2011 Death & Taxes Poster

"Death and Taxes" is a large representational graph and poster of the federal budget. It contains over 500 programs and departments and almost every program that receives over 200 million dollars annually. The data is straight from the president's 2011 budget request and will be debated, amended, and approved by Congress to begin the fiscal year. All of the item circles are proportional in size to their funding levels for visual comparison and the percentage change from both 2010 and 2001 is included so you can spot trends.



"Death and Taxes" is more than just numbers. It is a uniquely revealing look at our national priorities that fluctuate and almost always expand yearly according to the wishes of the President, the power of Congress, and (to some extent) the will of the people. Thousands of pages of raw data have been boiled down to one poster that provides the most open and accessible record of our nations' spending you will ever find. Everyone who taxes has paid for a part of everything in the poster.

A substantial part of this spending is for unconstitutional and anti-liberty budget items. It would be interesting to compare these 500+ federal programs with the strictly limited 17-20 (depending how you count them) enumerated powers given to the federal government through the US Constitution by the people. In fact, such a study must be done and all extra-constitutional laws, rules, policies, and agencies must be phased out!

Every congressman should have a copy of this poster on his office wall and should, with his full staff, take the time to ponder the conflicts between its content an that of the Constitution while thoughtfully reviewing his oath of office

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

.Voters would do well to do the same.

The overwhelming nature of this poster could easily be resolved if Congress would conduct an audit of all laws, rules, policies, programs, and agencies followed by legislation to phase out all laws, rules, policies, programs, and agencies which are outside the limits placed on the federal government by the US Constitution. Congress should also enact legislation requiring that all new or expanded laws, rules, policies, programs, and agencies have a maximum 10-year sunset.

No-knock police raids and the American police state

Police raids on the wrong house are not infrequent and innocent homeowners have been killed in such raids. Also, thugs have been known to shout "FBI!" or "Police!" when breaking into a home.

So, how is a homeowner -- felon or responsible citizen alike -- supposed to respond when somebody knocks down his door in the middle of the night -- submit unquestioningly to whomever it is -- police or axe murderer?

on the 16th of September, Todd Blair was gunned down by three well-placed bullets in the first seconds of a no-knock police raid on his home because of suspected drug activity.



This leaves me asking myself, could I -- a typically law-abiding citizen -- die from police gunfire during the violence and extreme chaos of a no-knock police raid? It seems to be very possible.

That said, a hostile person with a contact weapon -- as Blair had -- within the distance of this shooting is, indeed, capable of causing death or serious bodily injury and the application of deadly force can be justified. Like everyone else, cops want to safely go home after work and that is why they carry a gun. Contrary to popular perception, that gun is not there to protect you or me nor even to enforce the law. They carry a gun because, like you and me, they need the means to protect themselves.

But, how much of a threat was Blair really? The shooting officer had an adrenalin-filled instant to make that critical decision. It has been announced to be justified. Nevertheless, it was police-provoked -- over a now-reported half-once of dope!

I suspect the Blair family civil litigation against the agencies involved in this shooting will be successful -- very profitably.

I have concerns with the procedure for no-knock warrants and I hope that many of these concerns will get a thorough hearing in the lawsuit. I am not convinced that Blair did anything to merit his violent death on September 16.

In the following video, you will see an officer challenge an innocent, homeless, partially deaf Native American woodcarver -- John Williams who was crossing a street while whittling. The act of whittling on a public street cost him his life!



As long as police persist in bullying innocent people (like Williams) and engage in high-risk entries (such as in the Blair case) tragedies will happen unnecessarily. It is far too evident to me that the police have become the law unto themselves to a significant level. We live in a police state and Blair and Williams are among its victims.

The most troubling aspect of these, and similar, stories is that judges who issue no-knock search warrants and police officers who execute them and who stop wood carvers on the street have sworn an oath to the US Constitution which was designed and intended to eliminate government interference into innocent lives and to protect human rights. What happened to the Constitution and its protections?

