Please Help Support Backcountry Notes

Paypal Button:

OR:

E-MAIL CONTACT FORM

About Me

028_25Ae.jpg

I am an ex-urbanite who escaped the city life and has lived for the past 29 years in a rural, mountainous area of southwestern Virginia that in colonial and early-American times was part of the "Backcountry." This is the true melting pot of the U.S.A., its culture and traditions dominated by "born fighting" Scotch-Irish immigrants and enhanced by German, Highland Scot, Dutch, Welsh, and yeoman English settlers. Having absorbed and inculcated the history, values and views of the Backcountry, I would like to share information and insights from the place where America began. - - Jay Henderson

"My weariness amazes me . . . ." - - Bob Dylan ("Mr. Tambourine Man").

 

“The law often allows what honor forbids.” - - Bernard-Joseph Saurin, French lawyer, poet, and playwright.

 

POLITICS JOURNAL

 Declaration%20es.jpg

 My Perspectives on the Political Scene

Friday
May212010

The Restoration Movement -- Mending The American Social Fabric

In 1989, historian David Hackett Fischer described America as having "a social system which for two centuries has remained stubbornly democratic in its politics, capitalist in its economy, libertarian in its laws, individualist in its society and pluralistic in its culture." A good description at the time, but the two decades since have seen the emergence of a political class engaged, deliberately or recklessly, in tearing apart the American social fabric. Now there is a movement across the land to mend those tears and restore the American social system.

This movement is apparent in two co-occurring phenomena -- the Tea Party and the surging interest in libertarian philosophy. Those of the political class, Democrats and Republicans alike, have reacted badly to these phenomena. The establishment Republicans kept their distance from the Tea Party movement until the Massachusetts Senate election; now, it seems, there is a rush by prospective candidates to claim that "I am a Tea partier, too," even though many of them are not.  The Democrats alternate, sometimes rapidly, between slandering and scoffing at the Tea Party. Witness the immediate Democratic reaction to mildly-libertarian, Tea-Party-endorsed Rand Paul's primary win in Kentucky -- the slanderfest began within 24 hours. Meanwhile, Rand Paul and those like him continue to rise in popularity, while the audiences for libertarian commentators like John Stossell and Glenn Beck continue to rise.

Those of the political class of course pay lip-service homage to American social traditions -- but it is not what they say, but what they do that counts. Analyzed in terms of David Hackett Fischer's description, the list of offenses by the political class against America is lengthy and damning:

* "capitalist in its economy" -- The political class, Republican and Democrat alike, have worked assiduously to replace free-enterprise capitalism with a Federally-run mercantilism. In the world of Federal mercantilism, politicians and bureaucrats pick the economic winners and losers, bestowing blessings on favored industries (ethanol) and connected companies within industries. The free market is increasingly viewed as an annoyance, if not a hindrance. Despite the recent catastrophic failure of social engineering by economic manipulation, we hear calls for more "regulation." In Federally-run mercantilism, the "cure" for failure is more of the same. Barack Obama condemned George Bush for overspending the Federal budget by $300 billion or so per year -- but his "cure" is to overspend the Federal budget by $1.3 trillion per year. Q.E.D. And don't kid yourself that our state governments are any better -- Federal mercantilism applies to them, too, and the flow of money, the picking of winners and losers, mandates that they play the game by the same rules.

* "libertarian in its laws" --  The political class, Supreme Court included, has "re-interpreted" the Constitution and has adopted new laws which are distinctly anti-libertarian -- inimical to liberty. The Kelo decision by the U. S. Supreme Court typifies this terrible trend. The framers of the Constitution sought to guarantee that government would not seize the property of citizens except for public uses and that citizens whose property was taken would be justly contemplated. In the brave new world of Federal mercantilism, any government can take anyone's property and turn it over to a favored person or company on the bare promise that the favored one will someday pay more taxes. In the libertarian concept, the government is obligated to protect its citizens from the crimes and depredations of exploiters, but now the government plays the role of accessory to the crime. Again, don't kid yourselves by thinking that state governments are any better -- most of them apply the "law" exactly as it was stated in Kelo.

