The gay cowboy

A successful rancher died and left everything to his devoted wife.
She was a very good-looking woman and determined to keep the ranch, but knew very little about ranching, so she decided to place an ad in the newspaper for a ranch hand.

Two cowboys applied for the job. One was gay and the other a drunk.

She thought long and hard about it, and when no one else applied she decided to hire the gay guy, figuring it would be safer to have him around the house than the drunk.

He proved to be a hard worker who put in long hours every day and knew a lot about ranching.

For weeks, the two of them worked, and the ranch was doing very well.

Then one day, the rancher's widow said to the hired hand, "You have done a really good job, and the ranch looks great. You should go into town and kick up your heels.

"The hired hand readily agreed and went into town one Saturday night.

One o'clock a.m.came, however, and he didn't return.

Two o'clock a.m. came and no hired hand.

Finally he returned around two-thirty, and upon entering the room, he found the rancher's widow sitting by the fireplace with a glass of wine, waiting for him.

She quietly called him over to her.

"Unbutton my blouse and take it off," she said.

Trembling, he did as she directed. "Now take off my boots."

He did as she asked, ever so slowly. "Now take off my socks."

He removed each gently and placed them neatly by her boots.

"Now take off my skirt."

He slowly unbuttoned it, constantly watching her eyes in the fire light.

"Now take off my bra." 

Again, with trembling hands, he did as he was told and dropped it to the floor.

 

Then she looked at him and said,    "If you ever wear my clothes into town again, you're fired."

Apolitical Aphorisms ....

If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. ~Jay Leno~   The problem with political jokes is they get elected. ~Henry Cate, VII~   We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. ~Aesop~   If we got one-tenth of what was promised to us in these State of the Union speeches, there wouldn't be any inducement to go to heaven. ~Will Rogers~   Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river. ~Nikita Khrushchev~   When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President; I'm beginning to believe it. ~Clarence Darrow~   Why pay money to have your family tree traced; go into politics and your opponents will do it for you. ~Author unknown~   Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. ~John Quinton~   Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other. ~Oscar Ameringer~   I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them. ~Adlai Stevenson, campaign speech, 1952~   A politician is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country. ~Tex Guinan~   I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians. ~Charles de Gaulle~   Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks. ~Doug Larson~   There ought to be one day -- just one -- when there is open season on Congressmen. ~Will Rogers~

Fwd: Fw: Obama golf

A funny audio clip spoofing Obamacare
https://soundcloud.com/mrose5/obama-golf

Rex sez: I laughed out loud.  

Asshole judges

Judges are Free to Take Your Liberty For Anything – Didn't Cut your Lawn – Jail Time!

It is just amazing how there is no respect for human rights and the sanctity ofLIBERTY in the United States any more. There just has to be a serious overhaul of the rule of law in the USA for there are more people in prison in the USA than Europe, China, and Russia COMBINED. In Tennessee, a woman had to spend the night in jail because she had not mowed her lawn. A court had sentenced her to the prison because her garden had not been maintained in accordance with the rules of Lenoir City. In the USA, far too many judges are out of control and have become ruthless self-absorbed ego-maniacs who send citizens to jail for minor offenses that are not crimes in the least violating your Civil Rights, which is in itself a federal crime.

Last summer, Karen Holloway received a subpoena from Lenoir City because of the unkempt lawn and bushes in her garden. Holloway admits that the garden would have needed more attention, in fact. But they have not had time for gardening, she says. She was quoted by Yahoo News: "The bushes and trees were overgrown, but that's not a crime". Karen Holloway works full-time and has two children. Her husband, a former soldier, also works full-time and goes to college at the same time. The family has only one car.

Judge Terry Vann  sentenced Holloway to 5 days in jail for non-compliance of the local ordinance, This man is an absolute disgrace to everything the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave was intended to represent. Thank God I am not President for I would use the abuse of Executive Orders to imprison every judge that sent anyone for a non crime to prison indefinitely until the Supreme Court said they should be released. Holloway was not advised of her rights and the problem is you are entitled to a lawyer ONLY in criminal cases where your liberty can be taken. What is going on here is we have judges just throwing people in prison without Due Process of Law. This in itself is a federal crimes – 18 USC §241.

