Archive for the ‘Law’ Category


Monday, August 17th, 2015

Note (31AUG2015): During the past week, a Negro shot to death two, young Euro-Caucasoid broadcasters on live television. Then, another Negro shot a Euro-Caucasoid sheriff’s deputy in the back at a filling station, killing him, too.

Note (07SEP2015): The current, increasing tidal-wave of illegal aliens invading European shores mirrors the challenge facing these United States of America. Both in Europe, especially Western Europe, and these United States, the unarmed invasion of territory is greeted by an increasingly dispossessed majority not with armed resistance but with a spectrum of self-defeating responses ranging from apathy, indifference, and passivity to joyous celebration of their own demise among the self-loathing.

Science says, “If you want more of a behavior reward it.”

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

Today, calling Negroes by that which they racially are has become almost forbidden except among Negroes themselves, who frequently and publicly call themselves “niggers”. So, what to call them?

Ironically, the current plight of the American Negro is reflected by the confusion in nomenclature. Even American Negroes themselves do not know how they prefer to be called.

“Negro” as in the United Negro College Fund and as used repeatedly by Martin Luther King, Jr? “Colored” as in the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? “African-American”, more precisely “Sub-Saharan African-American” — but what of the Euro-Caucasians who settled South Africa before any Negroes even were there? “Black” —yet, to most African Negroes, American Negroes are not “black”?

Given the facts, perhaps American Negroes would do well to recall an answer several decades ago by a Negro given when asked about his race. It was the following:
“I am Negro. I am colored. I am not black.”

PART ONE: Context

“And you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” -John 8:32

violence n: exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse. –Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary

Violence, Evolution,  & the Earth
The cosmos has existed approximately 13.7-billion years. Our planet, Earth, approximately 4.5-billion years.

For the initial 200-million years, our planet remained inhospitable to life. Then, 4.3-billion years ago, a rogue planet, Theia, is believed to have collided with it; bringing water, thereby, rendering it habitable. Shortly thereafter, life appeared — soft-bodied and uni-cellular.

550-million years ago, multi-cellular organisms appeared. With their appearance, survival became increasingly precarious, for individual and species. Previously, the life-cycle essentially had been consume energy and divide; thereby, producing exact replicas of themselves. Not so with multi-cellular ones. They are heterosexual. Heterosexuality allows for genotypic and phenotypic differentiation, in turn, allowing for rapid evolution.

For these new, more complex organisms, the process became birthing, maturing, reproducing, dying in an ehanced context of predator and prey — kill and be killed. Life and violence became fraternal twins. So it remains today.

Violence in these United States of America
Domestic violence? From its inception as colonies, these United States of America have embraced violence as a way of life. British-Americans against French. Colonists against Indians. Americans and French against British with Continentals against Loyalists. Northerners against Southerners. Bandits against lawmen. Citizens against government and government against citizens.

Foreign violence? Spanish-American War. World War I. World War II. Korean Conflict involving China. Vietnamese Conflict. Iraqi Conflict. Afghan Conflict. Most recently, primarily Euro-Caucasoid Christians against primarily Semitic-Caucasoid Mohammedans. Ironically, given the “Cold War”, perhaps better known as the “Long Peace”, the only major country against which the USA has not been at war is Russia.

“An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” -Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975)

The Founding Fathers dreamt of creating a participatory republic incorporating the Four Freedoms; namely, freedom of religion, of political speech, of the press, and of association. To them, the concept — nay, the very word, democracy — represented an obscenity. Today, the concept of democracy has become a misguided, sacred cow defecating on the dream of our founders.

Descending more quickly and more deeply into the dismal depths of democracy, this once-preëminent nation is transforming itself into that which the Chinese characterize as “a nation in terminal decline”. Once again, we have burst into a nation on fire — once again, a consequence of racial diversity.

As we know it today, the notion of racial diversity with racial equality essentially did not exist until after the Civil War. Even Abraham Lincoln publicly proclaimed Negroes inferior.

