Column for Sept. 9, 2010

You are not going to find someone who supports the local fire service more than I do. I consider it an essential service to the town and surrounding area. I actually support the levying of a fire tax for people who live outside of the town yet receive fire services from a town or country volunteer department. I have a degree in fire protection and I spent nine years in the fire service. I have a folder full of certifications and certificates and notebooks full of educational materials from classes I have taken over the years. I volunteer my time to serve on the county's Local Emergency Management Planning Committee.

I wrote in favor of the reorganization that the Town of Selma did several years ago when the Town Council decided to hire a full time chief. I believe that Chief McDaniel has done a great job so far. I do not doubt his capable leadership at all.

Yes, you knew that there was a big "but" coming. It has been said that I always have a big "but". But I read with dismay last week's edition of The Selma News. Right on the front page was the story, "Fire Dept. seeks Council approval to charge for auto wrecks".

I realize that every time the fire department is dispatched to a call for service, whether it is the proverbial cat in a tree (not that it really happens), a car wreck, or a full blown house fire, it costs money. There are always going to be costs associated with manpower, equipment, supplies, wear and tear on vehicles, vehicle maintenance, fuel, and the list goes on. I comprehend the concept of wanting to recuperate costs.

However, the fire department, like any other municipal department, has a budget for which they receive tax dollar funding. I expect a municipal government, or any other government for that matter, to spend tax money in order to supply the services they do. To then charge for the services for which we are already taxed amounts to double taxation.

I read the reasoning that the fire department or town could bill the insurance companies of the accident victims. If insurance companies start paying bills associated with emergency response, we all pay for those costs. Insurance companies are not just going to absorb those costs. They are going to pass on those costs to the insured, meaning us taxpaying citizens who already pay for emergency response in the first place. Again, that amounts to double taxation.

It is for this reason that I really despise local government grants and loans from the federal government, since we are taxed on both ends to pay for those, especially loans.

Just this week, my lovely bride and I filled out our passport applications, got our photographs taken, and went to go get them submitted. We are planning a trip or two next year, so we will need passports. We took all of our paperwork to the US Post Office. Would you believe that we were turned away, being told that we had to make an appointment first? At the USPS? I guess I will need an appointment to rent a PO Box or get a money order next.

We already pay taxes to fund the US State Department. On top of that, we just paid $110 a piece for a passport application fee for each of us. Not wanting to have to make an appointment, we went to the Clerk of Court's office the next day to make the application process quicker. There we were charged a $25 fee for each application just for them to process them and send our paperwork to Washington, DC.

On top of that, even if we presented the requisite certified copies of our birth certificates at the time of application at an accepting agency, we still had to send the original certified copies along with the applications. There is a $10 charge each should we need to replace them. The required photographs were $10 per set. All total, we paid $290 for two passports. Now watch me be on some "no travel" list, be stopped at the border by Customs agents, and denied entry into or re-entry from Canada and Mexico.

I view both of these scenarios as double taxation. We pay the government once via our tax dollars to provide services. Then when we utilize the services, we have to pay for them again. The response of fire trucks and emergency response personnel who have dedicated their lives to serving others should not be something for which we pay twice.

Column for Sept. 2, 2010

What has been on my heart for a couple of weeks to share has been prayer. I am a believer in Jesus, the son of God, as my savior and my Lord. I make no apologies for that. I was not always a believer in Christ but I always had a belief in the existence of God. I have always had strong opinions on politics and religion, and those views have been refined over time as my relationship with God and my understanding of history grew.

Since I became a Christian in 1991, I have seen an awful lot in our nation and in our churches; some good, some not so much. One thing that I am reminded of from time to time is that I am supposed to pray for our leaders. I must admit that I have been remiss in my personal prayer life when it comes to praying for our governmental leaders.

Ye Olde King James Bible says in 1Timothy 2:1-4 “I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”

Though I do remember from time to time to stop and pray, I am often quick to comment, instead. Believe it or not, I have been endeavoring a lot over the past several months to be more temperate in the expression of my views and have on many occasions withheld my tongue when I thought I would jump on a topic with both feet.

For several years now, I have contemplated organizing a prayer gathering here in Selma. Whether such a gathering would be once a month or once a week, I have often thought about getting together with other believers who would be willing to gather at some place like the gazebo behind Town Hall some evening for the purpose of praying for the leaders of our nation, our state, our county, and our town.

I have not sat down to look at my calendar yet as to dates and times, but I would love to hear from anyone else so inclined to pray for our leaders. My email address is at the end of every column in this newspaper. You can also find me at the web site within that email address and I am also in the phone book. I am sure you can reach me through this newspaper’s normal communication channels, as well.

Well, enough talking about it, I am going to at least start my dedication to public prayer right here.

Father God, in the name of Jesus I come to you now and I ask the readers of this publication to join me in bringing our requests to you. It is in answer to your instruction to pray so I know that you will hear me and the others who come to you. You ordained human government through civil authorities. I personally ask for your forgiveness for not being slow to speak and slow to anger when it comes to your servants, as you call them in Romans 13.

I thank you, God, for your ordained government in our nation. You, in your grace and wisdom, gave us a long lasting and wonderful form of government that transcends all the way down to our local levels of government. I realize that it takes great wisdom, great moral character, and your hand of guidance to rightfully run such governance. Therefore I ask you to bless every elected, appointed, and hired official in governance over your people and over those who are not your children; the just and the unjust alike. I pray first and foremost that the blessing that Peter spoke of in Acts 3:26 “Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” Let your Spirit have free course to reprove of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment in the hearts of your servants.

I pray that you would grant wisdom to every government official, that they would take decisions according to your will, and that they would be rulers who would truly not be a terror to good works, but to evil.

In my limited space here Lord, this is my pondering and my heart’s cry. I pray it would also be that of every believer, and that every non-believer would be transformed to be one of your own. I thank you for this privilege and opportunity. I love you, the only father I have. Amen.

Column for August 26, 2010

I was at a loss about what to write this week, but one thing kept hitting me every time I read a newspaper, news web site, or local news report today. That was local spending. Every news source seemed to carry some story about local taxes, local spending, local grants received for more spending, and the list goes on.

