Category: random

  • The Constitutional Problems of ‘Interpretation,’ Opinion’ and ‘Bureaucracy’

    We to start calling our Congressmen and women ‘Representatives’ because they ‘only represent us,’ they are not our Lords and Masters, that the supreme Court IS a branch of government, subject to checks and balances, to the dismissal of judges, that ‘supreme’ at the front of their office is an adjective while Court is the noun, and they only issue rulings in the form of opinion and NOT law, that the Senate follows the House of Representatives in the formation of bills and budgets, and that the Executive Branch doesn’t have unlimited power, and that it is the people through the states that has delegated power to the three branches of federal government and that delegation can be withdrawn at anytime.

    Further, a Progressive education system and the Progressive media have pushed the idea that the U.S. Constitution is an outdated document, which simply isn’t true. Here is an overly simplified breakdown of the first 10 amendments that give us liberties that no one can take away from us:

    Free speech, freedom to worship (or not worship) in the religion of our choice, the right to gather and peacefully protest, the right to ask the government to make right an unconstitutional action; a free press; the right to protect yourself from anyone or thing that threatens you, your family or community (and that specifically means the government); not to be forced into having soldiers (or law enforcement) living in or using your home as a base of operation; the right not to be searched physically, electronically or by any other means unless a lawful warrant has been issued; not be held against your will unless you’re charged; your property cannot be taken from you without a trial or without fair compensation; you can’t be tried twice for the same crime; you get a quick trial and that trial cannot be held in secret; you can take anyone to court — including the federal government — if the offense is for more than $20, and that ruling once entered, cannot be overturned; you can’t be given a bail that is so high that you can’t pay it; you can’t be whipped, tortured, chained up or anything else as punishment for a crime; no one can be denied a liberty that is in the Constitution; and if the Constitution doesn’t say the federal government has authority over it, then it belongs to the state and this include marriage, transportation, roads, healthcare, schools, drug enforcement, etc.

    Sadly, many of these liberties have been quietly stripped from away through acts of unlawfulness which include ‘interpretation,’ opinion’ and willful ‘bureaucracy.’

  • Supreme Court Creates Itself a New Authority

    The supreme Court is seeking a compromise that allows religious non-profits who argue that the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate violates religious freedom, to opt out of coverage while guaranteeing free birth control for employees. They’re doing this by not making a decision but by sending the challenges to the contraception mandate back to the lower courts.

    And while the Progressive media is framing this a ‘win’ for the non-profits, what they’re avoiding telling us — or are too ignorant to understand — is that the supreme Court doesn’t have the Constitutional authority to form compromises. Section 1 vests the judicial power of the United States in federal courts, requires a supreme court, allows inferior courts, requires good behavior tenure for judges, and prohibits decreasing the salaries of judges:

    “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.”

    So in essence, while the non-profits are off the hook for the time being, “We the People” lost yet another bit of liberty as the judiciary continues it’s plodding toward a complete oligarchy.

  • The Murphy Twins

    Based on an old Irish joke my dad loved to tell…

    Two men were sitting next to each other at a pub in London.

    After a while, one bloke looks at the other and says, ‘I can’t help but think, from listening to you, that you’re from Ireland’

    The other bloke responds proudly, ‘Yes, that I am!’

    The first one says, ‘So am I! And where about from Ireland might you be?’

    The other bloke answers, ‘I’m from Dublin, I am.’

    The first one responds, ‘So am I!’

    ‘Mother Mary and begora. And what street did you live on in Dublin?’

    The other bloke says, ‘A lovely little area it was. I lived on McCleary Street in the old central part of town.’

    The first one says, ‘Faith and it’s a small world. So did I! So did I! And to what school would you have been going?’

    The other bloke answers, ‘Well now, I went to St. Mary’s, of course.’

    The first one gets really excited and says, ‘And so did I. Tell me, what year did you graduate?’

    The other bloke answers, ‘Well, now, let’s see. I graduated in 1964.’

    The first one exclaims, ‘The Good Lord must be smiling down upon us! I can hardly believe our good luck at winding up in the same place tonight. Can you believe it, I graduated from St. Mary’s in 1964 my own self!’

    About this time, Vicky walks up to the bar, sits down and orders a drink.

    Brian, the barman, walks over to Vicky, shaking his head and mutters, ‘It’s going to be a long night tonight.’