* "individualist in its society and pluralistic in its culture" -- What we see now are "identity politics" and "wedge issues." The Democrats have won control of Congress and the White House with these tactics -- the Republicans are not guiltless, but the Democrats are far better at such things. This sorry state of affairs has recently been exemplified by the attacks on the Arizona illegal-immigration law, which was condemned publicly by Democratic officials who hadn't bothered to read the law in question, including Attorney General Eric Holder and Director of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. Most of what the liberal Democrats have said about the law is false but in the world of identity politics and wedge issues truth does not matter; all that counts is hammering away at the wedge.

Most of those engaged in the movement are not political types — if they had any involvement in politics before, it was tangential or sporadic. Instead, they are folks who would rather be raising their families, minding their business, tending their properties, and otherwise living (not talking about) the American dream. Their involvement in a political process bears witness to a serious purpose.  Their willingness to suffer the slanderous beat-downs that the political class visits upon such upstarts testifies to a stoic determination to see things through to the finish.

Fortunately, America is still democratic in its politics and so we still have the vote. The restoration movement aims to stop the destruction of the traditional American social system and I hope it can muster the votes to make a difference in the November elections.

Thursday
May202010

VA-9 Republicans Should Reject Morgan Griffith

On Saturday, May 22, Republicans of Virginia's Ninth Congressional District will convene to select a candidate to run against incumbent Congressman Rick Boucher. The favorite, backed by state and national Republicans, is Morgan Griffith of Roanoke, currently Majority Leader in the Virginia House of Delegates. Griffith, who doesn't live in the Ninth District, is a statist Republican with a history of supporting stealth taxes and restricting the constitutitional liberties of citizens -- a poor choice if Republicans expect to win the votes of independents and conservative Democrats.

Griffith was an avid supporter of the traffic-violation "abuser fees" sponsored by his business partner, Rep. Dave Albo. Even after publicity concerning the discriminatory "abuser fees" resulted in a firestorm of protest, Griffith backed Albo on the matter. The "abuser fees" were admittedly designed as a means of raising revenue --  a stealth tax.

Griffith was the sole sponsor of a law which seriously restricts the rights of Virginia citizens to a jury trial when sued for damages. In Virginia, a person sued in a General District Court for $15,000.00 or less is not entitled to a jury trial. However, prior to 2007, the Code of Virginia allowed "removal" to Circuit Court -- where a jury trial is available -- in cases where someone is sued for $4,500.00 or more. Morgan Griffith introduced and sheparded through the Virginia General Assembly a bill which repealed the "removal" law. Now anyone sued for $15,000.00 or less is stuck in General District Court with no right to a jury trial.

That amount of money is very substantial for working families and small business owners in Virginia. A judgment for $10,000 or $15,000 might be enough to push someone into bankruptcy, even though there is a substantial defense to the claim which a jury might recognize but which would get short shrift in the collection-agency atmosphere of a General District Court.

Why would Griffith sponsor such a law? He has a history of supporting, and being financially backed by, corporate and business interests. Here are the top-20 Griffith campaign contributors for the past 10 years:

$73,000     Virginia Assn of Realtors
$72,052     Virginia Trial Lawyers Assn
$64,500     Dominion Power
$62,750     Virginia Bankers Assn
$58,250     O'Bannon for Delegate - John – Richmond
$54,000     Nutter for Delegate - Dave --    Christiansburg
$43,750     Virginia Auto Dealers Assn
$42,500     Altria
$36,462     Virginia Cable Telecom Assn
$34,500     Allen Allen Allen & Allen – Richmond
$34,500     Verizon
$34,000     Anthem
$30,555     Home Builders Assn of Virginia
$27,500     Alpha Natural Resources
$24,250     Genworth Financial     
$23,250     Virginia Hospital & Healthcare Assn
$23,200     NRA Political Victory Fund
$21,000     Anderson Financial Services/LoanMax – Alpharetta, GA
$19,750     Virginia Health Care Assn
$19,000     McGuire Woods – Richmond

A full list is available here. Most of the donors on this list either employ lobbyists or hire out as lobbyists of the Virginia legislature. LoanMax, for those unfamiliar with this company, is an often-sued car-title lender.

