LTE's from Undergrounders

[Dave Ridley]

I sent this to Keene Sentinel today:

---

Thanks for your coverage of the anti-tax protest outside city hall on June 2.  You guys better hang on to your photog Steve Hooper; he never seems to miss a good shot.

I don't claim to know all the details about our convoluted, book-long city budget, and I shouldn't have to.  I know that whatever problems we may have do not result from "insufficient taxation" or "insufficient city spending."   

It's a greedy disgrace to have money-grabbers in office who actually think we are not taxed enough and ought to be taxed more.  To paraphrase Patrick Henry, it is the responsibility of every Keene-lover to help protect her city from its government.

By the way, were any city tax funds used to pay for the placement of that orange monstrosity on the traffic circle? 

[Dave Ridley]

Kat can you post your lte here?

[Kat Kanning]

A bill to require licensing of shampoo assistants is making its rounds through the legislature.  This bill highlights the true purpose of professional licensing, which is not to protect customers, but to reduce competition.  To claim that the purpose of this bill is to protect us from a bad shampoo would be ludicrous.  What adult does not know how to shampoo hair?? 

I for one, wish to claim full responsibility for my life.  I don't want the nanny state protecting me from my choices, or limiting those choices.  If I wish to hire a herbal expert to advise me about my health, that is my business.  The state's licensing requirements adds costs to nearly every business transaction.  I don't want to pay for it anymore.  It's my money, and it's my responsibility to make safe choices for myself and for my family.

Licensure only gives a false sense of security.  Otherwise why would there be all those malpractice lawsuits?  When people have that false sense of security that the government has licensed an individual or business, they don't take the necessary steps to protect themselves.  They don't use word of mouth or investigate the business in any way.  It's time to end professional licensure.

Kat Dillon
88 Sparrow St.
Keene, NH 03431
603-357-2049

[Michael Fisher]

A bill to require licensing of shampoo assistants is making its rounds through the legislature.? This bill highlights the true purpose of professional licensing, which is not to protect customers, but to reduce competition.? To claim that the purpose of this bill is to protect us from a bad shampoo would be ludicrous.? What adult does not know how to shampoo hair???

I for one, wish to claim full responsibility for my life.? I don't want the nanny state protecting me from my choices, or limiting those choices.? If I wish to hire a herbal expert to advise me about my health, that is my business.? The state's licensing requirements adds costs to nearly every business transaction.? I don't want to pay for it anymore.? It's my money, and it's my responsibility to make safe choices for myself and for my family.

Licensure only gives a false sense of security.? Otherwise why would there be all those malpractice lawsuits?? When people have that false sense of security that the government has licensed an individual or business, they don't take the necessary steps to protect themselves.? They don't use word of mouth or investigate the business in any way.? It's time to end professional licensure.

Kat Dillon

Wow!  I haven't seen the real issue of consumer responsibility approached so clearly before!

Thanks, Kat!

Perhaps we need to get in touch with these guys:

The Center for Consumer Freedom
Promoting Personal Responsibility and Protecting Consumer Choice
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/

[Michael Fisher]

The Center for Consumer Freedom, formerly known as the Guest Choice Network, is a nonprofit run by lobbyist Richard Berman through his for-profit public relations company, Berman & Co. It was started by Berman with a $600,000 ?donation" from Philip Morris.

Maybe you can get in on the corporate shill money? ?

On second thought, that would probably fit in with the Anarchocapitalist thang?

Oh no!  Does Philip Morris think people should be free to choose to smoke?  We can't let people be free!!!  *GASP* 

What would I do with corporate money anyways?  I'd probably donate it to the LSF or use it for local community volunteer projects.  I have no other use for it.

[Pat K]

Man maybe I could get a grant from Sam Adams They could just donate beer.

[Russell Kanning]

Hey....I really like the idea of teaming with Phillip Morris against the government...that would be fun.

[Dave Ridley]

Kat you could probably get even more mileage with an anti-licensure LTE if you mentioned Mike's protest in some form or fashion...

although the more I hear, the more i think practically the whole state has heard about the "outlaw manicurist..."

[Kat Kanning]

I sent that in way before Mike's thing.

[Michael Fisher]

From Rodinia:


To the editor:

In am responding to your editorial, "Buff and polish stunt proves need for health and safety regulations."

Forgive me, but exactly how was this proved?

If manicures are as dangerous as Ms. Dalton or Mr. Maziarz would have you believe, why sell any of the equipment or supplies to the general public? For that matter, we better stop teenage girls from giving themselves or their friends manicures at slumber parties or while chatting on the phone about clothes or boys.

The truth is it's just not that dangerous. Of course, there can be problems or complications. You can die using a boom box or hair dryer improperly. Things happen; that's life.

You're right. It's easy to argue that we're overregulated. It is also easy to make the "if we save only one life" (or limb from amputation) argument. It's a slippery slope. With this way of thinking, soon enough, we will all be required by law to wear helmets in our cars. This may sound extreme, but is there anyone out there who really thinks that requiring a license for a manicure would save more people from injury or harm than requiring helmets in cars? I doubt it.

