an idiot speaks

Not me…a different idiot..

“Moreover, free speech has never been more widely available than it is today. So much so that the cacophony of voices liberated by digital media too frequently drowns out well-informed and sensible opinion. Trump, who blurts out several hot takes every day, is himself an example of the verbal incontinence enabled by Twitter in recent years.”

Please don’t be stupid enough to think that Free Speech has anything to do with Twitter and other social media. Your speech may be curtailed by any person, organization, church, or motorcycle club in your neighborhood who chooses to block you from their website, newspaper, podium, or whatever. You do not have the right to have your barbaric yawp printed or distributed by everyone.

Free speech is about what GOVERNMENT cannot do. They cannot stop you from saying cruel and heartless things… unless you advocate insurrection, the overthrow of the government.

Cancel Culture is the negation of public figures by withdrawing support for them, their history, their products, and/or their contributions. This is rejection, not censorship. It is revisionism of the highest order. It is oppression.

I’m beginning to think we live on the island described in Lord of the Flies. You and I and others like us are “Ralph”.

The rest of the world is like Jack’s savages and soon they will be hunting us. They wish to put our heads on a spike because we adhere to morality rather than savagery.

We may need the military to save us. It’s happened before. Different places and different times.

Insurrection, my butt

Here are 6 examples of Insurrections.

Definition of Insurrection:: an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government

There are weapons and political aims and people are killed. They are not protests with anarchists. They are not looters or flash mobs.

Videos of looters carrying a vacuum cleaner out of Target is not an insurrection. It is an opportunity crime.

The only thing this President wants to do is to find a bigger stick than other people so he can threaten and bully anyone in opposition to him.

He looks for the worst and then uses that to humiliate and defame. He continues to ARROGANTLY debase others.

We should worry this President will suspend elections for made-up reasons and assert himself as president with emergency powers until the made-up reason no longer exists. If his big business donor base abandons him and he is facing his own humiliation, he may say “try and stop me”.

Who will stop President Trump? Mitch McConnell? Not likely. Nancy Pelosi? That’s a stretch. The military? Maybe, but not likely.

We have not seen the likes of a destroyer like President Trump since Napoleon.

This President could bring Civil War back to America.

What are you going to do when he comes for you?

The Acid Media

It’s patina tempered to a lustrous glow by the President of the United States, Acid Media has become mainstream. First it was media gossip, then it was bullying, then it was propaganda, and now it has become Acid Media.

Throw metaphorical Acid in the face of anyone and get away with it.

President Trump certainly brought the swamp to the White House with his Acid Tweets. It is now common place to throw acid at anyone without fear of retribution.

And yet when the President throws his Acid and then is called out for it, President Trump uses the power of the Presidency to punish.

This IS the demagogue we feared would one day be in the White House.

HE has arrived and his taint will stink for a decade.

Along with him, are those who spend their days spraying acid on the innocent as they take aim at the face of their victim.

Acid Media.

A Citizen’s Arrest?

You’ve seen the footage of the Minneapolis police officer with his knee on the head of a detained man. That man died. You’re aware that FOUR police officers present were fired from their jobs as a result and that charges are pending.

The question that came to mind was if I were present could I have acted to prevent this death? Followed by: Would I have acted while a witness with three other police officers present?

We all want to say yes to that question but would we?

There were three times in my life when I stood up for people who were being victimized. Never like this situation but… I was risking physical harm in one instance and personal respect in the other two. In one case it was a civilian woman being harassed by a small group of sailors. Physical harm was possible but it didn’t happen.

One time I made it my business to stand up for a colleague that had been taken advantage by a corrupt taxi driver. That’s a long story that ended with a bunch of taxi drivers asking me if I was going to have the man arrested. I decided not. And another time, I challenged two obnoxious strangers to cut the crap as they made fun of a young shuttle bus driver.

When these things happened, I acted without thinking. I was up on my toes and I was leaning into the action. I was affronted and I acted immediately.

We never know what we will do until it happens but I like to think I would have acted to confront the police officer with his knee on the man’s neck.

Which leads me to wonder, from the safety of my keyboard, what would have been a good approach to intervene and create a different outcome?

