Frontiersman, April 1995

Notice:
This issue of the Frontiersman contains contact information that is out-of-date. For current contact information, click here.

Frontiersman, April 1995

The Age of Bubba
by Dante DeAmicis
I see we are getting another flurry of hype about us entering the Age of Aquarius. Unless you are into horoscopes I say, "Don't you believe it." We have entered the Age of Bubba.
"Bubba" is an archetype coined by columnist Molly Ivens. He has limited education and market skills, but is used to pulling his own weight.
Bubba didn't actually exist as separate from the mainstream until recently. In his glory days, he got an assembly line or equipment operating job with a "good company" — there were plenty in that fondly remembered era — and was set for life. For those with low ambition to go with their low skills, there was plan "B" — government jobs.
Having a house, cars, and a good pension was easy — if not your birthright. Throw in a work-at-home wife, and those were the best of times.
But all good things must come to an end. As the economy went sliding irreversibly into the service sector, the only new "high pay" jobs required highly skilled workers — although the legal bottom-feeders continued to prosper. Worse yet, many old jobs went into the toilet and were flushed out of the country.
What's a Bubba to do? It's tough not having a future when the past was so sweet. At first, Bubba was embarrassed and humiliated, shuffling off to his McJob, and then, maybe, to his second McJob. When he realized that things weren't going to get better, and no one in government seemed to even acknowledge that this new underclass even existed, Bubba got angry.
There were plenty of real and imagined villains to blame, whether he understood all of what was happening or not. He voted for term limits and anything anti-immigrant sounding. For the first time in his life, he voted Republican.
Still, the politicians and pundits didn't get it. It was all a Republican plot. They also didn't see that Bubba now had company.
Middle-management jobs were being vaporized right and left, with no end in sight. Most would bite the bullet, retrain, and take lower paying jobs. With more understanding than Bubba, they resented government's "business as usual" attitude. Although they were less likely to be first time Republican voters, they became less discriminating, electing half-wits like Sonny Bono to Congress.
Small business owners chaffed at thanklessly being held responsible for carrying out mandated social legislation. They were Republican-leaning before, and became solidly Republican. They told Democrats that they were not getting to heaven on their backs.
Recent college graduates, seeking entry level jobs in places where Bubba used to work, found that, sans skills, their degree plus ninety cents would get them a cup of coffee. Once, this crowd was good for ten years of Democratic idealism before caving in to the G.O.P. Now their vote was up for grabs.
All these groups are honorary Bubbas.
These wounded classes don't just reflexively vote. They also support the new creature, "Hate Radio", whose programs consist of hosts spewing torrents of venom, and howling testimonials from victimized callers. Opposing viewpoints are ridiculed, and their holders abused. There is no pretense of fairness, only of giving Bubba his day.
Rather than make some effort to understand what is happening, the keepers of wisdom, with access to printed ink or a microphone, daily demonize the Bubba-pandering DJ's as a disease. But, if they are going to prescribe any more of their quack cures, they had better learn how to distinguish a disease from a symptom.
How does all this bode for Libertarians? Not very well, unless you're bent enough to see a Libertarian as just an improved Republican.
Bubba and his fellow-travellers are angry, fearful, humiliated, and very insecure. He fell asleep in a "Leave it to Beaver" world, and woke up to "The American Dream meets Godzilla". He has little interest in and even less patience for abstract ideology -- the specialty of Libertarians.
Politicians and media-folk haven't gotten the message yet. If we could only get rid of a few divisive Republicans and "hot talk" radio jocks, why things would be as right as rain. It's not going to happen. Instead, whoever best promises a strong, no-nonsense government that will straighten things out will win the heart and mini-mind of the Bubba block.
From history, I know where this will lead, and I don't want to be around when it gets too real.

Riddle for Chemistry Students
by Professor Cottingham, San Antonio Jr. College, circa 1966

What's this?

(The answer is given on page 3.)

Buck Hunter shoots off His Mouth
Dear Buck
I have trouble going to sleep at night. What do you suggest?

— Wide Awake

Dear Wide Awake
Lay very near the edge of the bed. You'll probably drop off immediately.

Smitten With Embarrassment Dept. (rarely used)
by Sam Aurelius Milam III

In the March issue, I stated that the zip codes aren't in the Yellow Pages. An alert reader directed my attention to pages 34 and 35. The smart aleck was right! There they are. Zip codes. Drat!

Penultimate Straw
by Sam Aurelius Milam III

The feminist movement has a fundamentally different goal than other "equality" movements. However misguided those other movements may be, they do pursue equality. Although feminists claim to pursue equality, they actually want something very different.

The latest proof is the "all girl" high school math classes. That's right, the cutting edge in public education today is freshman algebra for girls only (Presque Isle, Maine; Ventura, California; and elsewhere). The reason? Girls aren't learning math as well as boys. The report¹ suggests that they never have, but God forbid that anybody should admit some inherent difference in aptitude. The excuse advanced by "educators" is that girls are distracted from learning math when there are boys in the class. The girls are too bashful to ask questions. They're concerned about their appearance. They're afraid the boys will laugh at them. Consequently, these daughters of the sexual equality mandate are getting their own sexually segregated math classes.