“I am not nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality; and in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” -Abraham Lincoln (18SEP1858)

Current, domestic violence pits mainly Negroes against Euro-Caucasians; the latter a demoralized, increasingly dispossessed and dwindling majority. By and large, Euro-Caucasians are either too apathetic and too passive to defend their territory, resources, wealth, and culture or too self-loathing not to celebrate the suicide of their own kind.

Pity their youth indoctrinated by The Left via so-called education — education now quasi-Marxist indoctrination; and via entertainment — entertainment in passionate pursuit of vulgarity. They not only tolerate, not only accept, but actually demand their own disenfranchisement and demise — economically, politically, and sociologically.

The Negroid Community Today

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

Sadly, the American-Negroid community, as a group, has come to represent a clear and present danger to the integrity of the remnant that remains of the Republic. With support from members of The Left such as George Soros, Negroes have unleashed a tyranny by a minority to the point that many of its members feel free to riot whenever they claim, even wrongly, that a supposed injustice has been committed against one of their own.

Its members demand not only child-support for their bastardy in addition to preference in hiring and academic admission even when unwarranted but free housing, free food, free clothing, free medical care, and even free telephones. Translate “free” into Euro-Caucasians, Asian-Indians, and Orientals paying. Privilege has become license, and Negroid demands for such license now serve as a model for elements of the exploding, Latino minority to imitate. Such are the consequences of racial diversity.

See “Diversity” at:  .

Unfortunately, the Negroid community is in shambles, partially a consequence of the governmentally-sponsored welfare-state and partly as a consequence of most of its members’ refusal to assume responsibility for themselves. Eighty percent of Negroid births are illegitimate. The intact Negroid family is a mere fragment of its former self.

These are facts. Attacking the messenger won’t change them.

For Negroid demagogues and their supporters among The Left, truth matters not one whit. Truth has become no defense against the inevitable accusation of “racism” as though racism necessarily is invalid or evil. That there are no differences among the various races and sub-races simply is a lie. Ask any physician about the demographics of sickle cell anemia, for example.

Compare contributions of Jews that benefit the world — Jews who number 14-million and represent 0.2% of the human population — to contributions of Negroes who number 100-times greater and represent 20% of the human population. Judge by documented facts not ideologically-based propaganda masquerading as so-called news and entertainment.


Negroes & “Hate Crimes”
When a Euro-Caucasian commits a violent crime against a Negro, an only occasional act, ideologically-driven authorities and Left-driven media automatically label the act a “hate crime”. “Hate crime”?

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

To begin, the term itself represents poor grammar. “Hate” and “crimes” are nouns. Grammatically, the proper term is “hateful crimes”; hateful being an adjective. This grammatical point is not trivial. The proponents of these unfair, unjust, and outrageous laws even cannot get the name straight.

Consider the following: The “crime” part of the misnomer represents objective, behavioral activity — arson, burglary, homicide, robbery, and so on. The “hate” part of the misnomer represents subjective, mental activity; specifically, cognition and emotion — for example, 1) cognition such as a Negro’s believing that he routinely is disrespected by Euro-Caucasians; and 2) emotion such as such as a Negro’s feeling hatred toward Euro-Caucasians.

Prosecution of any citizen of whatever race or ethnicity as a consequence of subjective, mental activity represents “thought-control”. Such prosecution is dissonant with traditional, American ideals and values but consonant with the quasi-Marxist ideology of The Left. Recall that Lenin (1870-1924) defined truth as anything that benefits the Communist Party.

The act is the crime, neither the accompanying thought nor the accompanying feeling. Truly, courts historically have applied the concept of “special circumstances”; for example “assault with intent to commit murder”. Special circumstances make for a more serious charge and a more severe sentence if convicted.

Courts have applied that concept and do apply it, but they should not without direct, objective evidence. The law may demonstrate intent objectively, but it never should divine intent subjectively.

Instrumental behavior, the behavior of an organism upon its environment, is objective and public. Verbal behavior is objective and public. Both can be recorded and measured.

Intent is neither objective nor public. It is subjective and private.

Aggravated assault, for example,  is objective and public. “Intent to commit murder” is neither unless the defendant has made documented, explicit statements to that effect.

