Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Eastern Washington

So Washington has a budget deficit. This is not my fault. I don't imagine it's your fault either. The state legislature, because they don't have the, uh, ability to print currency like the feds do, have to resort to something other than printing monopoly money to pay for their re-election schemes. So they recently repealed (I mean temporarily suspended. It's just a temporary measure, of course) the requirement for a two-thirds vote in order to raise taxes or create new ones, and straightaway started the process of instituting an income tax. While I could go on about the ridiculousness of taxes, which are only theft under a different name, I won't. Secession is a much better topic.

Usually talk of secession conjures images of rabid antebellum slave owners and off-kilter Texans, but this is a bit different. What if, instead of Washington seceding from the United State [sic], the eastern half of Washington formed it's own state? Let Olympia build as many stupid light rails as they want, let them restore their own rivers to a pristine and dam-free natural state, let them legislate their way to clean air, and let us live how we want to live without interference from the west side. It's something I've been thinking of for a few years now, but it seems like this might be a good time to get serious about it.

People have a right to be governed in the way they want to be governed. This is not a right bestowed by the state (because that wouldn't make much sense, would it?). Jefferson wrote it in the declaration of independence—governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. So it stands to reason that when the consent of the governed is withdrawn, the power is also gone.

What do the two halves have in common? Geography? No. Look at a map and you'll see a pretty distinct dividing line between green and brown. This geographic and climate difference necessarily leads to a cultural difference. I hardly need to spell this out. How many times has the utopia envisioned by west siders been scuttled by uncouth rednecks from the east side? How many times have the earth savers from the west side tried to save fish, dismantle dams, restrict water use, and otherwise save the ignorant farmers from themselves? Why do they bother trying to control a population they have a general disdain for, and nothing in common with? Why is Olympia our capitol? It has nothing to do with us.

The great part about this idea is that if enough people latch on to it, and if enough counties get together and decide to exert their sovereignty, there isn't anything anyone can do to stop it. If Olympia doesn't like it what will they do, punish us with more taxes? Guess what, we don't have to pay them, we're our own state! Will they refuse to maintain our roads? Big deal, we're our own state! Maybe they won't let us on their new billion dollar light rail. Watch us cry, we're our own state! They might have tech companies and billionaires, but we have agriculture, we have hydro and nuclear power, and we also have way more guns than they do. I'm just sayin'.

So seriously, this needs to happen. I'll post more info as I get it, but for now I have to work on some bumper stickers.

View Larger Map

Thursday, March 4, 2010

______ Control

The hubbub over Starbucks refusing to ban guns in their stores has got me thinking. Some people are upset by the fact that any old gun owner can wander in to Starbucks with their piece (that's macho lingo for a handgun), thereby disturbing the serene and tranquil paradise of nonviolence and slightly pretentious sophistication. But the gun issue is not my focus. There are other dangerous things out in the world. I recently learned about one. Let me tell you about it.

This particular dangerous item is a versatile explosive. In the standard liquid form it can cover a surface before it's ignited, or it can be poured under a door, which obviously causes problems when running away from bad guys. It can be added to other materials in a container and then ignited under pressure, which increases it's deadly capabilities. It can be easily transported in any type of container to avoid detection. Dangerous stuff, huh? But here's the crazy part: this stuff is readily available, no license or permit required. No background check or waiting period, no training certificate needed. All you need to have is the money to buy it. To buy a gun you have to have a background check (and that costs money, which increases the price of guns) and then wait five days, unless you have a concealed carry permit (which costs money and depends on the whims of the authorities), and then you only get to waive the waiting period—you still have to go through an up to date background check. We even have to be licensed to drive a car, but there isn't a restriction on buying this dangerous explosive? How did this slip through the legislative and regulatory cracks? How much danger are we in? Any random person can buy this explosive at any time. Readily available to the general public. Terrorists can buy this stuff. Seditious white supremacist groups can buy it. Tenth amendment sympathizers can buy it, and then they'll probably secede after they explode the entire country. Even Democrats can get it. This is totally insane.

So some of you may be wondering where you can get a hold of some of this stuff we should call "The Terrorist's Dream Come True." Well, even though it might expose me to some sort of liability or lawsuit or whatever, I'll tell you. You get it at the gas station. It's gas. Gasoline, petrol, aliphatic hydrocarbons. Every time you fill up you're putting the equivalent of three sticks of dynamite in your car, which, by the way, can also be a dangerous weapon in the hands of a raging terrorist. Terrorists!

So I'm calling for a crackdown on this threat to liberty. A strict permitting process must be established, and licensing instituted, with guidelines and requirements scrupulously adhered to. Maybe a dedicated agency set up to watch over things, and probably a hefty tax to prevent just any unserious or dangerous person from getting a hold of it. The survival of this nation could depend on it. If we don't control this threat, the terrorists win. We have to destroy our gasoline supply in order to save it. You're either with gasoline or against it. The government has got to do something, because only the government is big enough to handle this problem. If any country is harboring gasoline reserves, it is harboring the equivalent number of dynamite sticks as the number of gallons they are harboring, divided by five. This is terrorism, clearly. There should be a law.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

On Food Storage

I recommend this blog post from Alan Rock Waterman. I really enjoyed it, and it never hurts to get a reminder about what your priorities are and what they should be. I am now officially convinced that I should focus less on guns and ammo and more on food and water, although I still think about getting a slew of Mosin-Nagants at least once a day. But doesn't everyone?