During my perusing through my favorite sources for news, I found a report from George Mason University that showed that state and local spending in the United States as a whole has increased nearly ten times since 1950. Private spending has only increased five times in the same time period. What does that tell us? Government spending is out of control. Where does government get its money? From taxpaying citizens, which explains why private spending rose only about half of the government rates.

Guilford County is looking at another sales tax increase. North Carolina is looking at tollbooths on I-95. Cities like Philadelphia are requiring people like myself to pay for a business privilege license fee in order to have an internet blog. The cost of the license is $300, regardless of whether the blog is kept as a hobby or as a business, or even if the fee far exceeds any profits from the web site. That is nothing more than sheer governmental greed to feed an insatiable appetite for local spending.

Locally, I have seen grants and loans from the federal government for local spending on police and fire departments, schools and educational equipment, public library system computers, and local road paving projects. One major source of local money supply seems to be the US Department of Agriculture via loans and grants. I fail to see what local water systems, police department facilities, and road paving projects have to do with agriculture.

Just as frustrating to me is the idea that the federal government is making local towns, counties, and states increasingly dependent upon it as a money supply. Either way, the money is from taxation. Taxation comes from our pockets, not some magical, inexhaustible, deep well of cash in Washington, D.C.

When we get taxation on both ends, I am reminded of the admonition from an opponent to the US Constitution's ratification in an Anti-federalist letter written in October of 1787. The author identified himself only as "Federal Farmer" and was thought to possibly be Richard Henry Lee of Virginia, whose resolution was passed by the Continental Congress on July 2, 1776 declaring independence from Great Britain.

In this letter, Federal Farmer (in letter number 3) wrote, "…to lay and collect internal taxes in this extensive country must require a great number of congressional ordinances, immediately operating upon the body of the people; these must continually interfere with the state laws and thereby produce disorder and general dissatisfaction till the one system of laws or the other, operating upon the same subjects, shall be abolished".

Basically he thought that two levels of government attempting to rule on the same topic would clash and cause one or the other to be abolished. Unfortunately, we instead have a huge codependency of one on the other. Both, however, have the same insatiable appetite for tax money. One government is following in the footsteps of the other and taking more and more money from the citizenry to feed itself. Local and state governments following suit have, as I stated, raised local government spending ten fold since 1950 while private spending by contrast has only risen five fold.

As recently as the 1920's local governments did not constantly look to the federal government as a source from which to suckle money. During Calvin Coolidge's administration (a greatly underrated President, in my opinion), there was great flooding along the Mississippi River, far worse than the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Yet the federal government was not in the business of feeding the spending of local and state governments, even in the face of widespread disaster. Nowadays, a town can not pave Main Street or renovate a fire station without looking to Uncle Sam for money to do so.

We fell for this insidious plot decades ago and now it has caught up to us. Our federal deficit has grown (according to the Congressional Budget Office) by $4.4 Trillion since Barack Obama took office only a year and a half ago. States are going bankrupt. States are suckling more borrowed cash from the federal nipple. Local towns are raising taxes to keep up with their smaller yet nonetheless insatiable appetites for control and spending.

I have been decrying this for decades. Now we may have gone well past the rubicon of financial destruction. If so, we have done it to ourselves.

Column for August 19, 2010

Last week I wrote about the facade put on by politicians trying to look good so they will be re-elected. This hypocrisy is especially strong when they want to look like they are doing us constituents a favor by not taking more of our money from us. I also hit upon the hypocrisy of pitching tiny tax cuts and not bothering to try to keep the tax cuts we already had but are going to expire at the end of this year.

I decided that rather than take the word of any one particular media outlet about tax cuts, tax credits, and provisions that are going to expire, I would seek out that information my own self and spend some time reading about them. I found a 48-page document put out by the United States Congress Joint Committee on Taxation full of sun setting tax provisions that simply astounded me.

I despise the federal income tax for several reasons. First, the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution forbids involuntary servitude. Working to involuntarily pay a percentage to the government is a form of servitude. Secondly, the tax code can be easily manipulated, amended, and made to be either rewarding or punitive towards or against a particular behavior, ideology, or political agenda. Thirdly, it is purposely lengthy and confusing so as to require professional assistance and cost an exorbitant amount of time and money with its compliance. The tax system should be so simple that you should be able to do your tax return on the back of a post card. Better yet, we should not have to file anything with the Internal Revenue Service, which would be the case with The Fair Tax.

If Congress were serious about economic recovery and freedom, most of the tax provisions about to expire would be made permanent. The lowest tax rate of 15% that was cut to 10% is about to revert back to 15%. That means that the poorest taxpayers are about to get a 50% tax increase as of January first. The marriage penalty for the standard deduction is about to make its re-appearance. The previously doubled per child tax credit is about to revert from $1000 back to $500. That particular tax credit provision helped benefit a lot of families, including my own, and now it is being taken away.

The "death tax" is about to rear its ugly head once again. People who worked hard to leave a large estate for their heirs will leave 55% less of it because the government will be taking that much of it. Over half of one's estate will be taken away by the government just because it is being left as an inheritance. To me, that is one of the most unethical taxes ever devised. People can work hard all their lives only to pay taxes on their income. Then they take those taxed dollars and invest, save, or purchase property. Investment dividends are taxed, and the property they buy with taxed money will be taxed annually. Then, those who were fortunate enough to have amassed even a small fortune to pass on to their survivors will be painted with the label of greedy while the government steals and devours over half of that wealth. By the way, for those who do save and invest for their futures are going to run across a return to a higher rate of dividend and capital gains taxes. This is all insidious and just plain evil.

On top of all of this, we are going to be hit with the costs associated with the new health care legislation. People like me who use flexible spending accounts will no longer be able to use those funds for non-prescription items, which will hurt the family budget.

Another big hit will come in the form of health care insurance benefit taxation. If your employer has a health care benefit, you will have to start paying taxes on the portion of the benefit paid by your employer. For people like me who chose an employer that has an excellent benefits package, we are going to have a much higher income tax burden as these benefits will also count as income.

There are too many tax provisions expiring or about to be enacted to mention in this column. Look it up for your own selves. We are going to get reamed by our already out of control, excessively spending government that thinks that you just don't pay enough in taxes as it is. We had a revolution in this country for less than this.