Citizen, don't ever think that because you are an innocent, responsible person, the police will always leave you alone and that only bad people get the Blair treatment. Such is the denial that has given us asset forfeiture and these extremely dangerous no-knock raids.

The government needs careful watching and tight control. We voters have utterly failed in that role.


Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen


The Emerging Police State


The Making of a Police State


Judicial Tyranny - the New Kings of America?


Lost Rights; The Destruction of American Liberty

Yet another "gun-free" zone failure

Once again, a place where lawful carry of a self-defense firearm is frowned upon, innocent lives were in grave danger. Fortunately, only the intruder was harmed. In this case, it was on the grounds of an LDS (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) temple in a Salt Lake City suburb.

Who needs a gun for self defense on church property? According to some church and public officials, nobody. A church is a sanctuary, after all -- which, it is presumed, even criminals and the insane would surely obey.

Even after the in-church murder of an LDS bishop, the LDS Church stipulates that "Churches are dedicated for the worship of God and as havens from the cares and concerns of the world. The carrying of lethal weapons, concealed or otherwise, within their walls is inappropriate except as required by officers of the law." (Handbook 2: Administering the Church, 21.2.4)

It seems to me that it is unreasonable to presume that persons with criminal intent will obey any law or other prohibition -- even a religious "haven."

"Gun-free" zones are, in reality, disarmed-victim zones where only evil-doers and cops carry guns. Fortunately, this time the cops arrived in time. Most times they can't. This time, worshipers were lucky -- saved only by an observant citizen who called 911 just in time.

If armed security is apporpriate for certain government and church leaders -- even within so-called "gun-free" zones, why must we commoners be expected to do without self-protection other than a cell phone?

Even the Scriptures indicate that defense of self and others is appropriate and necessary:

A righteous man who falters before the wicked is like a murky spring and a polluted well. — Proverbs 25:26

But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. — 1 Timothy 5:8

He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. — Luke 22:36

If the thief be found breaking in, and be smitten so that he dieth, there shall be no bloodguiltiness for him. — Exodus 22:2

Rescue the weak and needy; Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked. — Psalm 82:4

When a strong man, fully armed, guards his house, his possessions are safe. — Luke 11:21

And they were doing that which they felt was the duty which they owed their God; for the Lord had said unto them, and also unto their fathers, that: Inasmuch as ye are not guilty of the first offense, neither the second, ye shall not suffer yourselves to be slain by the hands of your enemies. And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed. Therefore for this cause were the Nephites contending with the Lamanites, to defend themselves, and their families, and their lands, their country, and their rights, and their religion. — Alma 43:46-47

Let us resist evil, and whatsoever evil we cannot resist with our words, yea, such as rebellions and dissensions, let us resist them with our swords, that we may retain our freedom. — Alma 61:14

"Gun-free" zones such as churches, schools, businesses, government property, etc. must be abolished unless sufficient on-site armed security is provided to foil all criminal attacks on or in that property.

Protect Sacramento-area pilot punished for YouTube video

I been a frequent flyer for some 3 decades. Throughout that period, I have been deeply concerned by serious gaps in airline security which are fully obvious to anyone who cares about security or about defeating security.

I am outraged that a whistleblower is being targeted for identifying a few of the countless dangerous flaws in the lame theatrics that DHS Secretary Janet "The System Worked" Napolitano calls airport security. What we clearly have here, is the heavy hand of a police-state mentality intended to crush criticism through intimidation and force.

The airline pilot who has been singled out in this case is surely concerned about his own safety on the job, knowing that airport security is a sham. I'm sure that all he wants is a consistent and effective security process -- something that Secretary Napolitano and her staff are unwilling and/or are incompetent to do. This attack on the pilot is nothing more than a cover for incompetence and embarrassment.

There are many extremely serious problems in security at US airports. In spite of what TSA and DHS bureaucrats may beleive, pilots who express their concerns about security are not the problem!