With regard to ethnic and racial relations, in Canada and the UK the legal situation has become even more egregious than in these United States of America. There, the truth literally is no legal defense in matters of ethnicity and race unless the complainant is a Euro-Caucasian. Make some member of a “protected minority” feel bad about his race or ethnicity? Go to prison.

It is tyranny pure and simple. Tyranny, especially tyranny based upon lies, takes a terrible toll. So it is in Canada and the UK. So it is becoming in these United States.

Negroid Crime
Negroes claim that police exhibit unjustifiable bias against them. Unjustifiable? Consider the following facts:

Negroes constitute approximately 13% of America’s population. Yet, Negroes commit 55% of robberies, 49% of murders, 34% of aggravated assaults; and 33% of forcible rapes. Of total crime, Negroes commit approximately 30%. Despite these statistics, the powers-that-be demand police not use racial profiling. Is it any wonder that police of every race fear for their lives when confronting Negroes? The consequence for the Negroid community is less protection from crime for the law-abiding, peaceful majority.

As for Caucasians constituting a homicidal threat to Negroes, 91% of Negroes murdered are murdered by other Negroes. Only 9% are murdered by other races or persons unknown — the latter a number that likely includes additional Negroes. In a typical, large, metropolitan area with a heavy Negroid presence, Negroes commit approximately 70% of murders; Euro-Caucasians, fewer that 10%. Despite these statistics, the powers-that-be demand police not use racial profiling. Is it any wonder that police of every race fear for their lives when confronting Negroes?

The rate per capita of Negroes committing murders is approximately 12 times higher than Euro-Caucasians and 5 times higher than Latinos. Despite these statistics, the powers-that-be demand police not use racial profiling. Is it any wonder that police of every race fear for their lives when confronting Negroes?

What of Negroid police killing Euro-Caucasians? Generally, trivialized by being ignored. Consider the case of 18-year old Gilbert Collar, a student in Alabama. In 2012, unarmed, naked, and under the influence of drugs, he was shot and killed by a Negroid policeman, Trevis Austin. The legal system cleared the policeman. Big Media ignored the event. Had the races been reversed, would the consequences have been the same?

All in all, Negroes, especially males, are prone to agitation and violence. Conversely, contrary to portrayals by the media, Euro-Caucasians, including males, are relatively tranquil and peaceful. Violence American-style largely is a Negroid phenomenon — phony propaganda from The Left notwithstanding.

“And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.” – Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

Since the dawn of multi-cellular organisms — predators and prey — has the context really changed much? Anyone who believes that it has might take a lonely stroll down a dark street in the South Bronx at night; a stroll likely to be a short one. Americans of The Left blithely ignore that civilized humans live in a state of benign captivity with a thin, blue line separating them from the nasty, brutish violence that would prevail without it.

As for policemen shooting fleeing, unarmed suspects in the back, in the more civilized past, doing so constituted accepted policing procedure. When a policeman ordered a suspect to stop, if the suspect did not obey, the policeman fired two shots into the air. If the suspect continued to flee, he became fair game for a potentially lethal wound.

What factor controls a suspect fleeing from police when ordered to stop, especially when hearing a policeman’s gunshots into the air? Nothing criminal to hide nor to be discovered?

How are the police to know that which controls a suspect’s flight? What percentage of unarmed suspects shot by police are law-abiding citizens with no criminal records?

What is the primary mission of police? To maintain law and order or to play clairvoyants, social workers or pseudo-psychiatrists?

PART THREE: Repairing the Damage

Negroes and The Left
Who suffers the most from Negroid violence? Negroes.

Rioting instigated by Negroid demagogues and their supporters from The Left notwithstanding, remove the presence of police from Negroid neighborhoods then measure the consequences. Whatever mistakes police may make, the benefit from their presence to Negroes vastly outweighs any liabilities therefrom.

Sadly, those of The Left have done Negroes more harm than good. They have reduced them, as a group, to a state of humiliation. Is not that the context in which they are rioting? Would not any group feel humiliated?


The humiliation of so-called affirmative action. Do Orientals require “affirmative action”? Critics recently have accused Harvard University of “negative action” against Oriental admissions in order to prevent too many, qualified admissions. Do Orientals feel demeaned? Do they riot? Hardly. Unwarranted, unmerited preference via “affirmative action” only demeans the recipient.

