- EverVigilant.net - "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." - John Philpot Curran
The following is a quiz given to those seeking to become naturalized citizens in the United States. (Click here to take it yourself and have it scored.)
When I first saw this, I couldn't help but wonder what might go through the minds of publik skool-edumakated Americans who read it (or, more likely, have someone read it to them)...
1. How many stripes are there on the U.S. flag?
_ 10 _ 13 _ 50 _ 51
I'm not sure. The people I see on the news usually burn it before I can count them.
2. Who is the chief justice of the Supreme Court today?
_ George W. Bush _ Alberto Gonzales _ Thomas Jefferson _ John G. Roberts Jr.
Is that like a king or something?
3. In what year was the Constitution written?
_ 1776 _ 1787 _ 1876 _ 1812
This country has a Constitution?
4. Which of these is guaranteed by the First Amendment?
_ Freedom of the press _ Right to bear arms _ Right to happiness _ Right to trial by jury
I have never heard of those before. By the way, I think "bear" should be spelled B-A-R-E. Must be a typo.
5. How many Supreme Court justices are there?
_ 3 _ 9 _ 10 _ 13
Well, I think the Justice League of America originally had seven members...
6. What are the first 10 amendments to the Constitution called?
_ The Preamble _ The Bill of Rights _ First Ten Amendments _ Lewis "Scooter" Libby
Ha, ha, ha! "Scooter"!
7. When was the Declaration of Independence adopted?
_ July 4, 1776 _ July 4, 1787 _ July 4, 1812 _ July 4, 1876
Let's see. July 4 is called Independence Day. So, what year were fireworks invented?
8. Which of the following amendments to the Constitution does NOT address or guarantee voting rights?
I don't know. Whenever I vote, I just check off the names I hear most often on the news.
9. What are the 13 original states?
_ Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, New Zealand, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Rhode Island, Maryland _ Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Rhode Island, Maryland _ Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Rhode Island, Maryland _ Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Rhode Island, Maryland, Washington, D.C.
I thought there were 50 states.
10. What do the stripes on the U.S. flag mean?
_ The Cabinet _ One for each state in the Union _ They represent the 13 original states _ One for each article of the Constitution
Isn't it because Uncle Sam's pants have red and white stripes?
11. What is the introduction to the Constitution called?
_ The Preamble _ The Bill of Rights _ The Declaration of Independence _ The Articles of Confederation
Again with the Constitution? I never hear any politicians use that word.
12. How many changes or amendments are there to the Constitution?
_ 9 _ 10 _ 13 _ 27
Seriously, what the #$@! is this "Constitution" they keep talking about?!
13. Which of the following is NOT one of the constitutional requirements to be eligible to become president?
_ Must be at least 35 years old by the time he/she will serve _ Must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years _ Must be a natural-born citizen of the United States _ Must have served as a governor
Huh? The only thing I know about who gets to be president is that you have to be rich, belong to some secret society, or have a dad who was president.
14. Who selects the Supreme Court justices?
_ The Electoral College _ The people _ They are appointed by the president _ The Senate
I seem to recall members of the Supreme Court being selected based on how they did on a TV quiz show hosted by Ted Kennedy.
15. How many representatives are there in Congress?
_ 50 _ 100 _ 102 _ 435
I knew there were 50 states! I can go back and answer question #1 now.
16. Who said, "Give me liberty or give me death"?
_ George Washington _ Benjamin Franklin _ Thomas Jefferson _ Patrick Henry
Never heard of any of them. But what a dumb thing to say.
17. Why did the Pilgrims come to America?
_ In search of gold _ To meet the Indians _ For religious freedom _ To escape the Revolutionary War
It wasn't because they were starving?
18. Who has the power to declare war?
_ Congress _ The president _ Chief justice of the Supreme Court _ Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Duh! That's easy. The President.
19. What INS form is used to apply to become a naturalized citizen?
_ Form N-200 "Petition for Naturalization" _ N-400 "Application for Naturalization" _ Social Security card _ FD-258
I have a Social Security card, and I know I can't even rent a DVD without that number.