    Vicky asks, ‘Why do you say that, Brian?’

    ‘The Murphy twins are drunk again.’

  • Altars and Sacred Stones

    Sometimes the Lord lays a message on my heart in odd ways. With this one, it came through a friend who felt prompted to share Hosea 10:1-4 with me.

    The New International Version reads: 1 Israel was a spreading vine; he brought forth fruit for himself. As his fruit increased, he built more altars; as his land prospered, he adorned his sacred stones.

    2 Their heart is deceitful, and now they must bear their guilt. The Lord will demolish their altars and destroy their sacred stones.

    3 Then they will say, “We have no king because we did not revere the Lord. But even if we had a king, what could he do for us?”

    4 They make many promises, take false oaths and make agreements; therefore lawsuits spring up like poisonous weeds in a plowed field.”

    It’s hard for me to read this and not come away thinking of the United States of America. Though the text says “Israel,” it can easily be replaced with “U.S.,” and that makes it all the more frightening.

    Like a vine, the U.S. has steadily grown in its greatness. However, because of our greatness, we’ve also grown arrogant, thinking we are both our creator and the created, that our success has been our own doing, eliminating God from the equation of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

    “Altars,” and “sacred stones?” Simply put, those are the things we worship, that we have placed ahead of God in our daily lives and the lack of acknowledgement we give Him by continually ignore His promptings because we think life is good and we don’t need Him.

    Then there’s the word “king,” which is not capitalized and can easily be changed to “leaders.” So it becomes easy to understand the parallel question, “But even if we had leaders, what could they do for us?”

    That answer is simple — nothing. Our lives come from God, not man, no matter how powerful or affluent that person is.

    Finally, we are left with the “many promises,” the “false oaths,” and “agreements” that bring “lawsuits.” This is where we stand today and it is only a matter of time before we will have to “bear…guilt.”

    We were once a “plowed field,” formed over 225-years ago in a Godly way, that’s being choked by “poisonous weeds,” by Godless leaders that we commanded into position.

  • Title XI Has Nothing to Do With Transgender

    Our federal government has decided to issue a letter of guidance to our public school’s on transgender access to bathrooms. The joint letter from the education and justice departments was sent to schools Friday with guidelines to ensure all students “can attend school in an environment free from discrimination based on sex.”

    Realize that while they can ‘issue’ such a letter, it carries absolutely no authority. This is yet another example of federal overreach through the Executive Branch as yet another couple of bureaucratic and unconstitutional cabinets move to usurp power and authority from the Legislative Branch. However, time and again Title XI keeps getting tossed into the mix as if it has any real bearing in the issue of transgenderism and school bathrooms.

    “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” [Public Law No. 92‑318, 86 Stat. 235 (June 23, 1972), codified at 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681–1688]

    The first person to introduce Title IX in Congress was its author and chief Senate sponsor, Senator Birch Bayh of Indiana. At the time, Bayh was working on a number of issues related to women’s rights, including the Equal Rights Amendment.

    As they were having some difficulty getting the ERA out of committee, the Higher Education Act of 1965 was on the floor for reauthorization, and on February 28, 1972, Bayh introduced the ERA’s equal education provision as an amendment.

    In his remarks Bayh said, “We are all familiar with the stereotype of women as pretty things who go to college to find a husband, go on to graduate school because they want a more interesting husband, and finally marry, have children, and never work again. The desire of many schools not to waste a ‘man’s place’ on a woman stems from such stereotyped notions. But the facts absolutely contradict these myths about the ‘weaker sex’ and it is time to change our operating assumptions.”

    “While the impact of this amendment would be far-reaching”, Bayh concluded, “it is not a panacea. It is, however, an important first step in the effort to provide for the women of America something that is rightfully theirs—an equal chance to attend the schools of their choice, to develop the skills they want, and to apply those skills with the knowledge that they will have a fair chance to secure the jobs of their choice with equal pay for equal work.”

    Bayh said absolutely nothing about ‘transgender,’ though his bill did state ‘sex,’ which is defined biologically defined by the presence of the XX (female) or the XY (male) genotype in somatic cells.

