September 17, 2019

“When, how…and by whom?”

I recently wrote some colleagues that”:

“Bad laws” not only “ensure bad results”: they are like the bushel baskets full of oysters (and salt water) that some East Coast bay man totes in the bed of his pickup from boat to market 5 days a week.  Pretty soon the bed and then the truck shows evidence of rusty corrosion but by then it is too late.  The rust spreads, the value of the truck plummets to nothing, and he just keeps driving it until it falls apart.

These bad laws are like that salt water dripping from those baskets and we are noticing more and more corrosion while we try to tell ourselves that it isn’t too bad and we should get more years from the truck.  But we are just fooling ourselves. Rural America (and urban America as well but no one dares mention it) is the truck and we not only no longer care for it but we abuse it (and the people that live there and use it) because we accept lies from government on behalf of the rich and powerful about what a good thing it is to protect large, deadly and destructive predators that eradicate game animals, ranchers, and rural communities on behalf of pagan claptrap about biology and more hidden agendas than termites in an African termite mound.

A colleague responded that:

No need to explain why something needs to be done about this ever-increasing problem, the next line of questions, when, how…and by whom?”

——————————————————————————————————————-

My response-

THE problem is (unjust, un-Constitutional, tyrannical, etc.) absolute power given to central government bureaucrats in federal legislation like the ESA, Animal Welfare Act and similar Acts “enforced”, administered and regulated by US Fish & Wildlife Service, National Park Service, EPA, US Forest Service and BLM.  In a word, it is Political.

Regarding wolves; federal bureaucracies, and especially USFWS, have stolen money from state wildlife agencies, introduced and protected wolves and with few exceptions converted the State Wildlife Agencies and environmental scientists, Universities and “science” into little more than paid subcontractors for federal agendas.  Federal politicians and bureaucrats are rewarded with money, votes (mostly urban) and fame for doing what rich individuals and rich and radical environmental organizations want for a host of hidden agendas from eliminating hunting and private property in vast swaths of America to reducing the human population and stripping most of the human benefits created in the past century.

Both federal Legislatures and the Presidency benefit from happy environmental radicals and the “Deep State”, “Swamp”, (whatever you want to call it) that manages ESA, wolves, grizz, etc. for them.  Federal judges are nominated and ratified by those folks and this accounts for the increasing national divide in courtrooms reflected in whether “your” judge emerged under Democrat or Republican reigns.

The naked truth is that, like abortion, the Democrat Party is 100% behind this environmentalism and anyone deviating from that absolute support is marginalized and either silenced or removed.  The Republican Party has many members that talk a good game about “doing something” about these matters depending on the temper of those that elect them, but it is only talk.  Given the declining rural voting numbers, electing and expecting a good person to be able to fight to limit the power of the bureaucracy in these matters is wistful, to say the least.

All through this the federal bureaucracy gets increasing budgets, more higher-grade positions (and retirements), bigger bonuses, and a publicly unchallengeable authority no matter the basis or outcomes.

The current Administration boasts it is “de-regulating” and it is but “de-regulating” is only a temporary fix because it only reflects the authority of the current President and his appointees.  What they do can (and will) be undone done in a New York nanosecond by the next President who, if the last fifty years tell us anything, will be a “Deep State” or ”Swamp” enabler to his or her bones as will their successor for a long time.  The Mueller Probe alone tells us that but don’t forget the IRS, FBI and DOJ’s recent history as political weapons that appear to only be growing bolder and stronger about controlling us on behalf of our rulers. Consider getting political support for things like wolves and grizzlies in this climate.  A Yukon trapper just killed a grizzly near his cabin and then discovered his 10-month-old baby and its mother ripped apart where they had tried to flee the same grizzly.  Do we hear even one peep from rural Americans in the Lower 48 about the insanity of spreading and protecting grizzly bears by the federal government in the Lower 48?  From any of “our” NGO’s or state governments?

The current Administration tells us they are “purging” environmental radical bureaucrats.  I watched the current federal natural resource bureaucrats pop up out of the mud in the 1980’s and 90’s, often in high positions immediately.  Using the new race and sex preferences that financially benefitted cooperating top managers quite handsomely; common sense and scientifically educated bureaucrats were steadily replaced by extremist activists with actual animus toward the agencies and their historic missions FOR THE BENEFIT OF PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY THOSE LIVING WITH AND/OR UTILIZING THOSE RESOURCES.  Not only 20+years of such “purging” and hiring (I was terminated in 2000) but more importantly how they each replicated each other when hiring, promoting and awarding bonuses like wolves and grizzlies being imposed into settled landscapes has created a federal (and most state) radical workforce that if not reduced by 75% each year and then kept below 25% of current levels while Universities and science are reformed, will defy any controls by whatever it takes.