20. Which of these contains three rights or freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights?
_ Right to life, right to liberty, right to the pursuit of happiness _ Freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion _ Right to protest, right to protection under the law, freedom of religion _ Freedom of religion, right to elect representatives, human rights
What "rights"? Are they sure this question is about America? Must be another typo.
The folks at the Weakly Substandard have joined the ranks of "conservatives" calling for a crackdown on journalists who "leak" national security "secrets." In an essay entitled "Leaks and the Law," Gabriel Schoenfeld tries to make "the case for prosecuting the New York Times":
Can journalists really be prosecuted for publishing national security secrets? In the wake of a series of New York Times stories revealing highly sensitive counterterrorism programs, that question is increasingly the talk of newsrooms across the country ...
... Although the editors of the Times act as if prosecution is not a possibility, not everyone concurs. One person who is still mulling the matter over is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Asked in late May about the prospect of prosecuting the Times and others who publish classified information, he by no means ruled it out. "There are some statutes on the books," he said, "which, if you read the language carefully, would seem to indicate that that is a possibility."
Schoenfeld goes on to mention a 1949 Senate report which noted that a book published in the early 1930s about U.S. successes in breaking Japanese codes had caused "irreparable harm" to our national security because it supposedly prompted the Japanese to come up with more secure codes. The report concluded that this was why we weren't able to "decode the important Japanese military communications in the days immediately leading up to Pearl Harbor."
It is therefore Schoenfeld's conclusion that Pearl Harbor had nothing to do with economic sanctions, oil embargoes, or naval blockades. No, the devastating attack was made possible "by leaks of classified information."
Schoenfeld sums up his criticism of a free press this way:
At stake here for Attorney General Gonzales to contemplate is not just the right to defend ourselves from another Pearl Harbor. Can it really be the government's position that, in the middle of a war in which we have been attacked on our own soil, the power to classify or declassify vital secrets should be taken away from elected officials acting in accord with laws set by Congress and bestowed on a private institution accountable to no one?
"Accountable to no one?" That sounds a lot like the ruling elite in Washington. After all, they are the ones with the power to fine, imprison, and kill with impunity. Despite what "conservatives" like to think about their enemies in the mainstream press, the fact remains that the New York Times does not have that kind of power. But since when did facts matter?
We have already seen similar assaults on liberty in our nation's history. Abraham Lincoln, for example, fought against freedom of the press during his war against the South. He shut down newspapers that were critical of his illegal invasion and arrested editors who were sympathetic toward the Southern states and their right to secede.
Now it seems the Bush administration is prepared to pick up where Lincoln left off. And, as Schoenfeld's article demonstrates, there is no shortage of "conservatives" willing to go along with the plan.
It isn't difficult to spot the usual suspects. Those who support the prosecution of journalists for reporting the truth are the same ones who supported every other encroachment on our civil liberties under the current administration. They stood proudly by President Bush when he signed the anti-free speech Incumbent Politician Protection Act (a.k.a. the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act) into law. They cheered when the PATRIOT Act made every American citizen a potential terrorist suspect. They praised the REAL ID Act and its creation of a de facto national ID card.
As a reminder of the kind of nation we once had, here's what Thomas Jefferson said about freedom of the press: "The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." How soon we forget.
BAGHDAD, 25 Jun 2006 (IRIN) - Iraqis are increasingly turning to drug abuse as a way to escape--albeit temporarily--the chronic environment of insecurity, lawlessness and poverty, say health workers and government officials.
"Iraqis are consuming illicit drugs like they never have before," said Kamel Ali, head of the health ministry's drug-prevention programme. "Each day, they're shifting to more dangerous drugs due to the stress associated with violence."
According to Ali, the number of drug abusers countrywide has increased by about 50 percent since the beginning of the year, with an estimated 2 percent of the total population now addicted to illegal narcotics. Ali added, however, that this figure could be much higher because many local physicians lack the specialised knowledge to diagnose cases of drug addiction. "We have very good laboratories for toxicology, but this isn't enough," he said. "Different kinds of drugs are entering the country, and many of the cases seen by doctors are those of drug abusers who are also alcoholics."