A Citizens Arrest may be personally dangerous with three police officers present but it seems as if it would have changed the narrative, the dynamic, just enough to maybe save the man’s life.

Why do I think this way?

  1. The scene was being recorded so there would be evidence of what I did.
  2. If I shouted that the police officer was using excessive force and that is a felony, each of the policemen would have recognized I knew what they were doing was a felony.
  3. If I shouted a second time that this was a felony and if the physical restraint of the man was not modified that I will make a citizens arrest of the police officer as was my right under Minnesota law. This would get their attention, too.
  4. If I shouted a third time that the witnessing police officers are to be charged as accomplices if they do nothing to change the restraint on the man, everyone will know I am serious.
  5. Under the law, I am allowed to take physical action to prevent a felony and then announce they are under arrest.

My hope is that the witnessing police officers would tell their buddy to get his knee off the neck of the man before number 5 happened.

It is likely I’d be arrested in any event. A small price to pay to save a man’s life but one never knows when courage flows in the veins what one will do.

When the heart pounds and the call-to-arms is all you can think of, one never knows how it will end.

I know I would be considered a threat. Up on toes, fingers extended, accusing officers in no uncertain terms that their actions were felonies and the felonies were being recorded, I can feel their eyes on me even now.

I hope I have the knowledge to understand who is being victimized by whom and adjust my behavior accordingly. I hope I have the courage to act in situations like that, too.

I hope we all do…

Can anyone vote Republican anymore?

There’s a title I never thought I’d write. And yet the rot and decay in Republican Party values has created an overwhelming stench.

Evidence demands a verdict. Consider the evidence:

a) A President who blames all his troubles on someone else. A President who demeans 49% of all Americans. A President who is actively wrenching Republicanism away from its core values of decency, respect, the rule of law and God, and replacing those values with buffoonery, humiliation, and maniacal tweets.

b) A Majority Leader in the Senate who perverted the impeachment process and emboldened and enabled a cover-up of criminal and unethical Executive Branch actions.

c) A federal Republican party that will not display nor support the humble and decent values of Ronald Reagan and countless other Republican presidents.  A congressional Republican Party that seeks to break the US Treasury during times of crisis.

d) A Republican Party that no longer believes in a Republic and instead seeks Presidential immunity from prosecution and immunity from congressional oversight,  a party who seeks a King to revere,  and a party who asserts that all accusations against the President are a crime.

How can and why should anyone vote for the rot in the Republican Party?

And how can anyone vote for the Democrat Party either? Socialistic, bleed-the-bank programs, corrupting the ethics of self-reliance, independent thinking, and the advancement of the greater good in all men, the Democratic Party has failed to engage its collective brain and has failed its mission to rear decent Americans.

If you believe in the decency of the common man, for goodness sake, vote for someone other than a Republican or a Democrat. If you want to save America, vote independently and vote for a different set of legislators.


Autocracy in the New Millenium?

It appears to be true.

Across the globe, elected leaders are seeking to kill democracy and assert themselves as rulers for life in their countries.

In March 2018, Donald Trump, addressing a crowd of donors at his Florida estate, told what sounded like a joke. He was talking about the recent amendment of China’s constitution to remove presidential term limits, allowing Xi Jinping to serve in that office indefinitely. About Xi, Trump said: “He’s now president for life, president for life. And he’s great. And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll have to give it a shot someday.” The crowd cheered and applauded in response. In fact, Trump has told one version or another of this joke many times since becoming president.

And though Trump’s remarks are generally perceived as facetious, many of his counterparts on the world stage are quite serious. In January, Vladimir Putin addressed the Russian nation in an annual State of the Union–esque speech. Alongside pledges to improve living standards by, among other things, offering free hot meals to schoolchildren, he proposed major constitutional reforms that could see the presidential office weakened and the prime ministry and State Council strengthened—measures very likely aimed at ensuring that Putin can remain in power after 2024, when constitutional term limits will force him out of the presidency.

I remember when President Bush II  was reported to have said (paraphrasing?) “The Constitution is just another God-Dxxx piece of paper”. (You can read that here if you like.)