The humiliation of so-called entitlements. “Entitlements” are little more than governmentally-enforced, involuntary “charity” stolen from the productive in camouflage. “Entitlement” is nothing more than a governmental euphemism for legitimized theft via transfer of money. Receiving something earned by another and taken from another involuntarily simply because the recipient exists demeans the recipient.

In that regard, the humiliation of so-called child-welfare, a program begun decades ago for deserving widows and orphans not for outright bastardy. Then, it mutated becoming almost the sole province of Negroes. It became a curse camouflaged as kindness. It wrecked the Negroid, familial structure. Now, increasingly it is becoming coöpted by Latinos — next on the list of The Left to make all Americans dependent upon government.

Is it not time to allow Negroes to become all that each can be? Is it not time to end humiliating dependence upon government as a consequence of collective, irresponsible behavior and instead to begin uplifting independence with individual responsible behavior? Only when Negroes rightfully gain a genuine sense of pride from genuine accomplishments — whatever form those accomplishments may take — in the same manner as the rest of us, will they truly integrate themselves into society — whatever form such integration may take.

Repairing these United States of America
Complaining is one thing. Repairing is another. Repairing the nation from the ravages of the economic, political, and sociological fire increasingly engulfing it will depend less on The Who or even The What and more on The How.

Truly, repair requires a credible leader committed to stated principles. Truly, repair requires policies and programs based upon principles that are sound — scientifically-based and scientifically-driven; more precisely, the science of human behavior. Most importantly, repair requires a clear, explicit statement of how to undertake the needed repairs, including the methods by which to measure success or failure.

“I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.” -President Thomas Jefferson

Behavioral deficits like behavioral excesses have their consequences. We Americans must do more than complain. We must act.

Ah, but act how? Is there a way? Yes. With justice, fairness, and mercy for all? Yes.

(See Chapter Eleven, “A Dangerous Servant — A Terrible Master”, in the semi-fictional novel, Inescapable Consequences.)

Will repair require rebellion? Has “now and then” arrived? If so, rebellion in what form?

Violence via firearms by which to seize the reins of government or non-violent via civil disobedience such as refusal to pay income-taxes? Open rebellion with rebels showing themselves or hidden rebellion with rebels concealing their respective identities? Reasoned rebellion whereby rebels pursue dialogue with the powers-that-be or unreasoned rebellion whereby rebels forsake such dialogue.

The righteously discontented should hope that repair will come via the voting booth not violent rebellion. How likely is it, though? How likely is it that the productive and their sympathizers can outvote the unproductive and their sympathizers?

“He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty;
And he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city.” -Proverbs 16:32

Anger is abroad in this nation now on fire. Anger colors the speeches of Donald Trump. Anger demands satisfaction. Let us hope that satisfaction be orderly and peaceful. Let us be prepared that it might not be so.  How? Hopefully, by forming an apolitical, political party scientifically-based and scientifically-driven espousing traditional American ideals and values and reflecting the Constitution of the United States of America as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.


Note: In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.


Monday, July 27th, 2015

“I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature.” -Adolf Hitler (1889-1945)

violence n: exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse. -Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary

Hitler was wrong. Nature is neither cruel nor kind. Nature is neutral — indifferent one might say.

Yet, cruelty and violence are common bedfellows. Then again, so are living and violence.

“‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.” -Mark 12:31

Many speak against violence while indulging in it religiously. Love your neighbor? A lofty precept, indeed. The fact, however, is that most murders involve persons who know each other, including neighbors. Thirty percent involve familial members. Thirty percent of the victims are children.

The following is based upon actual events:
Mary lived alone. Another workday had arrived, so off she went. Closing the door to her apartment, she turned the lock then headed one flight down the stairwell towards the garage of the apartment-complex.

Clear and sunny. Warm. Just another workday for the 24-year-old, banking teller — or was it?

Upon entering the garage, she recognized a neighbor — an affable-appearing, late-adolescent. Had she ever known it, she could not recall his name. She also recognized the object fiercely gripped in his trembling, left hand — an axe.