Secretary Napolitano must immediately be held publicly accountable for this egregious attack on another honest, frustrated citizen who simply wants to see true security -- not silly DHS and TSA theater with an amateurish plot and horrible actors.

All Legislation Must Cite Constitutional Authority

Any student of the US Constitution knows that the Tenth Amendment states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Unfortunately, this simple but essential separation of powers and check on those powers is all but forgotten. Between an ever-expanding Federal bureaucracy that for decades has crept into many facets of traditionally locally controlled government to a Federal judiciary that time and time again completely ignores the intent of the Tenth Amendment, the Federal government has become wildly inefficient, expensive, and hostile to State and individual rights.

New Jersey's Congressman Scott Garrett has introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives Tuesday that would require all legislation to cite an enumerated power in the Constitution that grants authority for the bill’s mandate.

Garrett’s resolution will prohibit members from manipulating the more ambiguous “general welfare clause” and “necessary and proper clause” and instead require members to isolate specific provisions which make their proposals Constitutional.

The resolution is the direct result of the American people’s cry for Congress to restore the preeminence of the Constitution in law-making and does that by, as the rule would say, passing a non-waivable rule that would require every bill and amendment to have a citation of the specific authority in the Constitution.

Most the federal legislation, regulations, programs, policies, agencies, and debt are excellent examples of the nation's desperate need for Garrett's proposed change in legislative process.

Current practice is for Congress to almost entirely ignore the precious principles of the Constitution and cede the decision of constitutionality to the courts who also ignore or twist the Constitution far too often. This legislative attitude imposes the heavy expense of constitutionality litigation on the States and the people, violates each congressman's solemn oath to the Constitution, and is an egregious betrayal of the people's trust.

Garrett's proposed House Rule is a worthy step in the right direction. I am deeply saddened that nobody in the Senate seems to have the courage, integrity, and respect for the Constitution to introduce a similar resolution in the Senate. I urge every congressman to join this movement and ensure that this rule is immediately implemented in both chambers of Congress.

I also urge Congress to take this a step further and work for immediate enactment of the Enumerated Powers Act to make the intent of Garrett's proposal a permanent part of our legislative process.

In addition to Congressman Garrett's resolution to cite an enumerated power in the Constitution that grants authority for a bill’s mandate, Congress should also adopt a resolution requiring that all new or expanded laws, rules, policies, programs, and agencies have a maximum 10-year sunset.

The overwhelming abuses and cost of the federal government be resolved if Congress would conduct an audit of all laws, rules, policies, programs, and agencies followed by legislation to phase out all laws, rules, policies, programs, and agencies which are outside the limits placed on the federal government by the US Constitution.

Reign in the BATFE!

The Obama administration just can't stop blaming the Second Amendment and law-abiding American gun owners and gun dealers for violence perpetrated by criminals -- particularly Mexican drug cartels.

In their latest attempt to circumvent and trivialize the US Constitution (and most State Constitutions), Obama and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) are seeking to implement new rules that will subject American gun dealers to additional paperwork requirements to solve an unrelated problem in a foreign nation. To suggest that adding yet another layer of paperwork requirements to American gun dealers will help to stem the violence is just plain stupid! In fact, the new requirement is designed simply and only to intimidate gun buyers.

The new proposed rule will, for the first time, establish the precedent that licensed firearms dealers will be required (by administrative fiat) to report to the government the sale of two or more semi-automatic rifles that are greater that .22 caliber, can accept a detachable magazine, and are purchased by the same person within five business days.

Several points in the new registration scheme simply don't make sense here's one: The Feds want reports on rifles greater than .22 caliber. That would seem to exclude most AR-15s which are .22 caliber (.223 Remington). After the sale, they can be easily converted to shoot a larger-caliber cartridge -- and the Feds won't know about it! Some AR-15s are chambered for calibers larger than .22 caliber and would be reported. The inconsistency and lack of rational thought are overwhelming!