Do you remember reading about Kings who sought legitimacy for their rule by having the Pope recognize their earthly authority?

And what about The Divine Right of Kings. ?

It seems that every autocrat seeks legitimacy when they assert they are the rulers over others.

And as near as I can tell, there is a steady progression towards The Unitary Executive Theory in the US in which no other branch of government can challenge a sitting President even when the President overrides Congressional intent.

The Autocrat of the United States may be just around the corner. It might be President Donald Trump…

…or maybe Jared Kushner…

Removing local control over the siting of cell towers

Goodbye local control over the siting of cell towers in Wisconsin.State statute 66.04040 removes all vestiges of town or municipality control unless the political unit of government has zoning authority. This removes almost all towns and some villages from local control over the siting of cell towers. It vests some authority to the county but limits that authority severely.

Ok, so why is this happening? Why is the Wisconsin state legislature removing local control over so many items?

#1. The frac sand industry took a shellacking when the travails of the Town of Cooks Valley with the frac sand industry became public knowledge. Using blogs and the Wisconsin Town’s Association as megaphones, the word quickly spread to town officials that if you want to control your destiny, you better adopt ordinances to control the industry before it comes to your town. Numerous towns enacted protective ordinances modeled after Cooks Valley’s to ensure they did not lose air, water, or lifestyle quality in their towns. The frac sand industry sought to fight the issue in court and the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled with the towns and against the industry.

#2 It is so much harder to get the Supreme Court to invalidate laws than anything else so crafty industry professionals began lobbying legislators  to enact legislation that removed town authority and placed authority in state laws. When state laws pre-empt local towns from taking any direct action against the industry companies, it forces towns to sue the state government if towns want any power at all. The advantage to industry is that state authority and legislators are a defense against town action. Good gig if you can get it. And they did.

#3 People want to be let alone but today’s industries terraform the surroundings into inhospitable places to live. From high capacity wells that drop the local water table to farmland run-off that causes a loss of aquatic plants and an increase in algae blooms, local people are tired of industries creating problems that cannot be solved locally.

#4 The transmission of useful information through social media to local officials means that industries no longer have years to operate with invisible/hidden tactics that take advantage of small town officials who once were not aware what was happening 100 miles away.

So the cell tower industry chose to pre-empt local control and establish state authority for the application and siting of cell towers. A smart move on their part to limit the ability of local authority to do anything about it.

2. If a political subdivision has in effect on July 2, 2013, an ordinance that applies to a class 2 collocation and the ordinance is inconsistent with this section, the ordinance does not apply to, and may not be enforced against, the class 2 collocation.

3. A political subdivision may regulate a class 2 collocation only as provided in this section.
4. A class 2 collocation is subject to the same requirements for the issuance of a building permit to which any other type of commercial development or land use development is subject.
The passage above from 66.0404 says precisely what it means: 1. If a local town already has an ordinance , this law negates that ordinance. 2. The local town is not permitted to get creative in how it controls the siting of cell towers, its power is limited to what the statute specifically gives it.  3. Local officials cannot create a new requirement for cell tower ‘permit applications’ different than any other commercial development or land use permit applications.
Sneaky law. It snubs local authority like a red-headed step child.
Too late to do anything about this attack on local control. Barron County’s cell tower ordinance has been killed by 66.0404 and the only thing that Barron County can do now is write a pablum-oriented ordinance in compliance with state law.
Forget the fights about abortion and immigration, our liberty is at stake. I have said many times that local control is being usurped by the feds and by the state. At the federal level, we are the Federal States of America instead of the United States of America. At the local level, we are simply becoming vassal political units with the responsibility to carry out state mandates and no authority to create ones ourselves.This loss of freedom and liberty to choose for ourselves is what makes the current state of affairs so heinous.
The Freedom to Choose is the foundation of liberty. Controlling the list of what we can choose from is tyranny and oppression.
We are up the river without a paddle if this momentum to remove local authority continues.
When the feds centralize power over the state and the state centralizes power over municipalities, nothing good can come from it.


WI Legislature: Damn the Citizens! Full Speed Ahead!

It is not enough to take away local control and invest it all in the State of Wisconsin (SOW). Now the WI legislature desires to place limitations on public input and debate about legislation in process.

