Effor.com

I listen to the Dave Ramsey show everyday – well, as much of it as I can while driving home from work.  Dave is a smart, common sense guy, and he says a ton of stuff that I agree with wholeheartedly.  You will not go wrong if you follow his advice, and I strongly urge you to listen to him (podcast available on website) and to check out his website at DaveRamsey.com.

Let me put it this way, if more people had listened to Dave and followed his advice, this current financial crisis would not have happened.  The current crisis (I keep saying “current crisis” because the government ALWAYS has some crisis – it’s the way they convince you to go along with stupid ideas that you’d normally spit on) was caused by government policies which encouraged people to borrow too much money.  Period.

Dave has always encouraged (and encouraged is too mild of term!) people to get out of debt.  All debt.  No exceptions.  And he gives great practical advice  on how to do it.  His plan works, and it will also eliminate those fights about money with your spouse.  I know from experience, because my wife and I get along much better since we started following a written budget.

Go to his site, download the podcasts, listen to him live, whatever works for you.  But you need to listen to him and follow his advice.

After having said all of that, there are two things he says with which I disagree.  This is not meant to antagonize anyone, but simply to say that I don’t think Dave is 100% right on his advice.

1. Dave is a Christian, and he encourages people to tithe literally.  10% off the top to your church.  (I’m a benevolent Atheist, who thinks that religion is one of mankind’s greatest vices.  But that’s my opinion, you are free to practice whatever faith you wish.)
2. Buy and hold investing.  (See my previous post Bye-bye to buy and hold for the basics of why I disagree with that philosophy.)

The point of this post is not to point out the area’s with which I disagree with Dave, but to talk about something he posted on his website today.  He posted a link to a report called “The Wisdom of Great Investors” which supports his long term buy and hold advice.  (I assume it’s all about buy and hold from skimming through it.  If it is what it looks like, I’ll post again and tell you why I think they are wrong.)

On a side note, I admire Dave Ramsey for “practicing what he preaches”.  The report is free, and neither he nor the company who allowed him to distribute it are making any money off of giving it away.  Dave said that he doesn’t have any relationship with the company, and I believe him.

In case it’s only on his site for a limited time, you can also read the report here.  The Wisdom of Great Investors.  (Since they’re distributing it free, I assume this is ok.  If Davis Advisors asks, I will remove this link since it is their report.)

But I’m going to read the report later and not simply tell you what I think is wrong in it, but why I think it’s wrong.  After all, if I simply state an opinion, so what?

But if I can explain the reasoning behind my opinion to you, maybe I’ll convince you that I’m right and change your attitude and behavior regarding investing.  And that will lead you to change your attitude and reasoning towards money, which will lead you to change whatever monetary theory (if any) you currently hold, and perhaps I’ll eventually convince enough people that we can change the government back to something approximating what the Founders intended it to be.

I know it’s a long shot, but I have to try.  One step at a time, I hope to get people to think rationally, and not simply instinctively react to what happens.

gk

Share on Facebook

I’m just sitting here, minding my own business, peacefully surfing through the local news tonight, when I see this story in the Knoxville News Sentinel.  It’s titled “Knox schools say they don’t teach human evolution, but how the process relates to all life”.

The story starts out with this:

“We have the purpose of preventing bigots and ignoramuses from controlling the education of the United States.”

- Clarence Darrow, defense attorney during the Scopes trial in Dayton, Tenn., 1925

About 84 years ago, Tennessee was thrust into the international spotlight when biology teacher John Scopes went to trial in Rhea County and was found guilty of violating a state law that banned the teaching of human evolution in public schools.

While the state law was finally repealed in 1968, the teaching of evolution based on the theories of Charles Darwin is still a contentious subject.

Why is this “still a contentious subject” in Tennessee?  Why haven’t people in Tennessee learned from the debacle of the Scopes trial over 80 years ago?  Has anyone – anyone at all – produced a better explanation to explain how we developed?  Not that I’ve seen.  Note:  “God did it” isn’t an explanation anymore than “because I said so” explains something to a child.