Column for August 12, 2010

For those who are on the internet a lot, like myself, you probably get a good amount of "spam" email. For those who are not inclined to be in the cyberworld, spam is not just processed meat, it is a term used for junk electronic mail. I got what I consider a spam email from Congressman Bob Etheridge.

I opened the email to see what old Bob "Who are you?" Etheridge had to say this time. Here is some of what he had to say.

"My top priorities in the U.S. House of Representatives have been jobs, jobs, and jobs. Specifically, I support common sense policies that will create an economy that works for the middle class so every North Carolinian who is willing to work hard has the opportunity to make the most of his or her God-given abilities."

Well, I have a hard time disagreeing with him so far. Is a Democrat allowed to say "God-given"? I would have thought that would be viewed by liberals as a "separation of church and state" issue. What else did Bob have in store?

"We need to rebuild America and restore the American Dream. Economic recovery in our country will be powered by small businesses. I have been working to enact eight separate tax cuts for small businesses to jumpstart hiring and boost the economy."

He is correct. We do need to rebuild America. Small business is indeed the engine that keeps America going. I find it amusing that both a man and a political party that have been supportive of massive spending and tax increases would recognize that tax cuts are what stimulate the economy. Tax cuts worked for John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush. Why then do Democrats feel the need to pass Cap and Trade, health care legislation, and financial regulation packages that will only increase taxes, increase federal spending, and increase government intrusion into the economic and business sector?

This is simply talking out of both sides of one's mouth. You can not have it both ways. Either you are for tax cuts or you are for tax and spending increases. If tax cuts are so beneficial, then why does Congress propose these piddly little tax cuts while refusing to make the previous tax cuts under the Bush administration permanent? The answer is easy to find further down in the letter.

Congressman Etheridge continued, "The recent recession cost us 8 million American jobs—and years of policies that favored the special interests cost us 4.6 million American manufacturing jobs. Although too many people are out of work and family budgets are getting squeezed, bold action to correct the failed policies of the past has started to turn our economy around."

This is a classic case of blame everything bad on George Bush. In fact, the current recession is primarily because of the direct involvement in the economy by the Democrat controlled Congress in conjunction with a willing President Obama.

Don't get me wrong, I am not letting the Republicans slide on this at all. Republicans had control of Congress for years and did not act like they were in power. They were also corrupt and spent money in huge quantities, as well. I blame them just as much as I blame Democrats for the huge borrowing and spending problems that eventually led to an economic crash. These spending issues were hugely magnified and sped along under President Obama and his far left, socialistic agenda. Etheridge is claiming he is working to solve the very problems he helped create.

Since I only have so much space in which to critique, I will choose one last item. Etheridge wrote, "Long term, we need budget discipline and smart investments like Pell Grants and higher education assistance and school construction."

I wholeheartedly agree that we need budget discipline, but we will never achieve it when congressmen like Bob Etheridge vote for spending programs that will cost trillions of dollars. As to Pell Grants, education assistance, and school construction, I have yet to find anywhere in the United States Constitution that gives the power to Congress to either spend money on these things or regulate them.

Bob Etheridge's letter is unfortunately typical of most politicians in office today. They take credit for things they did not do, blame others for their own failings, try to "have it both ways" in order to look good, and attempt to tickle the ears of a predominantly ignorant constituency. Remember this when you vote in November.

Column for August 5, 2010

My family and I just returned from a wonderful two-week vacation in New England. It probably went better than most any vacation I have taken to date. There were still so many things left on my list of possible activities that we still have plenty of activities left for our next vacation.

The only bad part of the trip was the trip itself. In my 23 years of driving from North Carolina to New Hampshire and back, this was possibly the worst travel I have experienced. I continuously kept thinking to myself "I hope that North Carolina does not end up like this".

I know that each trip up or down the eastern seaboard, I am going to be hit with frequent tolls. I figured from experience that I will have to pay between $20 and $30 in tolls each way if I was going to take what is usually the most expedient route. The total was somewhere down the middle, at about $25 or so.

Some tolls were only a dollar or two. Some were $5 or over $9, depending upon where it was. The most expensive stretch of highway in the United States has to be through Delaware. In all, Interstate 95 goes through Delaware for about thirteen miles. Delaware is a small state, after all. I paid $4 on one end and $3 on the other end. That makes the toll rate about 54 cents per mile to travel through that tiny state.

Let's face the fact about highway tolls. Tolls are nothing but another form of taxation. Some may call them user fees, but they are taxes nonetheless. Ostensibly, tolls are enacted to help with highway maintenance and construction. Of course we all know how that concept works. North Carolina has raided the highway trust fund for use in the general fund. The Social Security trust fund was raided long ago to add to the US Treasury's general fund. I have no doubt that the North Carolina lottery trust fund will eventually end up as part of the NC general fund.

I can not remember in my 23 years of traveling up to New England a trip without some sort of construction going on in Connecticut along the interstate. This trip it took one hour to move four miles. On one of the busiest sections of American highway, I-95 coming out of New York City and through Connecticut, evening construction brought three lanes down to only one. Planning lane closures like that should be a capital offense.

The sad thing about it is that there are signs posted about how my tax dollars are helping fund that construction through the so-called stimulus spending under the Obama administration. Not only did I get to pay for tolls and taxed that way, I got to be taxed through federal income tax to help pay for inconvenient, incessant construction. In fact, federal dollars go into just about every stretch of major highway, so tolls are double taxation, even for non-residents of the state in question.

I saw more stimulus signage for paving projects in Massachusetts on roads that were already in excellent condition. I was wondering why they were in the middle of paving a perfectly good stretch of interstate.

While stuck in southern Connecticut, all I could think about is how every doggone trip that direction I run across construction in that state and how it reminds me of I-40 through Research Triangle Park. The construction there seems to have been going on for twenty years.

While sitting in lines at various tollbooths, especially without an E-Z Pass account since I don't normally encounter tolls in NC, all I could think of is that North Carolina wants to put toll booths on I-95 at our northern and southern borders. I-95 is indeed one of the most traveled corridors in all of America. Putting tollbooths along the interstate would certainly bring in revenue and soon recover booth construction costs. However, it is not a matter of finding more revenue, it is a matter of spending more than we take in as a state.