Only after public outrage did this ruthless judge reduce the draconian sentence to six hours proving he knew he went too far. The judge admitted that Holloway is not a criminal and that this is not a criminal trial. But she was still sent in the night from Tuesday to Wednesday to jail. She was NOT given a lawyer and she has an absolute right to now sue the judge and the city for violating her CIVIL RIGHTS.

This crazy judge has order her to return to court In November and he will again review the progress in the garden maintenance. Until then, their family and friends want to help her, to bring the property in order. Judge Vann has again threatened her with jail if her garden is not in perfect order.

Pennsylvania judges plead guilty to taking bribes from private prisons to fill them up with sentencing people to jail for non-crimes. Hillary Transue thought she might get a stern lecture when she appeared before a judge for building a spoof MySpace page mocking the assistant principal at her high school in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Hillary was a top student who had never been in trouble, and the page stated clearly at the bottom that it was just a joke. This is political free speech under the Constitution. However, Judges Michael T. Conahan, and Mark A. Ciavarella Jr., were taking kickbacks to send teenagers to detention centers. Instead, the judge sentenced her to 3 months at a juvenile detention center on a charge of harassment. Again, this violated her civil rights and was a federal crime.

The US legal system is out of control and there are too few checks and balances. It is not the first time that a US citizen is sentenced to a prison term because of the state of his property. How about sending a court in South Carolina Linda Ruggles for six days in jail after she failed to pay a $ 500 fine due to loose roof tiles. Again, judges are just summarily imprisoning citizens without Due Process of Law. They are not being provided lawyers yet their liberty is stolen from them for any excuse.

In July, police arrested the town of Thomaston in the State of Connecticut the 49-year-old Carmine Cervellino because he had punctured a watermelon with a knife ,  Register Citizen . James Campbell, the police chief of Thomaston, defended the arrest so that there were allegations against Cervellino.

In April, the seventh-grader Ethan Chaplin was in the state of New Jeryey excluded from school and had to undergo intensive investigations because he had played with his pencil in class , reports the Huffington Post .A classmate had told the teacher, Chaplin do "guns-movements". The school inspectors Charles Maranzano declared the exclusion from school so that Chaplin might constitute a threat to themselves or others.

In Peoria, Illinois, the police went on a rampage searching in April after the author of a fake Twitter accounts of Mayor Jim Ardis made a joke about the politician. They insisted this was a criminal act, because it was not obvious that it was a forgery jokingly. However, during the investigation, police raided a house and seized mobile phones and computers. They arrested five people and took them to the police station for questioning. One of those arrested was sent immediately for possession of marijuana into the prison. Nonetheless, no connection to the Twitter account was ever found. Those arrested were again abused. "They arrested me, as if I were a criminal" , citing the Peoria Journal Star. Even after hours of interrogation, the police still had no suspects. There was no probably cause – they just arrest people who they do not like.

In Charleston in the state of Virginia, the Federal Police imposed the construction worker Christopher Lewis a penalty of $525 because he had forgotten in the cafeteria of a hospital to pay for it, that he filled his drinking cup for a second time. For that he should have to pay 89 cents, by his own account. Later in April, the sentence was replaced by a warning, reported wistv.com . A hospital spokesman spoke of a "theft of government property." Lewis has lost his job on the hospital grounds.

On 6 April, the police of New York City arrested the puppeteer Kalan Sherrard , reported the Daily News . Sherrard led straight to a puppet when the police handcuffed him. They accused him of creating a dangerous situation. Video recordings of the arrest, however, show that there was no danger. In the arrest, the police destroyed a doll and other items of the 26-year-old artist from Seattle. Again, there was nothing LAWFUL about this arrest or the destruction of his personal property.