The measure would apply to approximately 8,500 gun dealers in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas. There is no assurance that this foot-in-the-door requirement won't be expanded to other States in the future. The reporting of multiple sales of handguns is already required in all 50 States -- a requirement that must be stopped immediately. There is no evidence that the reporting of multiple sales of handguns has prevented any violent crimes with the reported handguns.

Why would I want to buy multiple guns at once? Well, most importantly, according to the Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the US Constitution, it's none of the government's business! (The government only has an interest if I commit a mala in se crime with any of the guns -- and that's almost always a state or local crime -- not the federal government's concern!) That said, perhaps I want all my children and their spouses and my grandchildren to have the very special gift of sequentially numbered rifles (That'd be a single purchase of two dozen rifles -- all for a legitimate, responsible, Constitutionally-protected purpose.).

The Obama administration and the BATFE intended to bypass the elected representatives of the people (Congress) to impose their new gun control by regulatory fiat as soon as January 5, 2011. It has been delayed, but the final decision on implementing this plan will probably be by the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), headed by Cass Sunstein -- a man who would ban hunting and would allow animals to have legal representation in court.

This mandate will not only violate federal statutory law prohibiting a federal gun registry, it will also give the BATFE another excuse to harass American gun dealers -- while the Obama administration does absolutely nothing to address the problem of border violence -- including the cross-border murder of our citizens and law-enforcement officers.

There is another essential issue here. Normally, federal rule changes are given a 90-day public comment period. This regulation, however, was published in the December 17th Federal Register and comments close in early January, 2011! Not only is the proposed regulation a bad idea, but there are only 3 weeks to receive comments, and that period includes a major holiday season! Why cut the comment period from 90 days to three weeks? Most likely, to sneak it through before anyone catches on. The cover, however, is that chronic organized crime in Mexico can somehow be resolved if treated as an acute US "emergency" for which American rights must be infringed -- an "emergency" which has escalated for decades because of Mexico's internal corruption and our own failed "war on drugs"!

American freedoms, including those protected by the Second Amendment, are not the cause of border or drug-related violence. Rather, as violence increasingly occurs on our side of the border, those God-given rights that are protected by the people's Second Amendment to the people's Constitution become even more important for self-protection.

I urge and expect each member of Congress and of the Obama administration to live up to his or her oath to the Constitution by immediately stopping this egregious abuse of federal power.

Congress and the BATFE leadership must ensure that the BATFE either allows a full 90-day period for public comment or withdraws the regulation. If the BATFE does not comply with this reasonable standard, the BATFE leadership must appear before Congress to explain its legal justification.

Then, Congress must acknowledge that the BATFE is one of the most dangerous and out-of-control agencies ever created by Congress. Congress must abolish the BATFE and consolidate most of the other federal law-enforcement agencies. (There at least 57 of them!) The BATFE is but one of countless examples of the gross negligence by which Congress (staffers, actually) creates legislation that enables and even encourages bureaucrats, judges, and presidents (all of whom, ironically, swear to be faithful to the Constitution) to trample the Constitution.

In the future, the Senate must be extremely careful to ensure that anti-Constitution presidential appointees such as Hillary Clinton, Rahm Emanuel, Eric "My People" Holder, Elena Kagan, Janet "The System Worked" Napolitano, Sonia Sotomayor, Cass Sunstein, and Andrew Traver are never confirmed. No president is ever entitled to appoint anyone who would ignore or undermine the Constitution and the prinicples it outlines. So far, the Senate has been criminally negligent in thus protecting the Constitution.

Let the States manage their own wolf populations!

Federal and State wildlife managers, wildlife scientists and the Bush and Obama Administrations all have agreed that wolf populations far exceed recovery criteria.

