Saturday, April 29, 2006

The Great Immigrant Debacle

I'm a little surprised that the supporters of amnesty... well, what do we call these people anyway? You can't call them pro-immigration, because I haven't met anyone yet - even those opposed to illegal immigrants - who is anti-immigrant. I'm sure there are some people out there like that, but they're the fringe, for sure. Besides, I have no problem welcoming immigrants to this country who follow the law, and adopt the language and customs of America as their own (this is what immigrants to this country have done for a long time).

Are supporters rightly called pro-illegal immigration?

Well, I'm settling on amnesty advocates. The amnesty advocates have organized marches for May 1, vowing to "close" major cities as immigrants walk off the job or walk out of school. Funny that this coincides with May Day, that old Communist/workers day celebration.

If you had to dream up a public action most likely to alienate people who you want to support you, this would take top honors. This would be like asking the Republicans to develop the new motto for the Democrat party (motto: "We're Interested In Your Money").

We'll see how the marches go. There's one in Chicago, and I for one am glad I'm not working in the city anymore. Part of me hopes that they further embarrass themselves and damage their cause, but I think that's been done already.

My perspective on this is one of American exceptionalism. This country is special, and I can understand why people would want to come here. But there is no basis for granting amnesty - none - that stands up to logic. The cost objection (deporting people is impracticable) is often floated, but that is easily handled by removing social benefits and services from access by non-citizens. Suddenly, crossing into this country illegally doesn't seem like such a great idea if there's no chance that you can be taken care of in times of need.

I'll have more to say on this after the marches, and I'm hoping that once we get this blog set up in a team format, my fellow Federalists will add their two tyrant-heads to the discussion.

Friday, April 28, 2006

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills

Will Ferrell said this in the 2001 comedy "Zoolander." For those of you not in the know, Will was playing a fashion mogul plotting against the PM of Malaysia (stay with me). Ben Stiller was this airheaded male model who had multiple "looks" - except they were the same pout every time. An exasperated Will finally loses it at the end, shouting at the people around him, did they not realize this? And that, yes, he felt like he was taking crazy pills.

Funny in Zoolander. Not so funny with regard to the flap over the price of gas, in the event you're feeling like I am, the last sane person in a world gone mad.

It seems that both Democrats and Republicans are both falling all over themselves to denounce something as American as... making a profit. Yes, imagine that! So the chorus in Washington (did I mention this is an election year?) is that Big Oil is bad, they're apparently somehow "gouging" people, and that Congress must do something about it. I would respectfully ask that if they must do something, it might be 1) take a long vacation, 2) consider spinal-implant surgery, or 3) take a class in economics.

Funny thing about the price of oil - it's awfully hard to manipulate it. Years ago OPEC nations decided to collude on the price of oil, in an attempt to maximize profits. To do so, they had to agree on production quotas - simply put, hold supply down, and even unchanged demand will cause prices to rise. Problem was, with increasing prices per barrel, producers cheated and produced more barrels (thinking they were the only ones doing that). With supply increasing, prices naturally came down, despite the cartel's best efforts.

Here's the deal. Gas prices are related to oil prices. Oil prices are determined by global supply and global demand. As global demand increases (think China and India), oil prices are going to go up. So will gas prices.

But so will production. Exxon made billions in profit last year, but also invested billions in exploration and R&D. They're in the business of finding, refining and selling oil products. That they're really good at it is no reason to get hysterical, and all of those spinally-challenged mouthpieces in Washington ought to be ashamed of themselves. That they think so little of the American people ought to be reason enough to throw the bums out.

That this is also coming from Republicans is another reason why I no longer identify myself as such. To anyone who might agree with what I'm saying, consider defining yourself thusly: I am a conservative. Say it with me. There, doesn't that feel better?

Thursday, April 27, 2006

In the Beginning...

I think if one had a device that measured conservative ire, say, a leftoscope, there would be periods throughout history when the leftoscope would amble along with slight deviations, and brief times when it would go off the charts. Such as day was June 23, 2005.

On that day, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on behalf of the City of New London Connecticut against Susette Kelo et al. If at this point you're scratching your head and thinking "You know, I think I've heard of something called a Supreme Court..." I might recommend this link ( to Wikipedia, a nice resource that accurately summarizes the case. For those without the time to do the research, the Constitution of the United States has always provided for the taking of private property for public use (see Amendment V... "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"). Note the use of the word "use." Not public benefit. Not private benefit. This case changed the rules; now, a municipality could take private property and give it (after providing just compensation to the displaced property owner) to another private party, like a real estate developer, under the assumption that the public would benefit from increased jobs and or tax revenues. I'll elaborate in a future post about the concept of natural law, but this decision was contrary to everything this country was based upon.

What's special to me about that day was that I met some like-minded souls online and we began a regular correspondence. The idea has been - and remains - to begin a process of educating citizens on the right and proper nature of government, and to provide leadership in pursuit of that end. Our Founders were very clear on the proper role of the general government, as Madison called it, and always imagined that the general government's powers would be limited and defined, and the balance of power would belong to the states, or the people.

Now anybody with eyes, ears and a pocketbook will tell you that this sure isn't the case today. The federal government has grown (and grown and grown) beyond all comprehension and intent. Americans pay more of every dollar earned on taxes than they do on food, clothing or shelter (for a good resource on tax matters see:

We've come to a point where to continue as we have would put our very Republic in harm's way. Conservatives have noted with dismay that the Republican Party doesn't seem to care a whole lot. Spending under this GOP-controlled Congress is as bad as it has been in a long time. Generally speaking, people are fed up with politics and politicians, and for good reason.

So what now? I think that people need to slowly take back control of their lives. Hopefully, enough good people stand up and take leadership positions... which is sort of what this blog is but a small part of. I'm hoping to invite my dear friends to team up with me on this blog and between the few of us, provide a little education, a little commentary, a little entertainment and some much-needed leadership. A long time ago a group of men pledged to each other their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, that they'd support the Declaration they were making. With the blessings of Providence, they did it. Here's hoping that Providence favors our cause: the return of a self-governing people and renewal of this Republic.

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Getting Started

I've toyed with this idea for some time, and have decided to finally - in the immortal words of some 5th Avenue genius - just do it.

Who is The Monarchist? Well, this was a bit of 18th century name-calling by the political opponents of probably one of the greatest of our Founders, Alexander Hamilton. Anyone who is familiar with his life and work would readily admit his status as a brilliant and gifted statesman, and a perfectly human and flawed individual. From time to time, I'll share some of the more interesting aspects of his life because, well, I can.

Secondly, this name is also fitting because I'm solidly opposed to Presidential term limits. A great thinker once wrote about the difference between that which is seen and that which is not seen. People will readily acknowledge the former (no one man can become like a king), but few recognize the latter (the people's liberty to vote for who they wish has been infringed). There's something inherently... incomplete with the thinking behind term limits. But I'll change my mind just as soon as Congress votes themselves term limits.

There's something else as well. Maybe it's just my two tyrant-heads, as the saying goes, but human nature never changes, and when people start calling you names, well, that's a good sign you're doing something right.

So, stop by and visit. I've got real-world responsibilities like most people do, and will update this as time permits. Oh yeah, and I should tell you what most of this blog is going to be about, right? American Federalism, which I consider a system of thought, belief, and action based on the founding principles of this Republic. That's a pretty broad stroke, I know, but that's the idea.