Tollbooths being nothing more than another form of taxation, I am just glad that I don't frequently travel either north or south of the NC border should we get them. But wait! North Carolina is also talking about putting tollbooths on the new outer loop of I-540 in Raleigh. If we give an inch for a tollbooth, we are going to end up having many miles taken from us, as well as dollar bills. And the insult to us taxpayers is that we will be taxed for the implementation and construction of the new taxation system and its maintenance.

Column for July 29, 2010

Last week’s copy of The Selma News arrived just moments before the family and I left for a vacation to New England. I took one glance at the front page and saw the very thing I figured would happen. Selma has extended its tentacles of power two miles outside the town’s corporate limits via an extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). I did not bother going to the town council meeting/public hearing for two reasons. First, I already knew the outcome beforehand. Second, it was the same night as we had scheduled my baby’s first birthday party. I was not going to miss my baby boy’s birthday for anything. I stashed the newspaper in my luggage to carry with me on the trip.

I have written several times about the evils of having an ETJ and the injustice that will be perpetrated upon those within an ETJ expansion. My position has not changed on that. The extending of the Selma ETJ two miles into the unincorporated areas of Johnston County is just plain unethical. Just because the town is empowered to do so by the state legislature does not mean that they should do so. There are many freedoms and abilities that I have in life, but just because they exist does not mean that I should exercise those abilities and freedoms.

Upon reading the article, there are a few things that jump out at me. First is that though I work with technology and am fully in support of the employment of technology, I do not always support its use when it comes to representative government. What I mean is that this business of phoning in to a town council meeting, as done by Mr. Eric Sellers for this past meeting, should never be allowed. I understand that people have their own lives, schedules, and obligations in life. If you knew my schedule and how I have to use technology instead of being physically on site, you would know that I am not opposed to conference calls, web meetings, and the like. However, when a member of a legislative body is casting a vote, the onus should be upon the representative to be physically present. When I cast a ballot, I have to be at the polling place, I can not just phone in my vote. When a Congressman is not going to be able to be in Washington, D.C., he can not just telephone his vote into Congress. A Town Councilman should be required to be present in order to participate in an open, public meeting.

The next thing that jumps out at me is that the town really needs to examine whether or not this vote is legally binding. The Town of Selma has not historically done well in compliance with a state law that requires a 60% affirmative vote in order to enact an ordinance when it is introduced for the first time. Since there have been changes since the last time the town tried to snooker the public with an ETJ expansion, I don’t know whether or not they have met this requirement. If not, they need to take another vote at another council meeting.

The last thing that jumps out at me is the “Big Brother” mentality. The Orwellian thought that was expressed by Councilwoman Cheryl Oliver that the town needs to ensure that ETJ residents are “good neighbors” to Selma residents is just plain specious and nothing short of a soft tyranny. There is absolutely no reason why a town that is less than two miles across in its corporate limits should be able to extend its tentacles of power further than its breadth into the outlaying areas. That is not only unethical, it is as I have deemed it, regulation without representation. That is contrary to the very concepts of the founding of this nation. The excuse that we have to make sure that those outside the town are good neighbors to those within is merely a lame justification for an unjust act. Governmental oppression often comes under the guise of good intentions or flowery sounding excuses.

I have heard many people exclaim how much they detest the direction of our town in these sorts of affairs. Instead of attracting people into Selma, the town may very well be driving people out. I have heard from people who worked to get some of the people in office who voted for the expansion exclaim their displeasure with this ETJ expansion vote and paradigm of control.

Though I have appreciated the candor and responsiveness of both Council Members Sellers and Oliver and like them personally, I am very disappointed in their support of bigger government and unjust exertion of local government control. Thank you Jackie Lacy and Debbie Johnson for your votes for governmental sanity. I never before thought I would ever type that last sentence.

Column for July 22, 2010

I hate racism in any form. I don't care from whom it comes or in what direction it is aimed. Racism comes with a huge amount of hypocrisy, and we have been witnessing it to a huge degree on the national political scene. When racism is alleged, it is something against which there is pretty much no defense. Just the accusation, even if it is erroneous, brands someone with a label from which there is often no coming back. But I guess that depends upon who your political allies are. Politics does make strange bedfellows, as the saying goes.

In December of 2002, United States Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott made some kind statements about Strom Thurmond at his 100th birthday party. He praised South Carolina Senator Thurmond for his long service, which included a bid for President in 1948. Thurmond ran for the presidency on a platform of racial segregation. He also voted against the Civil Rights Act and against making Martin Luther King Day a federal holiday. The latter I do not see as racist at all, but that is another topic for another day. These comments, which did not particularly support Thurmond's racist views, were met with scorn from left wing hacks and media. Within about two weeks, Trent Lott resigned his position as Senate Republican Leader.

Just recently, fellow politicians honored another stalwart of Congress. West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd recently passed away. Byrd was another man who had a serious problem with racism and segregation. Byrd actually recruited 150 men to start a new chapter of the Klu Klux Klan. Byrd is recorded as having written, "I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side...Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds." Byrd also filibustered against passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Byrd did eventually renounce his views, but that was well into his adult life.

I believe that it is hard to refute that the quote and actions of Byrd were overtly racist. And yet former President Bill Clinton excused Byrd's Klan activity as just something that Byrd did "trying to get elected". If you are willing to sell out your soul like this, it is not merely "trying to get elected".

Current President Barack Obama, a man for whose color Byrd's activities tended to show disdain, eulogized Byrd as a "distinguished gentleman" and a "Senate icon" that "climbed to such extraordinary peaks".

I guess one can be forgiven for being overtly racist but not for praising the career of one whom was overtly racist. Then again, that all depends upon the side of the political spectrum from which you come. I find that incredibly hypocritical.

When we hear something overtly racist such as the recent comments by the leader of the New Black Panther Party, "Minister" King Shamir Shabbaz, why does the same press that lambasted Trent Lott not snow up and cloud all over Shabbaz? Shabbaz expressed his abject hatred for Whites saying, "I hate White people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker I hate him…You want freedom you’re going to have to kill some crackers. You’re going to have to kill some of their babies."