If 9th District Republicans want to oust Rick Boucher, they need to make a better choice. Morgan Griffith is not someone I can support and I suspect that many independents will feel the same way.

Wednesday
Apr282010

Tipping Point

Wikimedia image; click on image for larger view.Federal spending has passed the point where mandatory spending -- mostly "entitlements" -- and net payments of interest on the national debt exceed income from all sources. This means that every dime spent on "discretionary" budget items -- including national defense -- is now borrowed. Since entitlement programs are unlikely to be cut without severe economic distress, any substantial increase in the cost of debt service will push Federal spending past the tipping point.

Wikimedia image; click on image for larger view.In fiscal year 2009, Federal spending on "mandatory" items plus net interest was about $2,399,000,000. Federal income from all sources was $2,105,000,000, leaving a deficit of $294 billion BEFORE anything was spent on national defense, infrastructure projects, or grants to study the sex life of hornytoads. The projections for F/Y 2011 are $2.416 trillion and $2.567 trillion, leaving a positive balance near the tipping point -- but the income numbers assume a 22.5% increase in personal income tax revenues, a 115% increase in corporate income tax revenues, and $16 billion in new revenues from health care reform. The likelihood of these rosy forecasts actually happening are slim.

Even if the increased revenues do come to pass, all bets are off if interest rates rise faster than projected. And the Feds to acknowledge that, by and by, rates will rise. Factoring in the trillion-dollar-per-year increases in national debt and increasing rates of interest, net interest is projected to rise from $188 billion in F/Y 2010 to $840 billion in F/Y 2020.

Question: Do you think the "deficit commission" might propose new taxes?

1. Yes.

2. Hell, yes.

3. Oh, yeah.

4. All of the above.

You can check the numbers yourself HERE.

Tuesday
Apr272010

Read the Arizona Law First, Please

The recent passage of Arizona's law concerning illegal immigration has prompted a spate of criticism coming mostly from persons who have not taken the time to read what it says. Contrary to the pronouncements made by many of its opponents, the Arizona law does not require or condone "racial profiling." I am not taking a position on the law itself in this article -- but I am proposing that arguments from ignorance, based on rumor and innuendo, are far too prevalent. I am providing a link to the actual Arizona Senate bill for anyone who cares to have a look-see.

The Arizona law -- S.B. 1070 -- originates at the state level, so it is not thousands of pages long and doesn't require a lawyer and a c.p.a. to translate. There is a provision which states:

This section shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of united states citizens.

If someone can find the section which requires or condones "racial profiling," please let me know ASAP!

Here is a link to the Arizona law: Arizona S.B. 1070.

Friday
Apr232010

Wasted Votes, Third Parties

This coming November, tens of millions of Americans will go to the polls and -- if past behavior holds -- will vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate for each office on the ballot. Because a vote cast for a third party is a "wasted vote," right? I get this a lot because I am open about having adopted the policy of not supporting "the lesser of two evils" and thus voting often for third-party candidates. "But you're just throwing your vote away when you do that!" comes the refrain.

If it is true that "insanity" can be defined as repeating the same self-defeating behaviors time and time again while expecting different results, then, I'm afraid, the great majority of my fellow Americans qualify as political lunatics. We -- I include myself to acknowledge past acts of political madness -- vote for a Democrat who promises "change" or a Republican who promises "frugality" and we get politics as usual. Nothing changes, taxes go up, spending goes up, liberty suffers.

If one thing should be crystal clear, it is this: The "wasted votes," the votes which are "thrown away," are those cast for Democrats and Republicans.

In 2000, I liberated myself from two-party politics and voted third-party for the first time in a Presidential election.  And it was a liberating vote -- in light of subsequent events, I am happier now than ever that I am responsible for neither Al Gore nor George Bush.

If the major parties were running Satan and Beelzebub for office, would you vote for Beelzebub because he is "the lesser of two evils?" Not this citizen; if those are the choices, I'm a write-in for Jesus.

Here's my advice. Stop listening to the two-party rhetoric. Examine you own beliefs and values. Then have the courage of your convictions, find your conscience, clear your vision and vote accordingly. If that leads you to vote for a Republicrat or a Demopublican, so be it; but please, never be afraid to vote third-party because others waste their votes routinely.