He advanced. She retreated. He raised the axe. She screamed.

Mary had no defense against her assailant. Truly, she owned a firearm with which she was minimally proficient, but the law in her State prohibited her from carrying such a weapon.

Being defenseless against a homicidal maniac generates one of three behavioral responses — fighting, fleeing, or freezing. Automatically without thinking, she fled.

Her 17-year-old assailant, Roger, was an only child residing with his parents in the complex. He was an honor-student in the local high school with no criminal record. In fact, no history of violent behavior, whatsoever. Tending to be something of a loner, he, nevertheless, was reasonably well liked by peers and teachers.

Now in the garage, Roger entered into a not-so-merry chase with his intended victim as she screamed, “Help! Help me! Help me, someone!”

Bolting from the semi-enclosure into the driveway, Mary became an easy target. Panic-stricken, she stumbled, falling to the pavement.

Trapped. Eyes shut. Breath held. Mary awaited a violent death.

It was not to be. As Roger was about to release his lethal strike, a voice boomed, “Drop the axe, sonny, or I’ll blow your head off.”

A short, slender man of middle-age stood before Roger, pointing a .38-caliber revolver at the teen’s head. It contained deadly, high-speed hollow-points. Clearly, the man meant business — violent business in defense of the proverbial damsel in distress.

“Put down that axe, I said — now! Now!”

Slowly, Roger set his weapon onto the concrete. The axe was no match for a pistol.

The three actors in this scene of attempted murder remained stationary. Roger and Mary’s savior with a gun remained silent. She sobbed.

From the distance, sirens. The police.

Upon seeing the their cars approaching, Mary’s savior slid his weapon into the side-pocket of his trousers. He wanted neither to be shot by some overly-anxious policeman nor to be arrested himself.

Squeezing out of his cruiser, a middle-aged, pot-bellied sergeant took charge. Then, having heard the details, he arrested Roger, later charging the youth with attempted murder; a crime that potentially carried a sentence of life in prison. The next morning, a judge released him for admission to the locked unit of a psychiatric hospital, pending trial.


“Thou shalt not murder.” -Exodus 20:13

Murder. The ultimate form of violence.

It can occur on an individual scale, usually between acquaintances, friends, neighbors, or spouses. It can occur on a societal scale as perfected by Hitler and his Nazis, who encountered little difficulty finding willing and enthusiastic accomplices and unwilling but compliant victims.

Factors predisposing towards violence are both biological and environmental. Biological factors can be genetic or acquired.

The neuroanatomy of violence may involve the frontal lobe; the anterior, cingulate gyrus; the temporal lobe, and the limbic system. Violence as a function of a lesion in the brainstem usually is the consequence of a tumor.

The neurochemistry of violence may involve low level of serotonin, low or high level of norepinepherine; high level of dopamine; or high activity of GABA (γ-aminobutyric acid), the last a consequence of an excessive number of related receptors.

Environmental factors predisposing towards violence are a bit more complex but still not difficult to understand. For purposes herein, basically they can be characterized as a function of context and consequences ( They include over-crowding, poor parenting, maltreatment, modeling, generalization, and social reinforcement.

Science and the Daily Racing Form say, “The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.”

Violent behavior is no exception to this rule. Those with a history of violence in the past are more likely to acquire a history of violence in the future.

Temperament offers powerful indicators.  They include aggressiveness, impulsiveness, intolerance of criticism, intolerance of frustration, projection of blame wrongfully onto others, and sel-centeredness.

Mental illness — a predictor of violence? Yes with certain provisions. Not all mental illnesses are associated with violence. Mental conditions associated with violence include anti-social personality disorder, depression especially with psychotic features, homosexual panic, mental retardation, mania in a context of limits being set, and schizophrenia especially with paranoid features such as delusions and hallucinations.

See “Schizophrenia & Government” at .

Who tends to be violent? Adolescents and young adults. Males. Drug-abusers. Negroes. The mentally ill. Contrary to the never-ending bleating of those who best might be termed “Radical Maternalists” and their ilk, it has been documented for two generations that poverty itself is not a controlling factor in criminal behavior, which frequently includes violence.

See “Truth & Consequences” at .