Why have the same political hacks that skewered Senator Lott and gave a pass to Senator Byrd not come out against such hate filled evil rhetoric? Instead, the Obama administration has dropped pursuing a case against Shabbaz and his group for voter intimidation. It was a "slam dunk" case against these men for standing outside of Philadelphia polling places during the Presidential Election of 2008, carrying weapons.

A Department of Justice attorney even resigned over that case because the Department of Justice would neither prevent nor allow him to testify on the case. In his words he "was told by Voting Section management that cases are not going to be brought against black defendants [for] the benefit of white victims."

Had the defendants been sheet wearing Klansmen, their actions would have been equally despicable, but I bet they would have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law by the Department of Justice run by a Black man who reports to a Black President.

Folks, again, I don't care from whom racism comes or in what direction it is aimed. It is wrong, it needs to stop, and we should not tolerate it in our government, our churches, our community, or our families.

Column for July 15, 2010

I enjoy celebrating Independence Day here in America. Some consider July 4th as Independence Day, but I actually consider it to be July 2nd. On July 2, 1776, the Continental Congress passed Richard Henry Lee's Resolution to adopt a declaration of independence. This resolution began "Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved." The actual declaration was signed on July 4th.

I had resolved to spend the evening with my family in Uptown Selma. Over the years I have been to several of our town's July 4th celebrations and enjoyed them. Last year I did not go since I had some friends in town from Canada. These folks had never been to an Independence Day celebration since they are from out of the country, eh? When given the option of going to the town's celebration or to the countryside to play with my personal fireworks collection, they opted for playing with fireworks rather than observing them.

There was quite a choice of Independence Day celebrations from which to choose in Johnston County. When other towns had to either cancel their celebrations because of budget reasons or because of contractor availability under new, stringent state regulation. Kenly had a celebration on the real Independence Day, July 2. Clayton had theirs on the 3rd. Selma had theirs on the 4th, and Smithfield on the 5th. I had fully intended to go to Selma's celebration, since it is within walking distance from my home and Selma is my hometown.

As fate would have it, I got stuck working that Sunday evening. I was hoping I would get home in time to see the fireworks with the family and only miss the festival activities. Instead, I got stuck working on a stubborn computer in the booming metropolis of Roxboro and did not get home until about 11 PM. While working in that little concrete building, I had a few select words about the situation that I certainly will not type here, and was in a very foul mood as a result. I really did not want to have to explain to a seven-year-old why I could not fulfill my promise to go to the Selma celebration and fireworks.

Nevertheless, we figured that we could easily slide over to Smithfield for their "half priced, day late" celebration. We were hoping for some good, happy family time. Boy, were we in for a disappointment.

I wish that the Continental Congress had declared independence from Britain in October or April instead of July. Maybe they were cranky in Philadelphia because of the high temperatures and discomfort of July, and declared independence then because of it.

Temperatures were sweltering in Smithfield. The gnats were something out of a Mosaic plague. We could not take a bite out of our high priced festival food without eating a gnat. There were only three vendors at the Smithfield event, so we ended up spending $18 for the worst steak and cheese sandwich I ever ate, a hamburger, a hot dog, an order of French Fries, and 3 drinks.

Since we were dumb enough to get there around 6:30 and the fireworks were not going to be "bombs bursting in air" until 9:30, we had plenty of time to promenade on the River Walk. That is, until my lovely wife got tired of the hike and wanted to turn around. Add to that one bored seven-year-old and a squirmy almost one-year-old, and you have some quality family time.

Finally we found our spot on a hill, heard "I'm bored" about a thousand times, and stayed on the grass trying to rest until darkness overtook Smithfield. A few more thousand "I'm bored" declarations later, we finally got to see a few bursts in the night sky…right behind the tree directly blocking our view.

We moved up the hill some more to get a less obstructed view and waited for the grand finale, which only took eleven minutes to hit. The half-priced, day late fireworks display in Smithfield certainly resembled a half off clearance sale display.

Next year I hope to be able to just have the day off, relax, and enjoy the "pretty darn good for a small town" Fourth of July celebration that Selma puts on ever year. Either that or I will have to make a trip to South Carolina for a personal stash of some home spun fun. In the words of Jack Nicholson in the movie "As Good As It Gets", "Good times, noodle salad."

The fireworks I missed:

All American Festival Fireworks - 2010 from Lewis Mullen on Vimeo.

Column for July 8, 2010

I got a phone call from a polling agency asking me four simple questions. The first question was simply whether I approve or disapprove of the job performance of President Barack Obama. For me the answer was a no-brainer. I obviously disapprove strongly of his job performance. I also disapproved of the job performance of George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George H. W. Bush. Each had their strong points (yes, even Clinton had a few good points). Each had their negative points (Ronald Reagan had a few negative points, as well).

At the risk of being branded a racist for any criticism of Obama by those rabid, blind fools who drank the progressive Kool-Aid, it is hard to find much positive about the Obama presidency in my view. I have an adverse reaction to actions that are entirely antithetical to the Constitution and the nation's founding principles. With massive bail outs, nationalized health care, increased size of government, quadrupling the federal debt, unnecessary moratoriums on offshore drilling, the taking over of corporations, support of environmentalist whack job policies towards non-existent climate change, bowing to foreign dignitaries, and the soon coming massive tax increases, it is hard to find anything of which to approve. To be fair, the foundation for some of these things was laid before Obama took office.

The more I have read behind Thomas Jefferson, the more I have mixed feelings about him. However, from time to time I do find some quotes by Jefferson that are poignant. "A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." That does not describe American government today at the national, state, county, and municipal levels. It sums up my views and my answers to the survey.

The second question was whether or not I supported the health care system passed by Congress and President Obama. My answer was obviously that I do not and can not find anything constitutional about it. To quote James Madison, who was one of the biggest influences on the writing of our Constitution, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

That same quote can apply to the next question I was asked. Do I think that government is doing too much or too little to solve the crisis type problems in our nation? This is a paraphrase, since I do not remember the exact wording. Madison's quote in context was about the proposed expenditure of public money towards assisting people after a natural disaster. It also applies to private medical expenditures, welfare, public housing, food stamps, and the list goes on.