Nevertheless, the poorly-managed managed wolf population is doing serious damage to our herds of moose, elk and deer. Wolves are even degrading other natural prey bases! Lack of reasonable wolf control has resulted in the slaughter of an estimated tens of thousands of cattle, sheep, horses and even pets. Hardly the fuzzy little creatures of environmentalist dreams and other fairy tales, wolves are perhaps the most efficient predator species in North America.

Extremist "animal rights" groups like PETA and Defenders of Wildlife continue to exploit legal technicalities and liberal activist judges in a perpetual effort to prevent sound management of wolf populations by state wildlife agencies.

Management of wolf populations must immediately be turned over to state wildlife managers who can better manage the balance between predators and prey than has been demonstrated by bureaucrats in Washington, DC.

In my study of the US Constitution I cannot find where it delegates authority to the federal government to control wildlife in any of the several States. Instead, the 10th Amendment to the Constitution specifically states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The federal government must immediately get out of the business of managing wildlife in any of the States. Passing HR.6028 and S.3919 will be a small step toward restoring sanity to wildlife management and to restoring the proper and wise power restrictions defined by the US Constitution.

Stop the tax deal between Obama and the GOP!

I oppose the tax "deal" between the President and the GOP leadership. It's bad for America because:

• It extends current tax rates for a mere two years. This makes it hard for businesses to make long-term plans and may actually discourage them from hiring. A permanent extension would send a much better signal to the business community.
• It includes a "food safety" bill that will ruin tens of thousands of farmers without making food any safer.
• It reinstates the death tax.
• It extends unemployment benefits without making corresponding cuts elsewhere - expanding the national debt and increasing the employer's cost of hiring new workers.
• It funds unconstitutional and bad-for-America Obamacare for 2011.

I won't be surprised if the final version includes a bunch of back-room deals and unrelated bills catering to special interests. After all, nothing much has "changed"?

This sell-out is an egregious betrayal of the voters who fired this Congress and voted for smaller government.

Congress must reject this deal between the GOP leadership and the acting president and:

• Pass permanent extension of all current income tax rates.
• Pass a temporary government funding resolution of two months so that the next Congress can handle the budget.

Congress must respect the will of the people and give the next Congress a chance to clean up the mess the current Congress made.

There must be no compromise. Compromise on principles always moves the nation in the wrong direction albeit more slowly that the opposition desires.

We need an amendment to the US Constitution that prohibits a "lame duck" Congress from doing anything short of dealing with an act of war.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Language to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has been added or will be added to the Defense Authorization Bill. Language has also been added to the Defense Authorization Bill that constitutes a "Gay Bill of Special Rights."

I am left wondering, how did our nation reach the point where deviant, immoral, and destructive behavior deserves integration into mainstream society and even special treatment? Where will our society and its political leaders draw the line on the expanding acceptance of pathological sexual behavior? Bestiality? Exhibitionism? Incest? Necrophilia? Pedophilia? Polygamy? Rape? Transsexualism? Transvestism?

The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy already grants far too much leniency to homosexuals in the armed forces. As a 23-year military veteran, I urge Congress to vote against the Defense Authorization Act as long as it contains either a "Gay Bill of Special Rights" or the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

There must be no compromise. Compromise on principles always moves the nation in the wrong direction albeit more slowly that the opposition desires.

The 1911 as Utah's Official State Firearm!

The Model 1911 pistol was designed in Utah by John M. Browning. This pistol was designed 100 years ago next year. In spite of its age, it continues to be one of the most widely used pistols for military, police, competition, self-defense, and sporting uses.

To go along with Utah's State Flower and State Bird and to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the introduction of the 1911, Rep. Carl Wimmer has proposed naming the 1911 pistol as the Official State Firearm.

A great idea! I strongly support this proposal.

Congress vs the Constitution and Natural Rights

For those who have read the US Constitution, and especially for those who understand the debates surrounding the creation of the Constitution, the plain language it contains, and the prevailing “original intent” offering context to the document, there are myriad federal laws, rules, policies, and court rulings whose lack of constitutionality are glaringly obvious.