“The fact that this debate continues is a sign that we missed our target to educate people about the scientific process,” said Becky Ashe, science supervisor for Knox County Schools.

“Scientific process” is simply another way to say “scientific theory”, but Ms Ashe wants to avoid that word because it’ll offend someone.  Since most of what I write offends someone, I don’t have that restriction.  Check out the definition of “scientific method” on webster.com and you’ll see this: principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.

Scientists would have abandoned evolution long ago if it didn’t meet the above requirements – especially regarding the “formulation and testing of hypotheses.”  That’s the true test of any theory – does it correctly predict what will happen in a given set of circumstances.  Just like the theory of relativity, which predicted the atomic bomb, the bending of light by gravity, and the relative slowdown in time experienced at high speeds.  All of which have been tested and confirmed by numerous experiments.  If you need evidence, simply look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Darwin’s theory of evolution is in the same class as Einstein’s theory of relativity.  It’s been confirmed by numerous experiments and observations.  There’s not a single bit of evidence that contradicts it.  But yet it’s still controversial in Tennessee – and Kansas, and wherever else ignorant people congregate in sufficient numbers.

The KnoxNews.com story I referenced in the first sentence of this posts also contains this paragraph: “A theory, to a scientist, is not just a guess. A theory is an overarching, unifying concept that is supported by, and explains, relationships between many different types of data and observations from different fields of inquiry. Thus, the theory of gravity explains why an apple falls from a tree, why the earth circles the sun, and why we don’t all go flying off the earth as it spins. So yes, we should teach the theory of gravity, atomic theory, cell theory, the theory of relativity and the theory of evolution by natural selection. … I know of no scientific alternatives to this theory. I am aware of a number of mythologies that address the creation of Earth and mankind, but they are not science and should not be taught in science classes,” Wellman said.”

Read that last line again – “I am aware of a number of mythologies that address the creation of Earth and mankind, but they are not science and should not be taught in science classes.” Amen to that!

Biblical creation myths fall into the same class as Hindu creation myths.  And African tribal creation myths.  And Japanese Shinto creation myths.  None of them have A SINGLE SHRED OF EVIDENCE to back up their claims.  Yet they all claim to be the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help me god.  And they want it taught in public schools.  And they wonder why they’re thought of as backwards hicks.

This is coming from a guy who grew up in a town of less than 100 in rural Missouri – I know all about hicks – I are one.    But that doesn’t mean I can’t learn and grow out of it.  Eventually.

And yet Tennessee allows ignorant parents to opt out of having evolution taught to their kids if they sign a waiver – which produces yet another generation of people ignorant of science.  Future scientists would do well to avoid this state if they’d like to learn anything that would actually help them learn to be scientists.

Hmmm….  This turned into a rant.  Oh well, deal with it.

Darwin’s 200th birthday is coming up on Feb 12th.  Read all about him here.  You can read his book “On the Origin of Species” online (or download it) in PDF format here.  Project Gutenberg has a plain text version available here.  Enjoy!

gk

Share on Facebook

Stories like this one in the Knoxville News Sentinel today are popular tear jerker’s – kind of like any film with Hugh Grant and Julia Roberts – but they make no sense.

The story I referenced is headlined “A family’s faith helps them find the best gift of all” and it’s replete with statements like “They’re thankful for friends and family, acquaintances and complete strangers, who all prayed ceaselessly for Kara’s recovery, and for their Lord, who they believe listened to their prayers and made Kara’s body strong enough to withstand a very aggressive cancer and equally aggressive treatment.”

And – “Every entry, be the news good or bad, called on Kara’s “prayer warriors” and praised God.“  along with “But prayer can put Kara in that good percentage, the Lees believe, and there’s no shortage of people praying for Kara. Even a decal on the Lees’ car urges, “Pray for Kara.”