My answer was pretty much in line with Madison's quote. I did not find the constitutional empowerment for the government to get involved in a lot of its present activities. Therefore it is doing too much, in my view. The private sector and economy should be left alone.

The one exception I currently find would be the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, though it was not in the scope of the telephone survey. I have no problems with the government acting to secure our coastline from calamity. I see that as part of ensuring domestic tranquility and promoting the general welfare. I also believe that the financial burden should ultimately be upon the parties responsible for the incident in question.

The final question was simply that if the upcoming election was held today, whether I would support Elaine Marshall or Richard Burr for United States Senate? That was also a no-brainer to me. There are many things I have seen Burr support that I had misgivings about but many that I was happy about, as well. Elaine Marshall is a known progressive/liberal and I certainly have no love for progressivism or liberalism.

When thinking about issues of government action or inaction, always keep in mind the Constitutional requirements and purpose of government. The state and federal constitutions outline the scope of powers and limitations of government and are supposed to be our supreme laws to follow. I just wish governments would indeed follow them.

Column for July 1, 2010

Those of you who follow me on the internet know that I have become a fan of Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey. The more I see of Governor Christie standing up to political correctness, special interest groups, and labor unions, the more excited I get. When I see him being responsive to the reason he was elected, i.e., cut the budget, decrease spending, and restore the state of New Jersey to fiscal sanity, the more I love what I see.

One recent video had Chris Christie speaking at a town hall type meeting in which he was confronted by a school teacher. The teacher chastised the governor for cutting the education budget in New Jersey, much like we are facing here in North Carolina. The teacher, who asserted that she loved what she did for a profession was informed that if she did not like the pay scale, she could go find another job and that teachers know the wage scale before ever taking the job. I absolutely loved that answer and applaud him for it. Will we ever see that sort of bravado here in North Carolina? I seriously doubt it.

Public schools are a product of government. Since government has been bloated and allowed to grow unchecked over the years, I wholeheartedly suspect that school budgets are no different. Here in North Carolina, we have seen the North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE) complain about budget cuts. We have seen the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Crazy People) unfoundedly whine about "resegregation" when Wake County and now Wayne County have been moving to community based schools to not only save money but to restore common sense to school administration.

In Charlotte, there is debate over the merits of public pre-kindergarten education. Whatever happened to parental responsibility? Why is it the job of the populace to supply a babysitting service to four-year-olds? We have Smart Start, More at Four, and various other failed programs with a huge price tag. Why should anyone want his or her four-year-old placed a publicly funded education program other than to take advantage of free daycare?

Do you want to know what government thinks about looking after toddlers? The State of North Carolina wants to make it a crime to: "serve sugar-sweetened beverages to children of any age; serve whole milk to children two years of age or older; serve flavored milk to any child; serve more than six ounces of juice to any child regardless of age or how long the child is cared for." This is how government wants to intrude into private daycare center operations with House Bill 1726, which has already passed one vote. How much worse would it be in a public institution? Is this the sort of government control you want over your children? Is this the sort of government you want to live under?

I was intrigued by a news story I read about neighboring Wake County. That school district is in search of a new Superintendent of Schools after their old one whined about the direction of the newly elected school board. What I found interesting is that the county may not hire someone with an education background to be the next superintendent. The next leader there may be a businessman or former military leader.

As Governor Christie said in an interview, it is not the educators in his state that hate him, it is the education labor unions. They have created a society of entitlement for their constituency under the guise of being "for the children" in order to pad their membership roles. This of course leads to more union income. It is precisely that mentality that has been rampant in our school systems and why I would love to see someone with a background in business hired to run schools with a much higher degree of efficiency.

I work in private industry and we have to run with efficiency every day. We deal with budget and manpower cuts regularly and still produce for our customers and shareholders. We the taxpayers are the investors and shareholders in our public school system. We should expect a high rate of return on our investment. In order to cut down on public expenditure, I have openly offered to take the job of Superintendent of Schools in Johnston County for half the pay we are currently giving someone with a background in "education".

Think about this for a moment. Do you really want the "milk police" controlling what your child drinks? Do you want a law that regulates how much fruit juice your toddler is allowed to have? Do you want the same government controlling our children's education at age four or at any age?

Column for June 24, 2010

I look at the birdbath and bird feeder as a microcosm of American society. I wrote at the begging of May how I've had more birds and squirrels at my feeder this year than ever before. It is amazing that the birds and cute, gray, bushy tailed rats can empty the feeder in less than a day. I fill it up almost daily now. I have spent more on birdseed so far this year than I have spent on most previous years combined.

There are a few observations I have made over the past few months. Even if the feeder is empty, birds and squirrels still come by the feeder to check to see if there is anything to eat. When the birds see me coming, they will actually fly away, perch on a wire or tree limb, and as soon as I leave the freshly filled feeder, flock to it. I have actually had birds angrily scream at me when the feeder is empty until I finish filling it again for them.

I see more squirrels on my little quarter acre of land than I have ever seen before. I am pretty sure that some of these squirrels do not live in the old pecan tree behind my house. Instead, they seem to sneak across the property border and plunder the feed. Birdseed is not even meant for squirrels, but they don't seem to mind. When I have bags of birdseed set out under my carport, squirrels will invade my carport and tear into the bags of seed.

When I put the seed bags into an old trash can that I am using as storage, the gray, illegal alien squirrels actually ate through part of the plastic garbage can to gain access to it and plunder what was never meant for them in the first place. They leave seed hulls all over my carport.

The one good thing the squirrels do is to rake out seed from the feeder and spread it on the ground. When they do that, many birds and other squirrels do actually benefit from their labor. Apparently the birds let the squirrels do jobs that they, in theory, are not willing to do themselves. I doubt that is truly the case, since when no squirrels have been handy, I have watched an ambitious bird actually shoveling out seed from the feeder to the ground with its beak. There is an obvious parallel to society here.

It is all part of my birdie stimulus spending plan. Birds and squirrels have come from all over the neighborhood to my feeder. Why they come to my feeder in particular is a mystery to me. Perhaps they are looking for a better life than they can find where their own nests are located. Maybe the food supply is just scarce on the other side of the neighborhood. Either way, the birds flock to my feeder more than that of my neighbors and more than any other year since I have been living in this house.