This is, apparently, Governor Walker’s America: control by the State, influence by lobbyists, and legislation by corporate accord. Damn the Citizens! Full Speed Ahead!

Kathleen Vinehout comments on Changes in Committee Workings Public Input.

I hope she does not mind that I excerpt almost all of what she wrote:

Committees are the doers of the Legislature. The process is designed to be slow and deliberative and to encourage public input. However, speed and secrecy are increasingly being used to limit public involvement and careful legislative deliberation.

Public hearings are one place where people can make an impact on a developing new law. By testifying at a hearing, a person can directly provide input. Those who cannot travel to the Capitol can send emails or letters to members of a committee and request changes in legislation.

In recent years, small but significant changes are taking place in the workings of committees that limit public involvement — changes like shortening the length of notice before a public hearing; providing a public notice of one version of a bill and then offering a complete rewrite shortly before the public hearing; limiting speaking time for those testifying; limiting questions from committee members; allowing “invited testimony only” in a public hearing; or voting on a bill immediately following the public testimony.

All of these actions have been used for decades. But it is the increasing frequency with which they are used that concerns many of my constituents.

Committee chairs have extraordinary power. They set rules by which public hearings are held. They decide whether and when to hold a hearing, whether the hearing receives enough public notice for widespread citizen involvement, and who, if any, invited speakers might testify. During the hearing the chair determines the order of speakers and whether to limit speakers’ time testifying.

Following the public hearing, the committee chair decides if and when committee members will vote on the bill. Usually the process involves consultation with members. Discussion following a public hearing can involve conversation about new information made public during the hearing. When a substantial rewrite of the bill appears necessary, the committee chair sometimes convenes a working group to work through bill changes.

Thus correct language for new legislation emerges from a careful process of give and take. Members and the public have adequate time to prepare and concerns are addressed. This process is slow — so slow it sometimes involves several legislative sessions.

Speed and secrecy will kill public input. And changes in the actions of committee chairs can, over time, create a Legislature that listens primarily to the input of lobbyists, paid to represent the interest of their clients. Those voices without paid lobbyists are increasingly not heard, their concerns not addressed.


For example, a recent public hearing was held in the Senate mining committee on a bill to limit local people’s voices in sand mine operations. Many traveled by bus from western Wisconsin to testify. The first six hours of the testimony focused primarily on the concerns of those who benefited from the legislation — none of whom lived near a mine. The committee chair finally got to calling the majority of those opposed to the legislation very late in the afternoon — after the bus had to leave taking many opposed to the bill back home.

These unfortunate scenarios are increasingly common in the state Capitol. When citizens take the time to journey to a public hearing and are not able to testify, they rightly feel left out of the process. It’s easy then to give up.

Now Madison, WI wants citizens to buy sanitary insurance!

The trend to require citizens to buy insurance is growing!

The city of Madison is suggesting property owners buy a $70-per-year insurance policy to help pay for sanitary sewer line repairs on private property.

In the past, city engineering crews repaired the portion of a sanitary sewer located in the public right-of-way at the request of the property owner. But state government decided to prevent local government from performing any construction work for which a private person is financially responsible.

Never mind if local officials had been providing the repair program for years. The Legislature and governor apparently considered it to be bad public policy. It’s a good deal for contractors and the insurance company selected by city officials.

It’s the latest example of growing loss of local control. The ban on local government employees doing any work on private property didn’t attract much attention at passage. But the sewer letter from city officials to home owners has people shaking their heads.

The State of Wisconsin is getting mighty uppity with the usurpation of local control.

Let’s list them:

1. The State of Wisconsin (SOW) now prevents local communities from having residency requirements. Firemen, policemen, and other first responders no longer have to live in the local area. This means that in local disasters, first responders and not local any more.

2. Local control over cell phone tower installations was usurped by SOW. I guess the State feels the need to tell the town or suburb what to do.

3. “Legislation was also enacted to restrict the power of local government to regulate landlords and real-estate brokers. Another tells local government how to assess the property value of billboards.”