Ok, I understand that many people are unable to cope with their problems, and that it’s helpful for them to pawn the responsibility off onto God – so they can then sit back and say “it was God’s will” no matter what happens.   But come on – does anyone really believe that God cured her cancer?

Don’t you think medical schools (where actual science must be taught if the doctors are to be able to do anything) had something to do with it?   How about the doctors’ willingness to fore go their 20’s while they were studying and working their butts off?   Do you know of any doctors who got their medical training during a theology course at a bible college?

Would you trust one of them to treat your appendicitis?  Thought so.

gk

Share on Facebook

In case anyone is interested, here’s a link to the search warrant for David Adkisson’s home.  It’s linked from WBIR’s site, as the Knoxville News Sentinel is once again way behind the other local media in publishing up to date information.

Warrant #1

Warrant #2

I also have copies of the warrants stored locally in case WBIR is forced to remove them.  As these are public documents, they shouldn’t be made unavailable to the public, but not much surprises me regarding the local government anymore.

gk

Share on Facebook

The Knoxville News Sentinel deleted a lot of comments on its’ story during the day Sunday.  I left a few comments regarding deleting the comments and their coverage of the story in general.  Guess what – my comments were deleted….  Here’s what they posted as a reason this morning:

Posted by KNSemily on July 28, 2008 at 11:18 a.m.

Hi everyone,
My inbox is getting slammed with flagged comments and I’m going to start being pretty strict with this as we are on a national stage right now. So heads up: if KNS staff finds your comments to be off-topic, “unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, vulgar, obscene, profane, pornographic, or otherwise objectionable”, as stated in our user agreement, they will be deleted. Please be nice. This is a terrible thing that happened in our backyards and we should be supporting each other, not insulting or discrediting each other’s religious beliefs, etc. I am going to interpret “off-topic” very broadly.

Comments which have since been deleted (I know because I continually monitored the site yesterday) included religious views, facts about the church policy regarding gays and lesbians, and many that criticized the News Sentinel for being the last website in town to provide updates.

Not one that I remember could be construed as meeting their criteria for deletion.   Unless they simply considered it “objectionable” because they didn’t like the content.  I’d be willing to bet that they found a lot of it “objectionable” because they “objected” to someone saying that their coverage sucked yesterday.

Sure, there were many ignorant comments posted by ignorant people – how will deleting them ever help these people become less ignorant?  How will the rest of the community ever understand the hate (from some) that lingers under the surface, just waiting to explode into violence?

Ummm – isn’t that what happened here yesterday?.

Speaking of objectionable, check out the headline on this story in the News Sentinel tonight.

Given the News Sentinels’ proclivity in deleting information, I’m copying it here.  Verbatim.

Bill O’Reilly, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity on accused shooter’s reading list

4-page letter outlines frustration, hatred of 'liberal movement'

Here’s an excerpt:

Inside the house, officers found “Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder” by radio talk show host Michael Savage, “Let Freedom Ring” by talk show host Sean Hannity, and “The O’Reilly Factor,” by television talk show host Bill O’Reilly.

None of the national media I checked tonight (CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, FoxNews, etc) mention this – and they’re right not to bring it up.  Any well-read person is going to have a wide variety of books in their home.  I have two copies of the Bible, a Book of Mormon, and a Koran in my house.

I also have books by Robert Heinlein, Ayn Rand, a 13 volume “Story of Civilization” by Will Durant, Rachel Carson, Dave Barry, and lots of others.

Right-wingers think I’m a liberal because I support the ACLU, legalizing drugs and prostitution; those on the left think I’m a conservative because I support the NRA, Constitutional Law, and fiscal responsibility.  Guess what – I’m a Libertarian and neither of those labels apply to me.  Live and let live is what I’m all about.

There are probably 1500 books in my house right now – I guarantee that some of them are “objectionable” to someone.  Does that make me anything – other than well read?  Is that motivation for me to shoot up a church?  I don’t think so!

There’s lots more, but if you’re looking for coverage of the shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church (TVUUC) in Knoxville, I suggest WBIR.com or pick one from this list at Google News.