My point is that we just can't regulate everything; it is absurd to try. Why not leave some of these decisions up to consumers? Maybe I just want a file and polish and I'm comfortable with using someone who hasn't gone to school. Shouldn't that be my choice to make? Why should I be forced to pay more because the state requires hundreds of hours of hands-on work, exams, license fees, etc. for a manicure. All these regulations drive the cost of living up.

"Manicurists are trained to identify skin and nail infections and symptoms of more serious conditions that manifest in the feet, such as diabetes and heart problems."

Are we to assume now that it is a responsibility of a manicurist to recognize and diagnose heart disease and diabetes? Please, what kind of argument is that? With statements like the above, the door is opened wide for lawsuits, driving the cost of doing business right up through the roof. Will manicurist's now need not only liability insurance, but malpractice insurance as well?

Let us not forget, this may have been a stunt, but a man spent two days in jail for accepting $1 in exchange for a buffing a lady's nails. If that doesn't make one question the increasing fragility of our freedom, I don't know what would.

Kelly Halldorson
Dover

[Dave Ridley]

From me to Fosters Daily Democrat

Dear folks at Fosters:

In response to Kelly Halldorson's letter to you, where she criticizes state manicuring laws...she makes some great points.  A guy just spent two days in jail for buffing a woman's nails, when the real violators are those state reps in Concord who voted for the unconstitutional law he was breaking. 

I urge our legislators to look up Article 83 of the New Hampshire Constitution, which they are all sworn to support.  Then tell us why the Board of Barbering isn't a monopoly which tends to inhibits trade.  And I urge the ones who take their oath seriously to bring forward or support any and all bills which would tend to attrit the powers of this tax-funded commerce-prevention outfit.

[Dave Ridley]

From me to Nashua Telegraph

With regard to Cal Thomas's article "China is America’s next ‘gathering threat’..."

Hmmm...It's certainly a possibility that China will threaten the U.S. in some form or fashion, in a sense they already have with that late-90s comment about nuking L.A.  But I'm not impressed with all of the solutions Cal offers.  Kicking out Chinese corporations?   Initiating a more protectionist economy?   Sounds like a prescription for more Federal government control of a smaller U.S. economy. I fear that more than China.   

However there are some things the Feds could do which would spike the Chi-Comm coffee without inhibiting trade or growing the U.S. government.

1) Re-engage the Taiwanese.  Offer closer ties and beefed-up weapon sales in exchange for a drastic loosening of Taiwan's restrictive firearms laws, or an immediate suspension of their enforcement.  Taiwan should not be expecting the U.S. to help it fend off the Chinese if it is not allowing its own citizens to defend themselves against invasion and crime.

2) Re-task some of our State Department folks in China.  Give them a mandate to embarrass the Chinese government by constantly meeting with its native opponents and staging Free-Stater-style publicity stunts around the communist nation.  Replace the diplomats who aren't up to it.  This type of thing worked in Romania in the 80s.

3) Establish closer ties with anti-Beijing regimes in the region, giving top preference to those with the least restrictive gun laws.  Nothing will keep the Chinese military away  quite so efficiently as an armed citizenry (it helped keep the Japanese Army out of Hawaii, right)?

4) *Maybe* one could use the bully pulpit of Federal office to encourage information warfare against the Chinese government by average Americans. Call upon patriotic geeks around the country to crack into official Chinese websites with messages of freedom and undermine their censorship of the Internet.

In these ways, and many others, perhaps we can help draw a ring around the Chinese *military* without additional taxpayer expense, without economic losses and hopefully to the benefit of average Chinese.  I'm sure the ideas need refinement, and probably no one's listening anyway.  But we need to think outside the box if we are to remain secure without bankrupting the taxpayer.

[Dave Ridley]

From me to Portsmouth Herald:
-----

Dear folks at the Herald:

With regard to the "Unidentified Flying Objector" Russell Kanning and his arrest at the Manchester Airport for refusing to comply with TSA regulations:

There are some interesting highlights about his case which haven't come up much in the press yet.

1) Whether you approve or don't approve of Kanning's precise approach, he has helped the public become aware of something hardly anyone knew before:  It is possible to fly without I.D. if you are willing to submit to a secondary search.   Kanning wasn't, but if you are then you can fly I.D.-free!  If Russell had done his protest last year it would have saved me countless hours trying to procure a new I.D. for my grandmother who had lost hers but needed to travel.  Hopefully his sacrifice will save many others this hassle in the future.

2) Kanning and his wife Kat had company during their drive to the airport...at least three FBI agents.  I more or less confirmed this with one of the other FBI guys.  Kat reports that she and Russell led the tailing agents on a couple quick detours just to mess with them...earning a grin from one of the drivers.  It's an amusing anecdote, and the agents have remained friendly, but this doesn't seem to be a very efficient use of tax dollars.   The Kanning home in Keene has also been under open surveillance off and on since Kanning announced his protest.   