An example of the militarization of the police in the US raid on a family in Des Moines is in the state of Iowa. In February, about ten officers procured with helmets, face masks, bulletproof vests and weapons at the ready with a ram access to the house without first knocking, reported the Washington Post . The raid by the police was filmed by multiple surveillance cameras they did not know about. The sons of the family are technicians and been robbed in the past, so they installed the cameras. Only through this circumstance did this raid make the news. How many more are taking place we do not know about?

The reason this is a critical issue is more than just people losing their LIBERTY. This undermines PROPERTY RIGHTS. How can you buy a home or invest in anything if some judge can take it away and as long as they call it "CIVIL" and not "CRIMINAL" you are not entitled to a lawyer. This is how Rome Collapsed. Edward Gibbon in the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire explains precisely why prosecutors are made judges today. As long as they are

Like this:

Related Notes

Editorial: Judges SentencedEditorial: Judges Sentenced Kids for cash The setting is Pennsylvania coal country, but it's a story right out of Dickens' grim 19th-century landscape: Two of Luzerne County's most senior judges on Mo...

Screen clip

Fwd: Why I Don't Vote

Worthy words by an intelligent man who is disgusted with things as they are. Passed on by Rex Harrill

I have not voted in a national election since 1988 and will never vote again. It's not that I don't care or that I'm lazy. It's just that I've come to the conclusion that voting doesn't matter. More importantly, voting is antithetical to the values I hold dear. Voting is often held to be "a sacred duty" or "a right" or even a "moral responsibility". Those in power love to promote elections and voters rights because they know that voting gives legitimacy to what they do once elected. Why else would billions of dollars be devoted to election politics? Politicians desperately plea with citizens to "get out and vote" because they know that elections provide cover for them. "Make your voice heard" is a constant refrain as if going to the polling booth once every two or four years and secretly casting a ballot will miraculously change the course of human history.

In the end the biggest reason I don't vote, the only one that truly matters is that inevitably my vote is an act of aggression against others. The Declaration of Independence, one of the foundational documents that governs this country states correctly that "…all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". The key to that phrase is that our rights are unalienable which means non-transferable. I can vote to give away my freedoms but I cannot vote to take away yours. If our rights are unalienable (non transferable) then they cannot be usurped by a voter or group of voters and yet that is the crux of all voting. All voting is about taking something from someone and giving it to another or appointing someone lord and master over others against their will.

Voting is an act of violence because each voter assumes the right to appoint political and legal guardians over other human beings. No individual voter or even a majority of voters has such a right morally. If they claim to possess such a right, please have them clearly explain where that right comes from and how it squares with the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence "that all men are created equal" and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable "Rights" of "Life, Liberty," and Property. When someone slips into a voting booth and pulls the lever they are no different than the highwayman who pulls a pistol out of his pocket and robs you in broad daylight.

Some people say that voting is a key to democracy and necessary to preserve our rights. This is hogwash. History has shown repeatedly that voting does not preserve rights and in fact is used as a tool to take them away. There are countless examples of so called democracy, even representative democracy such as that practiced in America, electing tyrants. It should be noted that Hitler rose to office in a thoroughly democratic process. Moreover, if voting is required to preserve our rights then they aren't unalienable are they? Our rights become conditional, something bestowed by the state. This is a very dangerous proposition, to allow the state the ability to assign rights because what it can give it can surely take away. And it routinely does.

Voting is an act of consent. I do not choose to offer my consent. When you vote you agree to abide by the rules of the game and accept the outcome. By voting, the voter endorses the governmental system under which he or she lives and those in control of it. Each voter is saying: It is right and proper for some people, acting in the name of the State, to pass laws and to use violence to compel obedience to those laws if they are not obeyed regardless of the morality of those laws.