The seed is meant to supplement the animals' own ability to find food, not be their entire source of substance. I would hope that these now dependent birds and squirrels are also searching for worms, insects, berries, nuts and whatever else birds and squirrels consume. The handouts I provide are not meant to replace their own food chain. It seems that some take advantage of the free food more than others.

I get birds of all colors. Gray ones, black ones, red ones, blue ones, and a variety of color mixtures all flock to my feeder. Some are more common than others. Both birds and squirrels seem to take to the water supply in my birdbath. I have to rinse out the birdbath and refill it just about every day. Some days it takes less than an afternoon and it will be bone dry.

Regardless of whom the bird feeder and birdbath are meant for, the common factor is that when I put out an abundant supply of free food, I have an abundant supply of consumers wanting the handout. When I don't put out the food, the birds and squirrels find another way to get their sustenance. America could learn a lesson from that.

I almost feel like the federal government, giving out more in handouts than at any other time in my living here. The big difference seems to be that I can afford the birdseed. I guess if I charged the bird food to my credit card to pay it off years later with a huge amount of accrued interest, I would be more like the federal government.

Column for June 17, 2010

Over the years, I have been somewhat critical of Congressman Bob Etheridge. I have also endeavored to be fair and offer praise whenever praise is due. As of right now, I have zero praise for Congressman Etheridge other than to say "at least he offered an apology".

You have seen on the news or read in the newspapers that our very own Congressman Etheridge assaulted two students on a Washington, D.C. street last week. The college students were doing some sort of school project. When Congressman Etheridge walked by, they had their camcorder rolling and they simply asked him the question whether or not he is in support of President Barack Obama's policies. That was fair enough. Congressmen were asked about supporting Bush in years past.

Instead of politely stopping and asking who these students were and for what they were doing an impromptu interview, old Bob got hostile. He smacked around the videographer, grabbed the interviewer by the wrist and later by the back of the neck. He repeatedly asked them who they were, who they were with, and demanded to know their identities. Apparently if you see people with a video recorder and asking questions whom you do not know, that justifies assaulting them.

When Congressman Etheridge ran for his congressional post the first time, I interviewed him several times myself. He had a bad habit of not wanting to answer questions then, and he knew who I was and who employed me. He came to us wanting radio airtime and we gave it to him, but he dodged questions. He obviously wanted to dodge questions from strangers, as well. Two election cycles back, I offered old Bob an interview for my column as I did his opponent. He did not so much as pay me the respect of declining the offer. I have also extended unacknowledged offers for interviews on my internet radio show that I used to host regularly. Thus I know first hand what Bob Etheridge thinks about the press, about interviews, and about people with whom he does not want to be bothered.

I am trying to give Bob the benefit of the doubt on this one. I got to thinking that he is a very busy man. Maybe he had just gotten some bad news or maybe he just plain was having a bad day. Even if that was the case, that in no way justified assault. I saw the video of the incident several times. Perhaps the students could probably have handled the situation a bit better, but they were young and naive. I doubt highly, as has been speculated, that Congressman Etheridge was "set up" on this video encounter. I have concluded that his actions were inexcusable and just plain despicable.

Sure, Congressman Etheridge offered a formal statement reading in part, "I deeply and profoundly regret my reaction and I apologize to all involved. Throughout my many years of service to the people of North Carolina, I have always tried to treat people from all viewpoints with respect. No matter how intrusive and partisan our politics can become, this does not justify a poor response. I have and I will always work to promote a civil public discourse."

Sorry, Bob, but you have often failed in your attempt to treat people from all viewpoints with respect. I know too many people who have found that out first hand, especially others in the media. Furthermore, assaulting someone whose politics or viewpoints you have yet to even hear is purely partisan on your own part. Assaulting two people does not rate merely as a "poor response", it is criminal, despicable behavior.

Congressman Etheridge, I personally extend to you an offer for an interview with me, someone you have known by name and reputation for years. You know my family since my in-laws were neighbors of yours in Harnett County for years. You know the newspaper and blogs for which I have written for years, and I offer the chance to show the world you can have respect for people of all viewpoints. Let us have a civil public discourse together. I warn you though, if you ever try to manhandle me as you did those college students, I will ensure that you make use of the Congressional health care benefits package.

Yes, I have been critical of Congressman Etheridge for his lack of response to me as a constituent, member of the media, and for his leftist, progressive agenda. I have been hoping for years that he would be voted out of office for the benefit of the country. I had serious doubts that Renee Ellmers could beat Bob Etheridge in the upcoming election in November. Now I have a little hope that old Bob will be sent back to Lillington for good.



For fun:



More fun:



And for those who thought that Bob Etheridge was only rude to the public in the previous videos:

Column for June 10, 2010

I just finished a several yearlong teaching on the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in which I went through the notes taken by James Madison during the Philadelphia Convention with two of my cohorts. During the course of the debates of the convention, the ideas, the purpose, and limitations of government were discussed.

What about state and local governments? Just today I started re-reading through North Carolina's state constitution. Many of the same principles found in the national constitution are present in the state document. It is always a good idea to brush up on such things so that my garbage detector can operate more accurately. I always have my garbage detector operating on my core values and principles, so when I hear of a news story or incident, my antennae go up when I catch a trickle of garbage.

Four garbage stories grabbed my attention lately. Three of the stories are from North Carolina and one is from Michigan. Here in The Old North State, our legislature seems to have adopted the idea that anything that is personally distasteful to a legislator can be banned. The idea that a person or group of people can and should control or limit something they detest, whether it is a moral issue or not, I often find even more distasteful than the item in question they seek to regulate.

There is currently a bill in the state legislature that would slap a one-year moratorium on further placements of electronic billboards alongside the state’s highways. Since when is it the job of the state to regulate what sort of billboards are along highways? That tends to be a local planning and zoning issue and should be treated as such. If billboards are allowed in a certain area, of what concern is it the type of the billboard? I have no problem with electronic billboards. Here in Selma and Smithfield, we have a couple of them owned by a local company and I find them no more distracting than a still board.