“You get a lot further with a smile and a gun than with a smile alone.” -Al Capone (1899-1947)

Protection against violence comes at two levels — individual and societal. Such protection is highly context-specific, varying from nation to nation and from locality to locality.

In closing, let us note that the agents most prone to violence are governments. During World War Two, it is estimated that more people were killed by their own governments than by enemies.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” -incorrectly attributed to Edmund Burke (1729-1787)

Accordingly, as was well known to the Founding Fathers of these United States of America, the greatest threat of violence to us as citizens comes from government — our own government that now, in a context of no declared wars, has assumed the prerogative of murdering American citizens who have not been convicted of any crime, even have not been charged with any crime, and have not been arrested for any crime. Forewarned is forearmed.


Note: In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.


Monday, October 27th, 2014

NOTICE (26JUN2015): We have been banned by Financial Times, Reuters, and Red State (See “Censorship Hard & Soft” .).

“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” -The Constitution of the United States of America (Article1, Section1)

“I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a ‘phone,” proclaimed Barack Hussein Obama from the White House (14JAN2014).

Administrative law — an old tyranny renewed. In America, over the decades it has grown into a monster of gargantuan proportions.

What is administrative law and what does it have to do with EHF? To paraphrase legal scholar, Professor Philip Hamburger, administrative law consists of acts via an executive power that come not through law but through other mechanisms or pathways.

Article 1, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution essentially prohibits administrative law. As Professor Hamburger notes, the Constitution provides only two avenues of binding power — acts of Congress and acts of the Judiciary but not acts of the Executive.

Whereas Congress may create administrative agencies, their courts and they operate under the Executive. They have no constitutional power to make law. Moreover, they have no constitutional power to adjudicate. Yet, they do both with wild abandon, preferring their own unconstitutional “administrative courts” under the Executive to constitutional, traditional courts under the Judiciary.

“Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” -Lord Acton (1834-1902)

Such so-called administrative courts are nothing new. In fact, they are replicas of the old Star Chambers, King’s Councils, and High Commissions from the Middle Ages. The Founding Fathers abhorred and repudiated them. Why? As noted by Professor Hamburger, they aren’t judicial; they’re inquisitorial. They represent absolute power consolidated into a single, governing entity; be that entity monarch, president, or director.

This abhorrent, unconstitutional system began in 1887 with the creation of the Interstate Commerce Commission, an agency of the Executive, to regulate the railroads. The U.S. Constitution, however, based upon separation of powers — balance and counter-balance — forbids Congress from delegating its legislative authority to the Executive.

The fiercest proponents of such regressive, absolute, consolidated power have been the so-called Progressives via Democratic presidents such as Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Lyndon Baines Johnson, and now Barack Hussein Obama.

Consequences? Evasion of procedural rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. No real judges. No real juries. No protection against self-incrimination. Governmental agencies essentially have become extortionists.

“Settle on our terms, or we’ll drag you before our own administrative court, in which we have a record of almost total success. Meanwhile, we’ll bankrupt you with legal fees, even on the off-chance that you should prevail, never mind the adverse publicity we’ll unleash. Win and lose, we always win — you always lose.”

Rationale for such outrageous, governmental tyranny? Efficiency. Efficiency for whom? Efficiency for the tyrant. Tyranny always is more efficient than liberty.

The dreadful consequences of this form of consolidated, tyrannical absolutism become even more dreadful today in the context of EHF; a contagious, highly virulent virus that causes a brutal, ugly death. Curative or palliative treatment? Neither exists.

Accordingly, EHF represents a clear and present danger to the American public and the rest of humanity. Already, there have been four cases in the USA as a consequence of Obama’s “pen and ‘phone” . Experts tell us that there are more cases on the way unless the West contains the virus where it began — in Africa. Time is against us.

Meanwhile, there are only a four, American facilities with a combined total of a eleven beds possessing the Level-4 capabilities required of handling EHF . No other facilities can handle safely cases of this horrific disease, which leaves its victim bleeding externally from the eyes, nose, mouth, and rectum. Spread by contact, the virus can live for some time in soiled linen and used, medical supplies; both of which a hospital must dispose safely.