    In 2014, guidelines were issued by the U.S. Department of Education stating that transgender students are protected from sex-based discrimination under Title IX, and instructing public schools to treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity in single-sex classes, so that a student who identifies as a transgender boy is allowed entry to a boys-only class, and a student who identifies as a transgender girl is allowed entry to a girls-only class. The memo states in part that “…students, including transgender students and students who do not conform to sex stereotypes, are protected from sex-based discrimination under Title IX. Under Title IX, a recipient generally must treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity in all aspects of the planning, implementation, enrollment, operation, and evaluation of single-sex classes.

    There is nothing in the United States Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to delegate power to the federal Department of Education or the Department of Justice to create law or even the suggestion of it.

  • A Time to Act

    Once again I have sent an email to my congressional Representative in Washington, D.C. You should do the same by letting your Representative in Congress know where you stand.

    (If you agree with my position, please feel free to copy and paste, but remember to change the Rep’s name and yours too.)

    Dear Representative Amodei:

    Our federal government has decided to issue a letter of guidance to our public school’s on transgender access to bathrooms. The joint letter from the education and justice departments was sent to schools Friday with guidelines to ensure all students “can attend school in an environment free from discrimination based on sex.”

    While I realize they can ‘issue’ such a letter, it carries absolutely no authority. This is yet another example of federal overreach through the Executive Branch as yet another couple of bureaucratic and unconstitutional cabinets move to usurp power and authority from the Legislative Branch.

    Sir, you must act to stop this illegal activity. Thank you for your time and consideration in this urgent matter.

    Tom Darby
    Spanish Springs, Nevada

    The time for action is NOW.

  • An Open Letter to Nevada’s Federal Representatives

    So that you know that I’m not all smoke and no flame, here is the email I sent to each of Nevada’s federal Representatives. It became obvious during this ‘exercise in liberty,’ that they are using several methods of screening who reach out to them.

    These methods include not having a ‘link ready’ email address on each of their congressional websites. Instead, each have a ‘contact’ button, where upon after entering it you are asked for you zip code with the ‘special four digit’ number.

    If you do not have that four digit number, you must go to the official U.S. Postal Service website to enter your address and find out what that number might be. Honestly, it shouldn’t be this difficult.

    Lastly, I learned rather abruptly that Representative Hardy of Nevada’s 4th District doesn’t want to hear from anyone outside his district. I entered my zip code, followed by those extra four digits, only to be informed I live outside his area of representation.

    So, I called his office in Las Vegas and was told I couldn’t be helped, unless I wanted to relay my message telephonically or via the postal service. Opting to do neither, I called Hardy’s Washington office where the woman who answered the phone told me much the same thing – however offered to deliver my email to the Congressman through her work email.

    I call that service, something our federal representatives see to not understand.

    Here, now is my email to Representatives’ Dina Titus, Cresent Hardy, Joe Heck and Mark Amodei:

    Why are you allowing the Executive Branch of government to usurp the Legislative Branch’s authority when it comes to Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s threat to defund North Carolina?

    The Executive Branch does not hold that power. That power is authorized only to the Legislative Branch via the people, and therefore the Legislative Branch doe not have the authority to delegate that power to the Executive Branch.

    The federal overreach of the Obama Administration, through the Department of Justice must be halted. This responsibility falls to the House of Representatives as prescribed in Article I, section 7, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which reads: “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,” and in Article I, section 9, clause 7, that further states, “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”

    Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

    Sincerely,

    Thomas J. Darby,

    Spanish Springs, Nevada

    (The note I added only to Representative Hardy’s email)

    P.S. Your Congressional email system should serve all citizens, not simply the select few who live in the 4th District. It is a shame that I must rely on a staff member from your office to relay an email to you and not directly submit the same to you in person. Please convey my appreciation to Emily Moore for her assistance in this matter.

    Thank you, TD

  • Media Censorship at any Level is a Danger

    Look, everyone knows that Facebook censors Conservative stories in its ‘Trending Topics’ feed, though they deny it. They are a private company and can do with their product as they wish.

    But what’s difficult to understand is how Congress has any oversight responsibilities towards this private social-media company. When South Dakota Republican Senator (and supposed Conservative) John Thune became a leading opponent of net neutrality, he made the case that any political interference in how the Internet operates is inherently unacceptable.

    Now, he’s supporting the notion of Congress investigating how Facebook decides what to share in it’s feed –and that is a threat to free speech. Members of Congress and others may take issue with Facebook’s editorial decision-making, but the First Amendment leaves no room for Congress to investigate or otherwise insert itself into Facebook’s business.