I may add to this later if I read something else that ticks me off!    My posts are normally carried as part of the Knoxville Blog Network on the News Sentinel – let’s see if they have the guts to include this one….

gk

Share on Facebook

George Carlin died yesterday.  I for one will miss him.  From providing cutting social commentary, to setting legal precedents, to forcing people to question things they were taught as children – George enlightened millions.

I find it curious that the news stories about George Carlin (that I read) all – without exception – talked about the Supreme Court decision regarding his “Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television” skit.  Some of the stories mentioned that the decision (FCC v. PACIFICA FOUNDATION, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)) established the rules for broadacst “decency” that we still use today.

But not a single one actually mentioned ANY of the “Seven Words”.  I thought we’d come further than that.  And by not mentioning the words, they missed the point of the skit entirely. 

Words are merely names we give to thoughts and things and actions.  In and of themselves, words mean nothing.  A word is simply a sound – why are some sounds ok and others “filthy” or “dirty” or “obscene”? 

In keeping with the spirit of Carlin’s intent, here is the original, unedited transcript – straight from the Supreme Court decision at FindLaw.  Ever wonder why it’s ok to print (or say) these words on the Internet?  It’s (in part) thanks to George Carlin. 

Here we go – enjoy! 

gk

(All that which follows is pure George – straight from the Supreme Court transcript.)

Aruba-du, ruba-tu, ruba-tu. I was thinking about the curse words and the swear words, the cuss words and the words that you can’t say, that you’re not supposed to say all the time, [']cause words or people into words want to hear your words.

Some guys like to record your words and sell them back to you if they can, (laughter) listen in on the telephone, write down what words you say. A guy who used to be in Washington knew that his phone was tapped, used to answer, Fuck Hoover, yes, go ahead. (laughter)

Okay, I was thinking one night about the words you couldn’t say on the public, ah, airwaves, um, the ones you definitely wouldn’t say, ever, [']cause I heard a lady say bitch one night on television, and it was cool like she was talking about, you know, ah, well, the bitch is the first one to notice that in the litter Johnie right (murmur) Right. And, uh, bastard you can say, and hell and damn so I have to figure out which ones you couldn’t and ever and it came down to seven but the list is open to amendment, and in fact, has been changed, uh, by now, ha, a lot of people pointed things out to me, and I noticed some myself.

The original seven words were, shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, mother-fucker, and tits. Those are the ones that will curve your spine, grow hair on your hands and (laughter) maybe, even bring us, God help us, peace without honor (laughter) um, and a bourbon. (laughter) And now the first thing that we noticed was that word fuck was really repeated in there because the word motherfucker is a compound word and it’s another form of the word fuck. (laughter) You want to be a purist it doesn’t really – it can’t be on the list of basic words.

Also, cocksucker is a compound word and neither half of that is really dirty. The word – the half sucker that’s merely suggestive (laughter) and the word cock is a half-way dirty word, 50% dirty – dirty half the time, depending on what you mean by it. (laughter)

Uh, remember when you first heard it, like in 6th grade, you used to giggle. And the cock crowed three times, heh (laughter) the cock – three times. It’s in the Bible, cock in the Bible. (laughter) And the first time you heard about a cock-fight, remember – What? Huh? naw. It ain’t that, are you stupid? man. (laughter, clapping) It’s chickens, you know, (laughter)

Then you have the four letter words from the old Anglo-Saxon fame. Uh, shit and fuck. The word shit, uh, is an interesting kind of word in that the middle class has never really accepted it and approved it. They use it like, crazy but it’s not really okay. It’s still a rude, dirty, old kind of gushy word. (laughter) They don’t like that, but they say it, like, they say it like, a lady now in a middle-class home, you’ll hear most of the time she says it as an expletive, you know, it’s out of her mouth before she knows. She says, Oh shit oh shit, (laughter) oh shit. If she drops something, Oh, the shit hurt the broccoli. Shit. Thank you. (footsteps fading away) (papers ruffling)