I've often heard people say – "Well, if you don't vote you don't have the right to complain." Let me see if I understand the argument: If I don't vote I forfeit my right to free speech. Free speech is not an unalienable right but contingent on me voting. This of course must mean that other rights are conditional and based on whether I vote or not. The logical extension of this argument would suggest that the other protections afforded me in the Bill of Rights are only valid if I vote. If I don't vote I can't own a gun. If I don't vote I am subject to unreasonable search and seizure. If I don't vote I cannot expect to be secure in my "persons, houses, papers, and effects." If I don't vote I cannot decline to testify against myself and due process is not available to me. That's what these people are saying. It's a terrifying prospect to suggest that voting is the fulcrum on which all human liberty is balanced.

Voters are never held accountable for their vote. They vote anonymously to elect leaders that reflect their values with no regard for the rights of their fellow citizens. When you think about it, voting is a cowardly act. It allows people to do by way of proxies to others what they cannot or will not do themselves such as stealing or killing or otherwise agressing. Furthermore, those elected are never held accountable for the debt they accrue on behalf of those they represent and the resulting economic harm. The worst thing that happens is the they are voted out of office with a full lifetime pension when they should in fact be in jail for armed robbery.

Some people would say, "Vote for the person or issue that best reflects your values." In other words, vote for the lesser of evils. There are a lot of problems with the argument. If we vote for a bad candidate, we are partly responsible for the harm done by that candidate. This is true even if our sole intent was to defeat a worse candidate. One evil does not justify another. It would have been better not to vote at all. Supporting the lesser of two evils tells politicians that it is acceptable for them to do likewise. The "vote for lesser of evils" strategy always results in a downward trend in the quality of candidates. Politicians won't change if they know we'll vote for them anyway. Good candidates seldom receive the support they need to become viable. The problem of bad choices is thereby perpetuated, and the nation continues to deteriorate until the day when our choices will be an Adolf Hitler and a Joseph Stalin. The lesser of two evils is still an evil.

"When a candidate for public office faces the voters he does not face men of sense; he faces a mob of men whose chief distinguishing mark is the fact that they are quite incapable of weighing ideas, or even of comprehending any save the most elemental – men whose whole thinking is done in terms of emotion, and whose dominant emotion is dread of what they cannot understand. So confronted, the candidate must either bark with the pack or be lost… All the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." – Henry L. Mencken

In the end and after considerable thought I've decided to never vote again regardless of candidates or issues on the ballot. People will ask questions like – "how will we decide who leads us?" or "isn't the democratic process a key to a civilized society?" Okay, in the interest of full disclosure I'm a voluntaryist or anarchist if you like. I am not a fan of government. The greatest con in recent human history is the "social contract" put forth by the likes of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. This theory posits that individuals either explicitly or implicitly surrender some of their freedoms to rulers in exchange for security. Here's the problem – there really is no contract and there is no practical way of withdrawing consent. What social contract theory did was replace the "divine right of kings" with the "divine right of gangs". The majority has absolute control over the minority using a faux legal entity called government. "Government is not reason. It is not eloquence," George Washington reportedly said. "Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

The question of who will govern me is moot because I don't care to be governed, at least by the present rules. More than anything, I don't want any votes I cast to be used to exact violence against others. I don't want to be responsible for the debt that politicians accrue which must be paid by future generations including my children and grandchildren. And I don't want to enable politicians to wage endless wars which inevitably murder innocent non-combatants. As far as deciding who will lead us, that's none of my business. If someone chooses to give up their sovereignty and be lead then fine. Just don't ask me to participate in the charade.

"Although I admit that the outcome in a stateless society will be bad, because not only are people not angels, but many of them are irredeemably vicious in the extreme, I conjecture that the outcome in a society under a state will be worse, indeed much worse, because, first, the most vicious people in society will tend to gain control of the state and, second, by virtue of this control over the state's powerful engines of death and destruction, they will wreak vastly more harm than they ever could have caused outside the state. It is unfortunate that some individuals commit crimes, but it is stunningly worse when such criminally inclined individuals wield state powers… Only states can pose truly massive threats, and sooner or later the horrors with which they menace mankind invariably come to pass…"  Higgs

You need to know...