It is in this context that a particular, administrative agency arrives on the scene but in the shadows — the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Prior to the enforcement of its own regulations by the EPA, hospitals disposed of medical waste via fire in affordable, on-site incinerators. Fire purifies.

Some years ago, however, the bureaucrats at the EPA ordered burning of infectious, medical waste in on-site incinerators to halt in the name of cleaner air — that is, unless the hospital installed expensive, sophisticated incinerators that most hospitals cannot afford. So, administrative absolutism forced hospital-administrators to contract with third-parties to haul infectious, medical waste to some other, distant site to be handled according to the edicts of the EPA.

Consider the risk of such a practice in handling waste containing Ebola. Instead of disposing of the highly contagious waste safely, quickly, and efficiently on-site, hospitals must abide by an extra step of hauling to some other, certified site somewhere else. One consequence? Less air-pollution. Good. Another consequence? Increased risk of contagion. Increased risk? Yes, to the extent that some third parties reportedly have refused to handle medical waste containing Ebola. Bad — very bad.

“God watches out for little children, fools, drunks and the United States of America.” -Otto von Bismark (1815-1898)

Good theory becomes bad practice. As a consequence of the absolutism conferred upon itself by the EPA, at Texas Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas, medical waste from a patient dying from EHF filled an entire room designated for his waste alone then overflowed into the unprotected hallways used by people wearing no protective gear.

That only two, nursing personnel became infected with EHF represents a near-miracle, no thanks to the EPA. For how long shall we Americans enjoy such good fortune when bureaucratically-promulgated, bureaucratically-enforced, and bureaucratically-judged  regulations trump common sense?

Shouldn’t every hospital have an affordable on-site incinerator available in emergent instances such as EHF? Yes, but using it at this time would be violating inflexible rules established by arrogant, self-inflated bureaucrats impressed by their own unconstitutional power. So, who protects us from our so-called protectors?

“An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” -Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975)

As does all behavior, political and bureaucratic behavior, especially in a medical context, has its consequences. In this case, the consequences amount not only to tyranny but possibly to suicidal tyranny ( Ebola cares not one whit about political and bureaucratic pronouncements. Will God save us from this virus and, once again, from ourselves?


Monday, July 2nd, 2012

Well, well . . . one unelected governmental officeholder with lifelong tenure, Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., ironically a known epileptic, became the single, deciding factor in determining the future of all medical services for the entire USA.(1) What power! What would James Madison say?

It might be noted that the context in which Mr. Roberts made his decision not only is his own chronic illness but a Court in which not one of the “Supremes” is a WASP-male or a WASP-female. As Mr. Roberts reasoning represented a gross distortion of the language of the legislation, the composition of the Court represents a gross distortion of American demographics. Mightn’t even Abraham Lincoln be aghast?

To what extent did Mr. Roberts having served as counsel to the insurance-industry influence his decision, especially his loss in 2002 before what is now his Supreme Court (Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v Moran)? The answer is unclear, given the disparate consequences for different companies.(2)

Twisting definitions the way only a lawyer can do, Mr. Roberts pronounced legislation that he himself, otherwise, would have considered unconstitutional . . . constitutional. Talk about miracles! Such a feat of legalistic resurrection might amaze even Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed.

The four dissenting Justices noted that Mr. Roberts re-categorized, as a tax, the “penalty” attached to the “individual mandate”. The penalty was categorized numerous times in the legislation as such and not as a tax even though it will be administered via the Internal Revenue Service. Moreover, Mr. Obama and his Democratic supporters repeatedly denied that it is a tax,(3) and, although some of his supporters now might deny his denial, others within the White House continue to affirm it.(4) In the words of the radio-character, Chester A. Riley, “What a revoltin’ development this is!”

So, what’s America to do? Given her history, probably nothing more than passive acceptance. Isn’t it all over but the shouting?

Will Mr. Romney continue to campaign loudly for repeal of ObamaCare despite its model having been RomneyCare in Massachusetts? Such linguistic gymnastic is well within the abilities of Mr. Romney . . . after all, he is a lawyer himself.

Two lawyers campaigning for the presidency. What a sight to behold!