Unless we amend this top-down, federal mandate approach to wildlife management, all the “de-regulation” and personnel changes will be temporary at best.  So, one might ask, “what can we do”?  We must change the authority and jurisdictions that has been given to federal bureaucrats and replace it with a restoration of state authority over wildlife in the State excepting those species covered by ratified Treaties.  Federal concerns about “endangered” species (not sub sp., races, populations, etc.) should be proposed to the State with rationale, objective and federal funding for however long proposed.  State acceptance should allow amendments and require both legislative and Governor acceptance.  This is where rural residents of the state need to restructure the state ratification of such proposals to give rural residents increased ratification weight in the approval process.

So how do we get there in the present political “climate”? 

I live in a very liberal, Democrat state.  The only Republican elected last month was a dogcatcher in some rural norther County and has since been forced to flee when Antifa arrived in town. (That is a joke.)

About 4 hours ago I put out my flag and picked up my Saturday edition of the Minneapolis Star Tribune in the driveway.  When I opened it, the front page had an article, “Students get charged up about climate change”.  Here are some excerpts:

  • “When it comes to confronting climate change” “Some adults get struck on certain things” and “No is not acceptable.”
  • “Youthful advocates are leading rallies, gathering petitions and taking daring climate resolutions to City Halls and County Boardrooms”.
  • “But they’ve also studied their own backyards – from the urban core to the suburbs and small towns.”
  • “So iMatter (sic note the little ‘you’ in the name of one of this little-known enviro front organization) studies the energy behind other movements, including the fight for civil rights and same sex marriage.”
  • “Emotions make movements.”
  • “Young people can personalize this, can reach people at an emotional level.”
  • “Cities can make a big difference.”  “You get an enough grass roots action happening… it can force the state and federal government to move.”
  • “The city (sic Grand Marais, an expensive, elite enclave on the North Shore of Lake Superior) has even hired a climate change Coordinator, a position funded by a McKnight Foundation Grant.”
  • “It’s a very individualistic place”, said Craig Feist, 17, of Finlayson, about 100 miles north of the Twin Cities.  “People have their land, and they consider that their domain and do kind of whatever they want to do on it.”

Now I could call this a Socialist/Communist approach to brainwashing young minds and setting the stage for a government takeover because it is the reverse of Mao Tse Tung’s Cultural Revolution wherein the rural peasants occupied and purged the cities and the elites.  It is a rare glimpse into how these liberal bastions gain, keep and control political power.  Here we have the privileged elites using their children to lay the groundwork for purging the countryside and those yokels that oppose any of their agendas. However, I ask you to consider how “our side” in this environmental confrontation has behaved and can be expected to continue to behave:

  • Do we energize young rural students to dismiss adults with whom they disagree?
  • Do we send kids into the cities to explain what wolves and grizzlies and many other GI (Government Issue) animals are doing to our communities?
  • Do we send kids forth to defend property rights to property-less urbanites?
  • Do we condemn urbanites for being herd-animals (versus “individualistic”)?
  • Do we presume to brag that we have “studied” our home places and therefore have the right to lecture and abjure urban know-nothings?
  • Do we send forth youthful missionaries to cities to explain why it is so important to “Keep and Bear Arms”?
  • Would we rightly expect rural youth to be listened to in almost any city if they extolled such things publicly without fearing of violent reactions?

Until we can put the environmental genie of unjust federal power back in the bottle I cannot imagine how anything really changes.  We are forced to maneuver outside the walls of government about controlling wolves; limiting future areas to be infested; how controls will be effected; who will do the controlling; how long will controls be effected; and how will it all be paid for?  Traps are nasty and inhumane.  Snares are icky and unacceptable non-target species.  Planes are illegal and uncontrollable over property.  Can controls be forced in private properties or government landholdings?  When can control be exercised?  When killing livestock or pets?  When in a yard?  When appearing sick?  Who is responsible for rabid wolves or human infection outbreaks like tapeworms, etc.?  Can wolf population target levels be based on big game numbers, livestock depredations, human attacks or imagined threats like hanging around school bus stops?  Can hides be sold for trophies or home decorations?  Can any County or State say, “We don’t want any wolves here and we want to be able to kill any wolf here year-around”?

It is only realistic to see a hodgepodge of temporary and conflicting results emerging and being challenged (until the next President is elected).

Jim Beers

8 December 2018

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others.  Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC.  He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands.  He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC.  He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority.  He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to:   jimbeers7@comcast.net

If you no longer wish to receive these articles notify:  jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Who Are You?

I identify with nothing in this world!