This is obviously not a safety matter but rather a matter of personal taste. If you want to regulate personal taste, I found it distasteful to cut down trees that buffered the view from Selma's cemetery at the corner of Pollock Street and Highway 70 to put up a billboard, instead. And that billboard does not change electronically. Even so, I would not want the state legislature getting involved in that decision taking process.

Another state issue is a bill proposed to limit local governments from entering the internet and data delivery business. This is one issue that requires full disclosure up front. I work for the area's largest cable television and data provider. Yet this does not have a bearing on my thoughts either way.

Cities like Wilson are using public dollars to provide their own broadband data network to attract industry and compete with big telephone and cable companies. Though I generally am not for regulation by large governments, I am equally opposed to governments at any level providing services at taxpayer expense that are readily available in the private sector. Cities and towns have no business getting into the broadband data business.

Two other governmental regulations proposed involve licensing. North Carolina wants to require providers of hair braiding services to be licensed just like cosmetologists and barbers. They don't cut, color, or treat hair; they just braid it. For that, the government wants to stick its dirty fingers into the pot, stir it, and extract more revenue and control in the form of licensing fees.

The other licensing issue proposed is from Michigan. Some Michigan elected officials actually want to require licensing for journalists. Now I will agree that there are many people in the journalism industry that are better off finding other careers. However, I also believe in a First Amendment principle that says that says, "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" The Michigan State Legislature is not the U.S. Congress, but this is one principle that you would think is inviolable. Even intellectually and ethically challenged journalists, usually employed at the Associated Press, New York Slimes, or The Washington Compost should not require licensing. The art of journalism is seemingly a lost one and journalists should study their craft, but not be required to hold a license. I doubt that the bill will pass.

Government is often over-reaching and over-bearing. There are just some lines that government should not cross, some things they should not regulate, and some endeavors from which they should stay away.

Column for June 3, 2010

On my way to church services last weekend, I had to stop for the friendly neighborhood police officers that were running a license checkpoint here in the booming Metropolis of Selma. I am fairly used this concept, since I have had to stop numerous times at impromptu checkpoints over the past few years. Each time I get out my wallet to produce my driver's license. This time, for the first time, I also had to produce my vehicle registration.

I actually have no problem with this concept, which may surprise some people. As long as such checks are done with consistency of fairness to all vehicle operators, I believe that it is a matter of public safety to ensure that people are sober, are indeed licensed drivers, and belong on the roads. It is a legal and reasonable use of governmental and law enforcement resources.

Since I as a driver have to produce proof that I am licensed to operate the motor vehicle I operate, I am astounded at the resistance to the Arizona law against illegal immigration. Their recent law allows for local law enforcement to ascertain the legal statuses of people that they suspect are in the state (actually nation) illegally. This is pursuant only to an already legal contact with law enforcement agents. This means that a police officer can not stop someone on the street or a driver on the highway whom they suspect is here illegally unless they have either committed another infraction of the law.

Liberals who have ignorantly decried this law as a violation of civil liberties have either not read the law or they are purposely being deceptive. President Barack Obama lied through his teeth when he claimed that the police would ask people for their papers when they are taking their family out for ice cream. The use of the term "papers" was specifically used to conjure up images of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union's KGB. It is nothing more than a propaganda tactic.

If I, a law abiding citizen can be legally asked for my identification and "papers" at a license checkpoint, then a criminal can certainly be asked for theirs when they are caught in criminal behavior. Controlling immigration into America is one of the basic duties of the federal government, but one that they have abrogated most heinously. States and local governments have been paying the price for the lack of action on the federal government's part, so they in turn have begun to "step up to the plate" and begun dealing with the issue in their own sovereign ways.

There are legitimate powers of government for purposes of control and there are illegitimate ones. I think about this distinction often, and at all levels of government. Whether it is the national government, the state, county, town, or even church governments, there are legitimate uses of power and there are illegitimate uses thereof. Controlling our border for the sake of national protection is definitely a legitimate use of government. Ensuring that people who broke the law while entering the country and then enforcing that first infraction while enforcing other laws is definitely a legitimate use of governmental power.

Recently, the President of Mexico, Felipe Calderon had the audacity to criticize the sovereignty of Arizona and condemn their law against illegal immigration as a huge violation of human rights. He found it humiliating to be asked for proof that you belong in America. Oddly enough, he readily admits that the immigration laws in Mexico are far stricter than they are in the United States and illegal immigrants are readily deported or imprisoned. That flaming hypocrisy should be astounding to any logically thinking individual. What is even worse is the lockstep criticism by our current administration in the White House.

With all the irrational calls for boycotts against Arizona for their government's courage to stand against illegal immigration and to protect their own self interests, I am almost tempted to change my upcoming vacation plans and spend my tourist dollars in Arizona. I can only wish that legislators in North Carolina have the same fortitude to pass similar legislation in our state. Such a bill has recently been introduced into the North Carolina State Senate. I seriously doubt that either our weak governor or the state legislature would have such courage to pass it, however.

Cool. More hate mail.

On 6/1/2010 9:55 PM, Al Larivee brassmonkey1944@yahoo.com wrote:

Mr. Laplante: Do you vote in every election? Are you a Military Veteran? What are personally doing to right all the wrongs you seem to percieve? I you think your going to find utopia here on earth,you've got a rude awakening coming. This ain't no storybook world by any stretch of the imagination.Your whining,moaning,and bellyaching is the main reason i opted not to renew my subscription to The Selma News. The office staff at The Selma news must be as blockheaded as you,because my subscription ran out in early February and they still send me the paper,which i have no intention of paying for,as i wrote to them,stated so and dropped in the BIG YELLOW BOX in front of the Post Office .Respectfully Al Larivee 103 Wiggs Rd Selma

And my response:

Yes. No. You read it. Take a remedial English class. I know better than you there is no Utopia. Conservatives are the ones who realize that, liberals are not. Boo frickity hoo that you don't like or read my column. You finished your email "respectfully" but have shown none in your email, so you don't mind being dishonest. I do. I fail to see how all three questions are relevant to the conservative opinions that I have the courage to espouse. I am doubtful that you have answers that would be acceptable to own yourself, which means that you probably hold others to a higher standard than you do yourself, making you a hypocrite. I at least believe and live the things about which I pontificate (and am asked to do so) on a regular basis.