All federal public servants (congressmen, judges, and members of the executive branch) swear an oath to uphold the US Constitution. It is unconscionable for them to enact or enforce anything in defiance to the Supreme law of the Land -- the Constitution. Yet, they do so all the time with the full expectation that the other branches of the government will let them get away with it.

Why must almost everything be a federal crime -- especially the practice of Constitutionally-enumerated rights? Here is an egregious example:

The Second Amendment to the US Constitution says, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The US Supreme Court has confirmed that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right.

In spite of the Constitution's clear and specific restriction on the infringement of the right to arms, Congress and many of the agencies it has created have clearly, defiantly, repeatedly, and willfully infringed on that civil right. For example:

18 USC § 930(a) says, in part, "Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both." Subsection (d) lists some exceptions to the above restriction including "...the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes." Incomprehensibly, several federal agencies, including the National Park Service, do not accept self-defense as a "lawful purpose" for having a weapon in a federal facility.

What is so special about federal facilities, in general, that justifies a blanket denial of a constitutionally-enumerated right? And, what reasoning person really believes that such a prohibition would ever convince a criminal to leave his weapons outside any federal facility?

The US Postal Service has its own, more severe, infringement on Second-Amendment rights: 39 CFR 232.1(l) says, “No person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.” This prohibition clearly was of no help to the two postal workers who were recently shot while at work.

Natural law has given us sufficient restrictions on behaviors which are, in and of themselves, harmful to society and to the natural rights of the people. When lawmakers expand on natural laws, prohibiting or demanding behavior "because we say so" or creating new rights "because we say so", they invariably mess things up.

Instead of focusing on doing something about everything (I say gridlock in Congress is good), perhaps Congress should focus on undoing everything wrong it and the federal courts have done over the past 100+ years.

I urge Congress and the Whitehouse to initiate a full audit of all federal laws, rules, policies, and court rulings that are silly or unwise or counterproductive or unnecessary or that violate the US Constitution and the natural rights of the people. Then, initiate legislation that will make the necessary corrections.

There must be no compromise. Compromise on principles always moves the nation in the wrong direction albeit more slowly that the opposition desires.

Removing all unwise infringement of the Second Amendment found in 18 USC § 930 and 39 CFR 232.1 is a good place to start. History shows that restrictions on firearms have absolutely no effect on criminal behavior.

Taxing the rich

Except for when I mowed the law of the widow next door (she paid 50¢) as a teenager or when I worked for my dad, every one of my employers has been wealthy. Dunno why the anti-success politicians (usually, but not always, Democrats) want to tax the successful into oblivion. Who does Congress think will provide jobs (and pay taxes) once they have eliminated everyone with sufficient money to be comfortable?

A more important question is why so many of us in the working class (usually, but not always, Democrats) want the politicians to tax the successful into oblivion instead of working to join the wealthy. The answer to that is simple: Covetousness. And, covetous is the root of Socialism and the Democrat Party platform.

Except for the aristocratic class in the US (ie the Kennedys and the Bushes), how does one become wealthy? It certainly isn't because of the largess of government. I think the following quotes explain it best:

For the most part, treat consumers pretty well. The way to get rich in business is to create something good, sell it for a reasonable price, acquire a reputation for honesty and keep pleasing customers so they come back for more. — John Stossel, TV consumer reporter

I don't pay good wages because I have a lot of money; I have a lot of money because I pay good wages. — Robert Bosch

Never forget: the secret of creating riches for oneself is to create them for others. — Sir John Templeton

Starting out to make money is the greatest mistake in life. Do what you feel you have a flair for doing, and if you are good enough at it, the money will come. — Greer Garson

The worst crime against working people is a company which fails to operate at a profit. — Samuel Gompers

Recommended reading:

The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People


Costly Returns: Burdens of the US Tax System


The Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Mothers and Fathers Are Going Broke