Share

The Number 18 and the Number 21

I often get emails ridiculing Liberalism and in most cases, the ridicule is justified. But how much of what we do and what we get done is actually the result of unclear thinking from liberals and how much is the product of Leftism or for that matter the Deep State?

For decades, perhaps centuries, 18 years of age seemed to be the benchmark for when the Deep State feels they can get away with sending our children off to fight their wars, many of which come home in a box.

18 years of age is also the magic benchmark that allows those the privilege to vote for those puppets in Washington who will decide that at 18 you are old enough to die for their cause, hidden behind the guise of “freedom isn’t free” or some other such apothegm.

At age 18 you can don a uniform, carry weapons, and kill people so that Americans can be “free.” Nobody questions the absurdity of this. At age 18 you can cast a ballot for the next fascist dictator puppet so Americans can be “free.” Nobody questions this absurdity.

At any age, you can stage a revolt in Washington and dictate to criminals in Congress who can own a gun and what kind they can own, how much ammunition you can possess and what your gun might look like. But unless you are 21 you can’t own one of those guns.

Are you so embroiled in “for the love of country” and your government that you are incapable of seeing that this fascist regime and useless eaters that do their bidding for them, insist that once you turn 18 you can go get yourself blown up in a war created by the politicians, but you are incapable of owning a gun in this “free” country many died for in the name of “freedom isn’t free?”

Absolute HORSESHIT!!!

Share

Gun-Owners Are Being Blamed for [Modern] Liberalism Failures

*Editor’s Note* – This is a very respectable article that appears in the American Thinker about the failures of liberalism. Which brings me to the point of my note. It should be pointed out that this author when referring to liberalism, should more accurately qualify it as Modern Liberalism or a collective ideology of several left-leaning ideologies. Ancient Liberalism contains many great qualities many of which both conservatives and liberals agree on. But not to lose the point of the piece.

It has often been stated that liberalism is a disease. This becomes obvious to those whose ideology is quite different. But Liberalism is not interchangeable with “Leftism,” “Progressivism,” or the Democrat Party.

The Modern American Liberalism version of ideology has been well-hijacked by the Left and the progressives. Leftism, progressivism, and liberalism are not the same and shouldn’t be used interchangeably. As an example, liberalism was never opposed to Capitalism. The differences in ideology between liberals and conservatives on Capitalism is who should control that show – one believing the government should control it, the other leaving it to a free enterprise/individual effort. Leftism opposes Capitalism and most think this is a liberal perspective. 

In likewise fashion, liberalism shouldn’t be interchanged with Progressivism. Progressivism is the promotion of making every aspect of our lives “modern” often in disregard of long-held moral and religious reasons as well as disregard for the rule of law or the interpretation of long-held laws, rights, and policy. We all suffer from progressivism to some degree.

The Democrat Party is a mish-mash conglomeration of anyone thinking the party supports and promotes their values. This is the same with the Republican Party. Party politics is a completely different animal and yet the use of the terms are incorrectly lumped together.

Perhaps it might even be more understandable if it was stated that a combination of some or all of the ideology of Liberalism, Leftism, Progressivism, and the Democrat Party that has created failed policies referred to in this article, as they may pertain to public safety, gun-free zones and the right to keep and bear arms.

“Liberalism is largely a process of adopting illogical and factually invalid positions and then artificially placing blame on its opponents when policies based on those positions inevitably fail.  For the blame to bear fruit, it is necessary for people of good conscience to be fooled into believing that their actions and beliefs are bad for society and have brought about shameful consequences.  At the same time, it is necessary for people whose consciences have already been deformed and co-opted by the faux morality of liberalism to be conditioned to think fellow citizens, who have caused no actual harm but hold contrary views, are evil.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

Hollyweird Insanity

I remember reading a long time ago how “Liberalism” is a mental disorder. That might be, but when one honestly considers such a statement, isn’t that qualification based on the perception of someone a “Liberal” would perceive as having a mental disorder?

Leftism, is another thing, although few recognize and understand that. I’ll save that for a future discussion along with why “Liberalism” is not liberalism.

Hollywood rightfully deserves the label “Hollyweird,” because they are. Many there are insane, some are mentally unstable making it better understood that they have gone off the deep edge because Donald Trump was elected president. What confuses all of this is the simple fact all of these people are actors. In other words they are professional fakers. So what does this mean? Hell if I know.

But for those having trouble understanding how and why anyone, in this case Hollywood, would get so upset because someone who is just like them got selected to be president of the United States, consider what has happened to many of these same people while among themselves, honoring themselves as a way of justifying their perversions of life in general.