Admittedly, at this point in the campaigning, the consequence of Mr. Romney’s emphasizing his opposition to Obamacare might be less voters’ support not more. Whatever he chooses, in November, should the House remain Republican and, by some chance, Mr. Romney win the White House,(5) he still will be unable to repeal ObamaCare in its entirety unless the Republicans also capture a minimum of sixty seats in the Senate, unlikely, then band together into a united whole, even more unlikely given their past record of fecklessness . . . think Olympia Snowe from Maine or Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania.

Okay, other than the Republicans’ capturing the White House and both chambers of Congress, is there anything else that America can do? Yes, but she won’t . . . or might she?

As Alexis de Tocqueville noted in 1831, the real power in America, albeit currently remaining buried under the big foot of the federal government, lies with the individual States.(6) State-based governments simply could refuse to establish the “exchanges” demanded by ObamaCare. Will any? Governors Perry of Texas and Scott of Florida say, “Yes.” Talk is cheap, however . . . money, expensive. Time and politics will tell.

Wait! Even if a State so refuses, pursuant to the Act, won’t the federal government do so in its stead? Not necessarily . . . not if the U.S. House of Representatives, likely to be Republican-controlled, refuses to appropriate the necessary funds.

The U.S. Constitution is clear. Federal appropriations originate in the House not the Senate. “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”(7) No money . . . no ObamaCare.

James Madison wrote in The Federalist No. 58, “The House of Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose the supplies requisite for the support of the government. They, in a word, hold the purse – – . . . . This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.”

After all, if Mr. Obama can refuse to enforce the law in the form of the Defense of Marriage Act because it offends his personal or political sensibilities, why can’t the House of Representatives refuse to fund a law that a majority of its members deem unconstitutional, Mr. Roberts’s opinion notwithstanding?

What would be the consequence of such behavior? A constitutional crisis? Maybe. If so, perhaps a constitutional crisis is what America needs to save the Constitution and herself (

1. Epilepsy: a recurrent, paroxysmal disorder of cerebral function marked by sudden, brief attacks of altered consciousness or abnormal motor signs or sensory symptoms. Of note, patients with epilepsy are at risk of developing psychiatric problems including anxiety, depression, and psychosis. Whether patients develop an “inter-ictal” personality remains a source of medical controversy.

Whatever the case, Mr. Roberts’s condition has raised criticism about his fitness to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court or, perhaps, any court. Some might claim that his medical condition never having become a source of national or congressional debate prior to his confirmation would seem to reflect the power of political correctness or what, alternatively, would be called Radical Maternalism.

2. Schoenholtz, JC: The Managed Healthcare Industry: A Market Failure (2nd Ed.). North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace (2011).

3. “ObamaCare and the Power to Tax”. The Wall Street Journal, 29 June 2012, page A13.

4. “A Vast New Taxing Power”. The Wall Street Journal, 02 July 2012, page A10.

5. In this election, some might characterize Mr. Romney as a lightweight in a heavyweights’ bout. One example has been his refusal to address candidly and completely two issues of substantive importance . . . namely, 1) his promoting of RomneyCare, about which Rick Santorum beat him to a pulp during the primaries and 2) his wife’s medical condition (multiple sclerosis) and her ability to meet the challenges of becoming First Lady,(A) about which, unlike his wife, he himself essentially has refused to comment.(B) His reluctance to meet these issues head-on projects a personal image lacking strength, lacking courage, and lacking conviction.

A. Multiple Sclerosis: a chronic, progressive, auto-immune, inflammatory condition of the central nervous system, marked by intermittent damage to the myelin sheath that covers all axons of nerve-cells. One of the hallmarks of the disease is chronic fatigue (90% of patients) in addition to often severe motor and sensory dysfunctions, including loss of control of bladder (90% of patients) and bowel (15% pf patients). Fifty percent of patients suffer from depression while 20% exhibit “la belle indifference”, an unrealistic degree of complacency about gross symptoms.

B. Burton, TM: “Ann Romney Talks of Her Struggle With MS”. The Wall Street Journal, 02 July 2012, page A4.

6. de Tocqueville, A: Democracy in America. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press (2000).

7. U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 7.