History doesn't look kindly on Hoover's waste of resources investigating peaceful activists in the 60s; it may frown a bit on this allocation as well.

3) There had been some concern among Kanning's supporters about making sure no travelers were delayed by his protest.  I timed it out...Kanning was in his line for a little under 5 minutes before being hauled off; the other line (which remained open) reached a length of five persons but never more than that.  As Kanning put it...Manchester airport is one of the best in the country but would be better without TSA! 

4) Kanning didn't just have a complaint to make; he also has a couple of solutions in mind, solutions he believes in strongly enough to face arrest.   These include allowing pilots to arm themselves and ending the practice of government bailouts for airlines who let terrorists seize their planes.   Both of these goals would of course be realized by getting government *completely out* of aviation, and we'd all be safer for it.  As one local pilot put it:  "I am willing to bet my life on that proposition."

[Dave Ridley]

From me to Laconia Citizen...

Dear folks at the Citizen:

Regarding your article "N.H. denied No Child waiver..." here is my question:  Why is our state government trying to jump through Federal government education hoops?  Where in the U.S. Constitution is the FedGov authorized to oversee education?  Do the D.C. bureaucrats know more about education than our local teachers do?   

I would prefer our state officials spend their time helping New Hampshire opt *out* of Federal programs, especially the Federal Income Tax which funds sinkholes like "No Child Allowed to Shine."  If we give them nothing then we won't have to worry about getting it back.   State Rep Harriet Cady had a bill in '03 that was a step in this direction, but it didn't pass.  I hope she gives it another try!  In the meantime, hats off to the folks who are opting out of the income tax on their own initiative; where is the law that says we have to pay it?

[RexCurry.net]

Schools should not teach kids to verbally fellate flags, nor flag fetishism --

Below is a Letter to the Editor that was sent to newspapers, teachers, students, school boards and schools all over the USA asking that the national flag be removed from schools on Flag Day (June 14th). Please pass it on and feel free to use it as a letter to the editor. 

Dear teachers, schools, and School Boards:

Flag Day (6-14) is a good day to remove the flag from schools. Please help, and also educate students about these new historical discoveries:

1. The original Pledge of Allegiance to the USA's flag used a straight-armed salute and it was the source of the salute of the monstrous National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis).  The gesture was not an ancient Roman salute.

2. The Pledge began with a military salute that then extended outward toward the flag.  Due to the way that Francis Bellamy (the Pledge's creator) used the gestures, the military salute led to the Nazi salute.

3. Bellamy was a self-proclaimed socialist in the nationalism movement and his dogma influenced socialists in Germany, and his pledge was the origin of their salute. Many people forget that "Nazi" means "National Socialist German Workers' Party." A mnemonic device is the swastika (Hakenkreuz in German).  Although the swastika was an ancient symbol, it was also used sometimes to represent "S" letters joined for "socialism" under the German National Socialists.

How the discoveries were made is a fascinating story in itself.  I made the discoveries by accident during legal research involving litigation about the pledge. As a libertarian lawyer, and the USA?s favorite flagologist, I do pro bono work educating students and others about the right to reject the ritualism.

Fight the flag hags and their flag fetish. Government's schools should not teach kids to verbally fellate flags each morning. It is like a brainwashed cult of the omnipotent state. For adults it is childish. Remove the pledge from the flag, remove flags from schools, remove schools from government.

The Bellamy dogma was the same dogma that led to the "Wholecaust" (of which the Holocaust was a part): 62 million killed under the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; 35 million under the Peoples' Republic of China; 21 million under the National Socialist German Workers' Party.  It was so bad that Holocaust Museums could quadruple in size with Wholecaust Museums to document the entire slaughter.

In the USA, government took over education and imposed segregation by law and taught racism as official policy.  The USA's behavior was an example for three decades before the Nazis. As under Nazism, the Jehovah's Witnesses, and blacks and the Jewish and others in the USA attended government schools that dictated segregation, taught racism, and persecuted children who refused to perform the straight-arm salute and robotically chant the pledge. Some kids were expelled from government schools and had to use the many better alternatives.  There were acts of violence. When Jesse Owens competed in the 1936 Olympics in Germany, his neighbors attended segregated government schools where they saluted the flag with the Nazi salute.  The U.S. practice of official racism even outlasted the horrid party.  And the schools and the Pledge still exist. The Pledge is still the most visible sign of the USA's growing police state. 

Some schools in the USA are still named after Francis Bellamy.  The Bellamy schools should be re-named because they send the wrong message to children and the community.  It causes emotional distress to children who attend schools named after a man who popularized the Nazi salute and who helped the government institutionalize racism and segregation.  I, and my supporters, will also assist in any legal means to defray the cost of re-naming Bellamy schools.

Listen to a new talk-show appearance by RexCurry.net about the flag and the pledge http://rexcurry.net/rexcurry4.mp3

A more detailed version of the article above is at http://rexcurry.net/flag-day.html