4. Local control over absentee voting has been removed.

5. The pending mining bills seek to take local control away from towns and villages and give it all to the state.

The SOW under Governor Scott Walker seeks to consolidate power at the state level wherever they can get away with it.

Think global and vote local this year. Your independence may be dependent upon your vote.

Taking Away NYC guns at Christmas time

And a sarcastic Merry Christmas to those who think that it can’t happen in America….

The New York City Police Department (NYPD) is sending out letters telling gun owners to turn over their rifles and shotguns — or else face the consequences.

New York City’s ban on rifles and shotguns that hold more than five rounds is now being enforced, according to a letter the NYPD is sending out to targeted city gun owners.

New York and New York City possess more unconstitutional laws about guns than other municipalities. How so? Like this: There is no requirement to obtain a State permit to buy a long gun but a State permit is needed to buy a handgun. New York City is more restrictive and requires a permit to buy a rifle or a shotgun plus it requires that every rifle or shotgun be registered. Gun registration is how NYC knows to target certain gun owners who have magazine capacities that exceed five rounds. (In an amusing fashion, the State of New York permits having a 10-round magazine provided that only 7 rounds are in it when you are outside of a shooting range, hunting, or in your home.You cannot have 10 rounds in it if you are on your property, outside of your home, and not hunting. The state has decided that 7 rounds is enough for you regardless of circumstances.)  NYC residents are limited to 5 round capacity in their shotguns and rifles by city ordinance. Plus they cannot purchase more than one long gun in a 90-day period of time. Obviously NYC does not support the 2nd Amendment and just as obviously,no cases have yet made it to the Supreme Court.

The question I have is how can you be a law abiding citizen one year and a criminal the next year by what you purchased? And how can your gun property be seized (or you forced to surrender it) when clearly the law has infringed on your right to possess firearms?

The answer is that New York and other states express disdain and contempt for the clear language in the Constitution by passing laws that infringe on your right to have firearms.

If you accept that the Second Amendment was intended to give you a weapon to shoot tyrants( as Judge Napolitano said) then you should oppose gun registration, permits to purchase firearms, plus oppose limitations on magazine capacities.

I sure hope that criminals in NYC are law abiding about gun ownership while breaking other laws, don’t you? And I hope that law abiding citizens are not declared criminals because of unconstitutional gun laws.

Just imagine a call to arms in Revolutionary America and getting this letter back:

Dear George Washington,

I regret that I cannot join your revolutionary army at this time. Oh, I would like to join your campaign to rout the British soldiers from New Jersey and New York City but the weapons I have are not sufficient for me to go up against the lawful and mighty armies of King George. King George instituted laws in New York City and Tarrytown areas that control my firearms and because of that all my musket pistols and rifles are registered with the local magistrate who, if I join your army,  may take any remaining firearms from my family, or my extended family, and reduce their personal protection. Your campaign against the tyrant King George is limited by the ability and number of weapons that can be brought by we volunteers. Unfortunately, the King has seen fit to reduce the utility of weapons in our possession. Of the weapons that I could bring, I can only carry 5 musket balls and enough powder and flint for five shots by law. I will need more than that to ensure my personal protection when trying to kill soldiers in the British Army.  Another example, I am not allowed to conceal my pistols on my person. I need to do that in order to prevent them from being observed by British spies while I am traveling along the road to join you. If I am caught with concealed weapons, law officers will arrest me and perhaps impress me into the Royal Navy. Yet I cannot carry them openly either because I will be stopped and harassed by law officers and British soldiers alike. I did not make these rules but if I am arrested before joining your army, how does that help your cause?

Good Luck with your recruitment, I sincerely hope that you win this war. I just don’t know how I can help. The local laws have reduced my ability to kill British law enforcement and British military personnel who have better weapons than I do. If you win, perhaps you can do something in the future to ensure more people have weapons to overthrow tyrants should it become necessary. If you lose the New Jersey-New York areas, we will remain under General Howe for some time and  my family will have to live with that. I must consider the best interests of my family. So please do not contact me again. I do not wish to be known as a revolutionary sympathizer and have my mail read, my home searched, my whereabouts tracked, and under God-knows-what-kind of surveillance.

Signed, Supportive in Spirit

January 1776