Read it! (from audience)

Shit! (laughter) I won the Grammy, man, for the comedy album. Isn’t that groovy? (clapping, whistling) (murmur) That’s true. Thank you. Thank you man. Yeah. (murmur) (continuous clapping) Thank you man. Thank you. Thank you very much, man. Thank, no, (end of continuous clapping) for that and for the Grammy, man, [']cause (laughter) that’s based on people liking it man, yeh, that’s ah, that’s okay man. (laughter) Let’s let that go, man. I got my Grammy. I can let my hair hang down now, shit. (laughter) Ha! So!

Now the word shit is okay for the man. At work you can say it like crazy. Mostly figuratively, Get that shit out of here,  will ya? I don’t want to see that shit anymore. I can’t cut that shit, buddy. I’ve had that shit up to here. I think you’re full of shit myself. (laughter) He don’t know shit from Shinola. (laughter) you know that? (laughter) Always wondered how the Shinola people felt about that (laughter) Hi, I’m the new man from Shinola. (laughter) Hi, how are ya? Nice to see ya. (laughter) How are ya? (laughter) Boy, I don’t know whether to shit or wind my watch. (laughter) Guess, I’ll shit on my watch. (laughter) Oh, the shit is going to hit de fan. (laughter) Built like a brick shit-house. (laughter) Up, he’s up shit’s creek. (laughter) He’s had it. (laughter) He hit me, I’m sorry. (laughter) Hot shit, holy shit, tough shit, eat shit, (laughter) shit-eating grin. Uh, whoever thought of that was ill. (murmur laughter) He had a shit-eating grin! He had a what? (laughter) Shit on a stick. (laughter) Shit in a handbag. I always like that. He ain’t worth shit in a handbag. (laughter) Shitty. He acted real shitty. (laughter) You know what I mean? (laughter) I got the money back, but a real shitty attitude. Heh, he had a shit-fit. (laughter) Wow! Shit-fit. Whew! Glad I wasn’t there. (murmur, laughter) All the animals – Bull shit, horse shit, cow shit, rat shit, bat shit. (laughter) First time I heard bat shit, I really came apart. A guy in Oklahoma, Boggs, said it, man. Aw! Bat shit. (laughter) Vera reminded me of that last night, ah (murmur). Snake shit, slicker than owl shit. (laughter) Get your shit together. Shit or get off the pot. (laughter) I got a shit-load full of them. (laughter) I got a shit-pot full, all right. Shit-head, shit-heel, shit in your heart, shit for brains, (laughter) shit-face, heh (laughter) I always try to think how that could have originated; the first guy that said that. Somebody got drunk and fell in some shit, you know. (laughter) Hey, I’m shit-face. (laughter) Shit-face, today. (laughter) Anyway, enough of that shit. (laughter)

The big one, the word fuck that’s the one that hangs them up the most. [']Cause in a lot of cases that’s the very act that hangs them up the most. So, it’s natural that the word would, uh, have the same effect. It’s a great word, fuck, nice word, easy word, cute word, kind of. Easy word to say. One syllable, short u. (laughter) Fuck. (Murmur) You know, it’s easy. Starts with a nice soft sound fuh ends with a kuh. Right? (laughter) A little something for everyone. Fuck (laughter) Good word. Kind of a proud word, too. Who are you? I am FUCK. (laughter) FUCK OF THE MOUNTAIN. (laughter) Tune in again next week to FUCK OF THE MOUNTAIN. (laughter) It’s an interesting word too, [']cause it’s got a double kind of a life – personality – dual, you know, whatever the right phrase is. It leads a double life, the word fuck. First of all, it means, sometimes, most of the time, fuck. What does it mean? It means to make love. Right? We’re going to make love, yeh, we’re going to fuck, yeh, we’re going to fuck, yeh, we’re going to make love. (laughter) we’re really going to fuck, yeh, we’re going to make love. Right? And it also means the beginning of life, it’s the act that begins life, so there’s the word hanging around with words like love, and life, and yet on the other hand, it’s also a word that we really use to hurt each other with, man. It’s a heavy. It’s one that you have toward the end of the argument. (laughter) Right? (laughter) You finally can’t make out. Oh, fuck you man. I said, fuck you. (laughter, murmur) Stupid fuck. (laughter) Fuck you and everybody that looks like you. (laughter) man. It would be nice to change the movies that we already have and substitute the word fuck for the word kill, wherever we could, and some of those movie cliches would change a little bit. Madfuckers still on the loose. Stop me before I fuck again. Fuck the ump, fuck the ump, fuck the ump, fuck the ump, fuck the ump. Easy on the clutch Bill, you’ll fuck that engine again. (laughter)

