members were called "Irish terrorists"... One might think that we could call the Islamic Terrorists "Arab Terrorists", but that is not really that great of a description of them since that is not the major identifying factor in their terrorism. From what I understand, the terrorists from Iran are not Arab, but are rather Persian. So, being Arabic is not a prime identifying factor with them. Plus, there are US citizens who end up supporting the terrorists. These US citizens do not suddenly change their race and become Arabs. They do change their religion and become Islamic though. So, it goes back to what is the identifying factor in their terrorism and that is the fact that they are Islamic.

USB File System Corrupted -- US Government at Fault?

My laptop was running a bit slow today even after closing off nearly all my applications, so I decided to reboot it. Some of the applications would not close off even though I attempted to kill them via Process Manager. I lost a lot of work that I was doing in Visio thanks to this. I finally had to power off the machine to get it to reboot. When it came back up, the system decided to check the 1.5TB USB drive and it said that it was corrupted and proceeded to 'fix' it. It did not give me the option to cancel this 'fix'. Well, after it finished, the drive is basically useless now. The files appear to still be there, but they cannot be opened with any of the programs associated with them. The photos apparently have missing headers in the image files, the music files are also not playable. All in all, everything that was on that filesystem is now crap.

So, I have to wonder now... Was this some sort of attack by the US Government against me? The coincidence is just a bit too much for me to ignore the possibility since when I was visited by the two US Treasury Agents the other day, they explicitly said that they would be watching me. Is it just paranoia on my part? Then again, is it really paranoia when they really are out to get you?

I lost a lot of family photos and such that I had taken, but not backed up to anywhere else. To think that they can do this sort of thing and get away with it really pisses me off. I guess a bit of verbal intimidation wasn't enough for them, they needed to escalate the issue.

I'm not so naive that I don't think that the government spies on us, whether it is legal for them to do it or not. I just wish that they would write their spy software better so that it doesn't destroy the data on the machines that they are spying upon.

Is Anyone Actually Reading My Rants?

Thanks to my recent visit by two US Treasury Agents, I have received verification that at least someone actually reads these rants that I post here. Actually, I'm quite surprised. Considering the fact that no one posts in response to any of my posts on this blog, I was pretty sure that I was basically just talking to myself. Obviously, I have ONE person/group out there who actually reads my rants -- the US government. Apparently, they are also the only ones who are reading it. Should I be concerned? Maybe... They really could make my life miserable if they wanted to. I like to think that the 1st Amendment applies here -- Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press. I have to wonder though -- am I part of the Press if no one actually reads what I write?

As I look back over the time of my life, I have to think that our country has gone down the tubes over the last 50 years. Things that used to be legal are no longer legal. Does that mean that what we used to do was wrong? Personally, I don't think so... I think that what we have is a bunch of legislative idiots who think that everything can be solved by simply creating another law with respect to it. It's like, someone gets killed while walking across the street while not paying attention to traffic, so the legislative idiots decide to create a law against jaywalking. Perish the thought that we could just expect people to have a bit of common sense, right?

I guess what this really amounts to is that our rights are getting slowly eroded by the idiots that we elect. For some reason, they think that their job description is to create laws. Sometimes the laws that they create are not that bad, but most of the time, it seems that they are just creating them solely for the purpose of being able to say that they created one. I guess no Congress-Critter ever managed to make himself famous by the laws that he helped to revoke. Kind of sad, isn't it?

Texting While Driving

I read an article today where it stated that a study had shown that about half of all cell phone users send text messages while driving. Considering the amount of distracted driving that I see from day to day, I can believe it. I'm not about to say that I don't sometimes send a text message when I'm in the car, but I know my limits and as such, I only do it if I'm stopped at a light. I find it too irritating to be constantly switching my focus from something close up (like the cell phone) to something far away (like the view of the road). My old eyes just don't like it, so unless I'm stopped at a light, I don't do it. Too many people try to multitask and do both at the same time though. The end result is that they do neither all that well.

Having said that, I will have to admit that I wish that there was a way to more easily text while actually driving, but I don't see it happening when you are limited to a small handheld device. Perhaps this might consist of some sort of heads-up display where the text was displayed at the windshield level instead of on a separate device that you needed to look down at. Input could be accomplished by way of a keyboard that was part of and somehow oriented along the perimeter of the steering wheel so that you could type without taking your hands off the wheel and without having to look at where you were placing your fingers.

Visited by US Treasury Agents Today

I had an interesting experience today... I was visited by US Treasury agents. They had a printout of what was probably every post that I had ever made of a political nature in addition to photos of the various firearms that I had saved off in a private area of Picasaweb on Google for insurance purposes and reference. They did not like the fact that I was a pilot, an aircraft owner, and had made statements critical of the government. They did admit though that what I had said was totally legal since I had not crossed the line. I was pretty sure that I had not crossed the line and it is good to have that confirmed. It is perfectly safe to say that you wish that a planet killer meteor would drop on Washington and rid us of the jackbooted IRS thugs and the congress-critters, but unless you have a way to control the orbit of the meteors, they realize that it is still harmless talk. It is also apparently acceptable to say that you hope that one day you get the chance to piss on Bama-Boy's grave as long as you do not say that you want to hasten that opportunity or encourage someone else to hasten that opportunity.