When Iraqis start battling chronic obesity, perhaps then we can truly say, "Mission accomplished!" and start bringing our troops home.
The folks at LewRockwell.com have posted a chapter from Murray Rothbard's book, Making Economic Sense, that deals with the minimum wage and its effect on the economy. Rothbard, not surprisingly, clearly understands this issue more than any self-serving politician:
In truth, there is only one way to regard a minimum wage law: it is compulsory unemployment, period. The law says: it is illegal, and therefore criminal, for anyone to hire anyone else below the level of X dollars an hour. This means, plainly and simply, that a large number of free and voluntary wage contracts are now outlawed and hence that there will be a large amount of unemployment. Remember that the minimum wage law provides no jobs; it only outlaws them; and outlawed jobs are the inevitable result. ...
... The advocates of the minimum wage and its periodic boosting reply that all this is scare talk and that minimum wage rates do not and never have caused any unemployment. The proper riposte is to raise them one better; all right, if the minimum wage is such a wonderful anti-poverty measure, and can have no unemployment-raising effects, why are you such pikers? Why you are helping the working poor by such piddling amounts? Why stop at $4.55 an hour? Why not $10 an hour? $100? $1,000?
It is obvious that the minimum wage advocates do not pursue their own logic, because if they push it to such heights, virtually the entire labor force will be disemployed. In short, you can have as much unemployment as you want, simply by pushing the legally minimum wage high enough.
The entire book is available online for free at Mises.org.
Devoted Minnesota Twins fans David Hoch and Joe Marble started an organization known as "Citizens United for Baseball in Minnesota" back in 1997. The purpose of the organization was to persuade Minnesotans to support their efforts to build a new outdoor baseball stadium for billionaire Twins owner Carl Polad.
After nearly ten years, their efforts finally paid off. The legislature OK'd their publicly funded stadium. But when Minnesota's lying governor, Tim Pawlenty, showed up at the Metrodome to sign the new stadium bill into law, Hoch and Marble weren't invited to the ceremony.
Now Hoch, who is now running for governor as the candidate of the Resource Party, isn't happy. In fact, he's downright angry.
"Between us, I estimate we spent $80,000 working toward a new Twins ballpark," Hoch said in a recent Star-Tribune article. "And then down on the field, taking bows at the signing ceremony, were politicians we know opposed a new ballpark for 10 years. When I found out some of the people who were going to be there, it made me sick."
And now the Minnesota Twins have lost a fan. "I'm done with the Twins," Hoch said. "I'm never going to another game. Dome, new ballpark...never." In a June 13 radio interview, Hoch reiterated his intention to avoid the new ballpark, saying, "I guess I'll always have a chip on my shoulder."
Well, Mr. Hoch, I wish I could offer some words of comfort. You're obviously distraught, and I can see why. You embarked on a mission to get other taxpayers to fund your love of outdoor baseball and now, having been tossed aside by those who used you to get their hands on those public funds, you cannot even enjoy the fruits of your labor.
At the very least—whenever you're done behaving like a spoiled little child—maybe you can learn to appreciate the poetic justice of this situation.
Tim Pawlenty, Republican governor of Minnesota, is a liar. He signed a "no new taxes" pledge in 2002 to secure his party's endorsement and proceeded to break that promise by imposing a $.75-per pack "health impact fee" on cigarettes. Most recently, he signed a new bill that increases the sales tax in Hennepin County to pay for an outdoor baseball stadium.
Pawlenty will never admit it, but he knows he's a liar. And he knows that his "conservative" base knows it, though they'll never let on that they know. What's more, he knows that they'll support him even though they know, because they know that all politicians lie.
He also knows that since Republican voters are just as gullible as their Democratic counterparts, all he has to do is refuse to apologize for lying—that would only draw the attention of those who don't already know—while at the same time making it appear that he won't do it again. This will be his key strategy in seeking reelection.
On May 31, in a preemptive publicity strike, Gov. Pawlenty said, "I'm not going to sign any pledge for any special interest group for any reason." I guess when you know you can't stand on principle, the best course of action is not to have any principles at all.
But deep down, everyone still knows that he's a liar. He's a politician, after all. Lying is in his nature.