The other shit one was, I don’t give a shit. Like it’s worth something, you know? (laughter) I don’t give a shit. Hey, well, I don’t take no shit, (laughter) you know what I mean? You know why I don’t take no shit? (laughter) [']Cause I don’t give a shit. (laughter) If I give a shit, I would have to pack shit. (laughter) But I don’t pack no shit cause I don’t give a shit. (laughter) You wouldn’t shit me, would you? (laughter) That’s a joke when you’re a kid with a worm looking out the bird’s ass. You wouldn’t shit me, would you? (laughter) It’s an eight-year-old joke but a good one. (laughter) T

he additions to the list. I found three more words that had to be put on the list of words you could never say on television, and they were fart, turd and twat, those three. (laughter)

Fart, we talked about, it’s harmless It’s like tits, it’s a cutie word, no problem. Turd, you can’t say but who wants to, you know? (laughter) The subject never comes up on the panel so I’m not worried about that one. Now the word twat is an interesting word. Twat! Yeh, right in the twat. (laughter) Twat is an interesting word because it’s the only one I know of, the only slang word applying to the, a part of the sexual anatomy that doesn’t have another meaning to it. Like, ah, snatch, box and pussy all have other meanings, man. Even in a Walt Disney movie, you can say, We’re going to snatch that pussy and put him in a box and bring him on the airplane. (murmur, laughter) Everybody loves it. The twat stands alone, man, as it should. And two-way words. Ah, ass is okay providing you’re riding into town on a religious feast day. (laughter) You can’t say, up your ass. (laughter) You can say, stuff it! (murmur) There are certain things you can say its weird but you can just come so close. Before I cut, I, uh, want to, ah, thank you for listening to my words, man, fellow, uh space travelers. Thank you man for tonight and thank you also. (clapping whistling)

Share on Facebook

I can’t believe that just a few months after letting one kid die, these religious nutcases have let another child die.  I’m not kidding – it’s the same group! 

After I disagreed with what the state did in Texas (the state couldn’t prove a damn thing and had no reason for taking the kids away from their parents) I’m on the other side in this one.  I can’t believe that after parents have been charged with manslaughter for letting a 15 month old kid die,  the state allowed the same church to withhold treatment from other kids – and now a 16 year old is dead.

It’s time to put these idiots into a chair and watch the smoke disappear into the sunset as they fry….  How many of their kids will we allow them to kill before the kids are removed from this insane environment?

gk

Share on Facebook

As I said before, Texas had no right (and violated several amendments in the Bill of Rights) ro take children from their parents who are members of the FLDS.  At last they are being returned to their homes.

CNN says a Texas judge issued an order Monday allowing parents of hundreds of children seized from a polygamist sect to begin picking up their kids.

With one exception, Judge Barbara Walther told the Department of Family and Protective Services to allow parents to pick up the 440 children starting 10 a.m. Monday.

It’s about time!  What business is it of the state to determine the type a relationship consenting adults wish to have with each other?  IMHO, none. 

Polygamy should be legal, as should homosexual marriages.  I have a hard enough time with one wife – I would probably go insane with two, but it’s no skin off of my back if someone wants to get married.  I don’t care who they get married to.

gk

Share on Facebook

Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good.  Especially regarding news stories and commenting about them…. 