    It’s clear Congress has yet to learn the lesson it taught us when it authorized the 2008 federal take-over of car companies, banking institutions and the nation’s healthcare system.

  • Loretta Lynch, the Liar

    Yesterday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch held a press conference announcing that the Department of Justice is suing the North Carolina about House Bill 2, signed into law March 23, 2016. Officially known as ‘An Act to Provide for Single-sex Multiple Occupancy Bathroom and Changing Facilities in Schools and Public Agencies and to Create Statewide Consistency in Regulation of Employment and Public Accommodations,’ and legislates that individuals may only use restrooms that correspond to the sex on their birth certificates.

    Several times, Lynch lied as she spoke:

    “In so doing, the legislature and the governor placed North Carolina in direct opposition to federal laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex and gender identity.”

    The specific federal law she is citing is the 1964 Civil Rights Act’ which outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It does not include ‘gender identity,’ and ‘sex’ under this law is defined as biological at birth.

    “While the lawsuit currently seeks declaratory relief, I want to note that we retain the option of curtailing federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina as this case proceeds.”

    The Department of Justice, which falls under the Executive branch, does not have the authority to halt the funding of any establishment. That power is only given to the Congress, which is delegated to that body by the State’s and thus the people.

    “And it’s about the founding ideals that have led this country – haltingly but inexorably – in the direction of fairness, inclusion and equality for all Americans.”

    Those three words, ‘fairness, inclusion, equality,’ do not appear in the U.S. Constitution and therefore cannot be expressed as ‘founding ideals.’ Meanwhile, ‘life, liberty, happiness,’ do appear in the Declaration of Independence.

    “And we saw it in the proliferation of state bans on same-sex unions intended to stifle any hope that gay and lesbian Americans might one day be afforded the right to marry. That right, of course, is now recognized as a guarantee embedded in our Constitution, and in the wake of that historic triumph, we have seen bill after bill in state after state taking aim at the LGBT community.”

    For such a ‘right’ to be ‘embedded in our Constitution,’ it would first have to be passed by Congress and then ratified by the States. Instead, she is choosing to confuse a supreme Court opinion with an Article 5 activity that must first begin in the Legislative Branch and not the Judicial Branch.

    “Let me also speak directly to the transgender community itself. Some of you have lived freely for decades. Others of you are still wondering how you can possibly live the lives you were born to lead. But no matter how isolated or scared you may feel today, the Department of Justice and the entire Obama Administration wants you to know that we see you; we stand with you; and we will do everything we can to protect you going forward.”

    Finally, Lynch has no Constitutional understanding of her position within the federal government. She does not work for the DOJ or the Obama Administration as she contends. She is sworn to uphold and defend the entire U.S. Constitution, not create ‘new law’ protecting the rights of a singular population, but the rights of all.

  • Bridgette Bottemiller-Mitchell, 1963-2016

    The first time I met Bridgette things were fairly formal. Her father, Ron, hired me to run their PhotoKis machine for Ron Villa Pharmacy’s new one-hour photo lab in McKinleyville, California.

    The second time I saw her, she blew me away with, “Why, hello gorgeous!” I walked around flattered as flattered could be for a couple of days, until I realized that was her greeting for most everyone she knew.

    Today, I’m sitting here at my desk feeling sad at the knowledge of her passing on April 28, 2016. I think she was diagnosed with cancer sometime in 2015, but I didn’t realize how bad it had become until she said the disease was pressing on her spine, causing her pain.

    Bridgette was born in Fort Bragg, California, Christmas day, 1963 to Betty and Ron Bottemiller. She grew up in Bayside, near Eureka, went to school in Arcata and then worked as her father’s bookkeeper at the pharmacy.

    She’s survived by her two children, Clara and Matthew, her sisters, Connie and Kristy and mom, Betty. She is preceded in death by her dad, Ron, who passed away in 2013 and her husband David Mitchell, who died in 2009.

    For me, her smile, laughter and good cheer will always hold a special place in my heart. This, and every time I see a red chili in a plate of chinese food, like the one that nearly killed me during a lunch date she and I had at a restaurant in Arcata, where she laughed so hard and so long that she nearly pee’d herself.

    I’ll miss you, Bridge.