Scott Bradford: Off on a Tangent

Best Democratic Party Strategy: Repeal and Replace

Posted

It was only a decade ago that the Democratic Party styled itself as the party of unbridled democracy, attempting to throw out the rule of law and the unique legalistic nuance of our electoral system in an effort to make sure that the winner of the popular vote—then-Vice President Al Gore (D)—became president. In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court had to weigh in, ruling that Florida’s election laws had to be followed as-written and couldn’t be changed on a whim because the outcome didn’t meet with everybody’s approval. As such, the state’s electors went (with the presidency) to then-Governor George W. Bush (R-TX).

Many Democrats were apoplectic, declaring that the will of the people had been usurped by a cadre of beltway elites in Washington. It may have looked that way on its face, but we simply don’t elect presidents by popular vote. You might not like the Electoral College system—heck, I’m not sure I like it either—but it’s the system we have, and its outcomes don’t always align with the popular vote. That’s reality, and we are free to amend that system at any time using one of the two methods of amendment provided-for by the Constitution itself.

Regardless, you would think that the party of unbridled democracy—that which treats the will of the people as the most sacrosanct of things, never to be ignored or usurped—would have refrained from passing a health care reform act opposed by a clear plurality of the voters (a majority in many polls) and likewise thought to be more harmful than helpful by just under two-thirds of doctors. The will of the people is quite clear: we want health care reform, but we don’t want the version of it that Congress passed last year. If there was any doubt about this, the last Congressional election should have made it painfully obvious. You would think that the Democratic Party would be the one to have noticed that the people were not at all happy with what they were doing.

Read more . . .

Stealthflation

Posted

The biggest economic risk facing the United States (and much of the world) right now is something I’m calling ‘stealthflation.’

The elites in the White House and the U.S. Federal Reserve seem to think we are at risk of monetary deflation, where the value of the national currency actually rises. This causes many systemic problems when it occurs, not least of which being that people find their personal property suddenly worth less than what they owe on it. Deflation tends to harm loan recipients (people and companies) and benefit loan issuers (banks).

In an effort to keep the dollar stable, Presidents George W. Bush (R) and Barack Obama (D) have drastically increased our federal deficits by injecting massive buckets of federal tax dollars into the economy with ill-advised bailouts and ‘stimulus.’ Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve (under Bush-appointed and Obama-re-appointed Chairman Ben Bernanke) has created an additional 2 trillion dollars out of thin air and injected it into the economy through its so-called ‘quantitative easing’ programs. All-told, somewhere over 4 trillion dollars—that’s $4,000,000,000,000.00—have been artificially forced into circulation by the U.S. government.

Based on the official inflation rates and the consumer price index (CPI), our government keeps telling us that they need to put more and more and more money into the system to maintain its stability and prevent deflation. I’ve talked before about the very dangerous risk they are running, which is that their unprecedented dollar injections will result in serious inflation and potentially hyperinflation before they realize they’ve gone too far. One could argue that inflation is better than deflation, since it tends to benefit loan recipients (people and companies) at the expense of loan issuers (banks), but putting a bunch of our banks out of business isn’t really a good thing either. It’s just a different kind of bad.

Read more . . .

‘Gallery Shortcode Style to Head’ Version 2.1

Posted
Plugin Settings Screen

I’ve just released an update to the ‘Gallery Shortcode Style to Head‘ plugin for WordPress, bringing the version to 2.1. This update is nothing earth-shattering, just a standard maintenance update.

Here’s what’s new:

  • Removed clearing <br> tags in galleries (replaced with clearing <div> tags).
  • Corrected bug that threw a cryptic error on the media page for some users.
  • Support for WordPress 3.1; now requires WordPress 2.9 or higher.

Like I said, nothing too major. As always, contact me if you find any bugs or issues!

Justice Served for Chief Chambers

Posted

There are (basically) two kinds of civilian government employees: political appointees and career public servants.

Political appointees serve at the pleasure of the president, and can be fired for pretty much any reason at the President’s discretion. As such, when President George W. Bush (R) found himself embroiled in a controversy over the politically-motivated firing of a number of U.S. attorneys, I scratched my head and wondered why everybody was making such a big deal out of it. Was it imprudent and politically damaging? Yes. Was it illegal? Absolutely not. The president can fire appointees for any reason whatsoever, including petty political ones.

Career public servants, however, are different. The bureaucracy, as much maligned as it is, is supposed to be full of employees who dutifully execute public policy without regard to the politics behind them. They can’t be fired except if they fail to do their jobs. The president can’t demand that a career bureaucrat be fired, only the agency’s equivalent of an H.R. department can, and only with valid cause. Bureaucrats have whistle-blower protections as well, giving them the leeway to protect the public interest by reporting waste, fraud, abuse, and mis-management without having to fear being fired for it. They can’t divulge classified information (ahem, WikiLeaks leaker) or private personal information (e.g., military service or tax records) without clearance, but otherwise have a lot of freedom to discuss their work. After all, they work for us!

Back in November 2003, Teresa Chambers—then-Chief of the United States Park Police—expressed her concerns about staffing and funding of the department in an interview with the Washington Post. Within days, she had been suspended by the Bush-administration Interior Department. In June of 2004, she was fired.

As one would expect, Chambers appealed the decision to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), which is a panel that hears appeals from terminated federal employees. The Board finally rendered its decision today, determining that Chambers had been fired improperly and must be reinstated within twenty days. Good for her. Our federal bureaucrats must be permitted to express their concerns about the operations of our federal agencies without fear of repercussions. They answer to us, so it stands to reason that they should be allowed to let us know what’s going on.

One innocent victim: current Park Police Chief Salvatore Lauro, who will be displaced by Chambers assuming she chooses to return to her wrongfully-taken position. I am hopeful that the Department of the Interior can figure out some way to ensure that both Chambers and Lauro are properly compensated for the mess made by the previous administration.

Ruger Mk-III 22/45 .22LR

Posted

Using some of the cash I got for Christmas (thanks, cash-senders!), I decided to go pick up a .22 LR pistol. The main purpose is to have something for inexpensive target practice at the range. .22 LR is too light a caliber for defensive purposes, but ammo is drastically less expensive than any other handgun round. When I say drastic I mean drastic. You can pick up 500 rounds of .22 LR for less than the price of 100 rounds of 9mm, so it makes it much more affordable to go to the range.

Melissa and I dropped by Virginia Arms in Manassas, our favorite go-to shop for handguns, and handled a few different .22 LR pistols. We settled on the Ruger Mk-III 22/45 as having a good balance of price (less than $300), reliability, reputation, and feel. Melissa and I both found the 22/45 grip, which has the same angle as the traditional M1911 .45ACP, more comfortable than the ‘standard’ Mk-III grip. We are hoping to get out to the range sometime in the next week or so to try it out!

Scott Bradford is a writer and technologist who has been putting his opinions online since 1995. He believes in three inviolable human rights: life, liberty, and property. He is a Catholic Christian who worships the trinitarian God described in the Nicene Creed. Scott is a husband, nerd, pet lover, and AMC/Jeep enthusiast with a B.S. degree in public administration from George Mason University.