Regarding the FLDS polygamy case, it was just yesterday I said ”the state has based their entire case on anonymous “calls” that may be a hoax.”   I then listed the many Constitutional issues that I saw with the case, and related it to the rights we’ve seen eroded in the “war on terror”.

Today, a Texas State Court of Appeals ruled that the state had no right to remove the children.  Better late than never, but that’s little consolation to those parents and children who were wrongfully separated back in April.

A CNN story tonight says “Flanked by the FLDS mothers represented in the case, Balovich said authorities considered the YFZ Ranch one household, an assertion with which the appeals court did not agree.

Therefore, proving that there was abuse in one household did not mean the state could apply that behavior to the entire ranch.”

Balovichs’ statement makes sense to me.  Imagine if one person in your subdivision was suspected of abuse, so they took everyones’ kids away.  It’s the same thing.

The CNN story also has this little tidbit: “Police have alleged that a family shelter crisis line received multiple calls March 29 and 30 from a caller claiming to be Sarah Jessop Barlow, age 16.

At least one of the telephones used by “Sarah Barlow” has been traced to a Colorado woman. Police say Rozita Swinton is a person of interest in connection with the reports of abuse at the ranch, but she has not been charged. She does, however, face a charge of providing a false report to authorities in a Colorado case.”

In other words, the facts so far publish are indicating that the entire case is made up.  Someone in Colorado evidently made up the story and called a hotline, so hundreds of kids and parents have been uprooted and falsely accused.  

How many millions of tax dollars has the state wasted on this case so far?  How much money has gone to pay foster parents, to pay for temporary shelter and meals for the women, etc?

Will people in Texas eventually stand up and say “enough is enough”?  Will they prosecute (or sue) the people behind this fraud?  Will they eventually say “go away and leave me the hell alone!” to the state?  One can only hope….

gk

Share on Facebook

I haven’t said anything about the Texas state raid of the “polygamist compound” but I read a story tonight on FoxNews that kinda ticks me off.  When I get ticked off I need to say something about it, so here goes….

The story is about a supposedly underaged girl who gave birth while in state custody.  The state immediately took the child away and placed it in foster care.  Is this standard in Texas?  Does the state take all children born to underage mothers away from the parents?  I sure hope not!

Another aspect of this case is that the supposed “underage” mother claims to be 22 years old.  Her attorney said “She is 22.”  Shouldn’t the state be required to show some evidence (or at least probable cause) before taking kids from their parents?

But this is the part of the story that ticked me off: 

Child welfare officials and state troopers raided the FLDS’s Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado after a domestic violence shelter received calls from someone claiming to be an abused 16-year-old girl. The girl has never been found and authorities are investigating whether the calls were a hoax.

In other words, the state has based their entire case on anonymous “calls” that may be a hoax.  From what I can tell, Texas has violated the:

Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrents shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.  (Who issued the warrant without having the “16-year-old girl” testify “by Oath or affirmation?”)

Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.  (These people have been deprived of liberty and their property – even their kids! – taken away with no “due process” that I’ve seen.)

Sixth Amendment: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.   (What have these people been charged with?  Who are the witnesses?  Have they been allowed to “confront” (question) the witnesses?)

Eighth Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.  (Why haven’t these people been released on bail?  I know they can’t be released on bail – because they haven’t been charged with a crime.  Yet the state is holding them against their will without charging them with a crime.  And if taking your kids away with no reason given isn’t “cruel and unusual punishment”, what is?)

Hmmm….  Sounds kinda like Gitmo….   All of you who don’t think it’s a problem to hold people indefinitely without charging them with a crime, raise your hands….  Now, I want all of you with your hands raised to spell Lettre de cachet.

Question: Why is this any different than the people we’re holding in relation to terrorism? 

Answer:  It’s not.  What goes around comes around – when Bush decided it was ok to hold even one person without following the Constitution, we all lost our basic rights.  I hope someone sues the state for this.

gk

Share on Facebook