One could argue that the carrying on so about Trump is theater performed by actors, but was this the same thing when, during the Oscars, not only was somebody incapable of providing the correct “envelope” to give the presenters, but neither of the two presenters were intelligent enough to understand something wasn’t right (if they could read?) and make an adjustment mid-stream.

But, BFD! Who cares? People make mistakes. We’ve seen it before. But not if you are hollyweird! Their tiny, useless, perverted, Satanic world, from their perspective, is falling in around them. This appears to be their Armageddon.

And now you better understand the insanity of these sick people over Donald Trump.

2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 –10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Share

Paradox: Leads to a Self-Contradictory or a Logically Unacceptable Conclusion

Share

They Caused Me To Act The Way I Do

*Editor’s Note* – I got the below in my email today and thought it would be a good example of how we are deceived and blinded, much because of our own self-importance, taught to us by those promoting the false paradigm of Democrat/Republican or Liberal/Conservative. That isn’t to say that political idealism doesn’t exist. It does. But that isn’t what this little ditty below is about…is it?

Depending on which side of the fence you have been convinced you are on, you, most likely, will read this and think it to be mostly, or all, true, or mostly, or all, false. You will either come away feeling a sense of pride, accomplishment and power, or your level of anger and disgust has risen a couple of notches. But, isn’t that the purpose of all this? It’s easy to say, at the end, “It really is just that simple,” and perhaps to the simple-minded it is just that simple. 

Whoever wrote this probably thinks (or they were just doing their “divide and conquer” job) the statements are true. And, who could argue with it…unless you are of “the other side?” Again, that is my point. The simple act of writing this “You Created Us” is, in fact, who and what created “them” – them being the ones blamed for creating “us.”

Probably since the beginning of time, no two people have been able to agree on everything. Man is incapable of accepting that fact and letting it go…something called respect. Instead, things are written and said about “the other side.” Each time someone does or says something disparaging about “the other side,” the gap of respect begins to diminish. At this point, each “side” has begun the creation of the “other side.”

And then we have those who take the high road and say, “Our side doesn’t do this or do that” – that it’s the other side that’s all wrong and misguided. It doesn’t stop. It will never stop. 

And now we have the in-your-face Trump winners justifying their “victory” by taking the thorn in the side and turning it into a dagger, blaming “them” beside “they” created “us.” What should we look for next?

It would probably be in everyone’s interest to take a hard look at who really are the ones, the powers, the entities who have created this hateful mess – and this one disguised as, “Don’t look at me! The other side did it!”

~~~~~~~~~~~

I’m noticing that a lot of you aren’t graciously accepting the fact that your candidate lost.

In fact you seem to be posting even more hateful things about those of us who voted for Trump.

Some of you are apparently “triggered” because you are posting how “sick” you feel about the results.

How did this happen you ask?

You created “us” when you attacked our freedom of speech.

You created “us” when you attacked our right to bear arms.

You created “us” when you attacked our Christian beliefs.

You created “us” when you constantly referred to us as racists.

You created “us” when you constantly called us xenophobic.

You created “us” when you told us to get on board or get out of the way.

You created “us” when you forced us to buy health care and then financially penalized us for not participating.

You created “us” when you lied and said we could keep our insurance plans and our doctors.

You created “us” when you allowed our jobs to continue to leave our country.

You created “us” when you attacked our flag.

You created “us” when you took God out of our schools.

You created “us” when you confused women’s rights with feminism.

You created “us” when you began to emasculate men.

You created “us” when you decided to make our children soft.

You created “us” When you decided to rewrite school history books and remove the truth about our founders

You created “us” when you decided to vote for progressive ideals.

You created “us” when you attacked our way of life.

You created “us” when you decided to let our government get out of control.

“You” created “us” the silent majority.

You created “us” when you began murdering innocent law enforcement officers.

You created “us” when you took a knee, or stayed seated or didn’t remove your hat during our National Anthem.

And we became fed up and we pushed back and spoke up.

And we did it with ballots, not bullets.

With ballots, not riots.

With ballots, not looting.

With ballots, not blocking traffic.

With ballots, not fires, except the one you started inside of “us”.

“YOU” created “US”.

It really is just
that simple.

Share

Leftism Not Liberalism?

liberalis
Share

Liberal, Feel-Good Policies Have Created Poverty in Maine

A letter writer to a Maine newspaper says that the effort to ban bear baiting, trapping and hounding by referendum is a “liberal, feel-good policies have created poverty in this state.” I have to agree.
PovertyMassDestruction

ChurchillSocialism

CampingOutFuture
Share

America The Great

When you grow up you can be anything you want to be…or at least what somebody else makes you to be.

WannaBLiberal
Share