Meanwhile, at North Salinas High School in Salinas, California (and presumably elsewhere), girls have forced their way into the boys wrestling class.² They claim they have a "right" to be there. If the boys are bothered by grappling on the floor with their nubile young female classmates, the boys will just have to deal with it. The girls don't care if teenage boys might have difficulty learning wrestling when there are girls in the class. Being careful not to grab anything sexual will just be a normal part of learning their holds and throws. Did the girls all agree in advance that they won't accuse the boys of fondling? Don't be ridiculous.

If girls can have their own math classes to avoid being distracted by boys, then why can't boys have their own wrestling classes to avoid being distracted by girls? This kind of arrogant hypocrisy is typical of the feminist movement. Some of them demand equality when they want a "right", then the others whine about their special needs when they want an extra privilege. Men, of course, are trapped in the middle. The lessons being taught here have little to do with math and wrestling and a lot to do with female supremacy and the subordination of men. These lessons won't be lost on the kids. The hand that rules the cradle rocks the world.

In recent years, women in the U.S.A. have equaled or surpassed men as aggressive advocates of bearing arms. One such woman, speaking of her concealed handgun,³ said, "I think it's a great equalizer between a 110 pound woman and a 220 pound man." It turns out that a handgun is a great equalizer for a 110 pound person of either sex. However, groups like Safety for Women and Responsible Motherhood (SWARM)⁴ aren't advocating armed citizens. They're advocating armed women.

In Sao Paulo, Brazil, there's a police station that, as a matter of official policy, is staffed exclusively by female cops. Their only agenda is to neutralize men who are accused (by women) of mistreating women.⁵ Such a uniformed force of armed women on an anti-male crusade is a pretty good definition of feminazis. Women can also have special protection under the law closer to home. Clinton recently opened within the U.S. Department of Justice a new office dedicated entirely to the prosecution of so-called crimes against women. The U.S. government is also providing $26 million in grants to the states for the same purpose.⁶

These are all straws blowing before the storm. Feminists, and particularly feminazis, have been accumulating power over men for decades now. As I watch the news, I see that around the world they're intent upon a coercive and increasingly militant policy of domination, justified all the while by their hypocritical rhetoric of sexual equality. While they loudly whine about their plight, they gradually ease into control of the means of control.

Today, the feminists have moved so politically far from men that they have become, in effect, a distinct ethnic group. Today, there are ethnic conflicts raging throughout the world, some of them driven by grievances of no greater consequence than those presently being provided by the feminists. Men can be pushed only so far; we've taken up arms before in lesser causes than this. Nobody can infallibly predict the future, but I expect the conflict will escalate. My best guess is that, in the not too distant future, the battle of the sexes will become very real.

MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour; Tuesday, March 7, 1995

KSBW; Salinas, California; early 1995, exact date unknown

NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw; Monday, March 20, 1995

How cute: locusts, lemmings, and now women.

ITN World News; Wednesday, March 8, 1995

MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour; Tuesday, March 21, 1995

Should I Worry?
by Stephen R. Strayer

In the USA, the cops entertain themselves by beating up and otherwise harassing defenseless low lifers: transients, ex-convicts, prostitutes, and the like. I think that is wrong, but I'm not effected, so I don't worry about it.

They routinely find pretenses for harassing any organization, the Branch Davidians for example, which behaves in ways they find strange. I think that is wrong, but I'm not effected, so I don't worry about it.

Then they locked up a few super successful, super wealthy Wall Street financiers as sort of a political publicity stunt. I thought that was wrong, but I wasn't affected, so I didn't worry about it.

Then the politicians declared a "war on drugs" to gain more power for themselves and to provide more entertainment for more cops. I thought that was a mistake, but I'm not interested in drugs, so I don't worry about it.

Then politicians created laws requiring seat belts, motorcycle helmets car pool lanes, and redefined legal drunkenness to give cops an excuse to harass more drivers. I thought that was wrong, but it represents only a minor irritant to me, so I don't worry about it much.

Then they concocted civil forfeiture laws to provide cops a pretense for "legally" stealing any property they might want. I know that is wrong, but I haven't been effected yet, so I haven't worried about it yet.

Is anybody else out there getting nervous?

H-e-l-l-o-o ... Hey, is anybody else out there?

Social Contract: The Series
Part 2: Taking Stock
by Sam Aurelius Milam III

Although constitutions have not caused a reduction in the powers of government, they have changed the fundamental nature of government. A government based only on the whims, desires, or authority of a ruler is merely an extension of that ruler. However, a government based on a constitution embodies all of the defining characteristics of a corporation.

Bouvier's article corporation contains the following:

".... A body, consisting of one or more natural persons, established by law, usually for some specific purpose, and continued by a succession of members.

"It is this last characteristic of a corporation, sometimes called its immortality, prolonging its existence beyond the term of natural life, and thereby enabling a long-continued effort and concentration of means to the end which it was designed to answer, that constitutes its principal utility ....."

— from Bouvier's article corporation

There can be little doubt that the pedigree of constitutional government identifies it as a corporation.

".... In Roman law the most common word for expressing this idea was universitas. A universitas might either be personarum or rerum, that is to say, might consist either of an aggregate of persons or of things. The highest example of a universitas personarum was the Roman state itself: others were municipalities and private societies, on which the law had expressly conferred corporate privileges ...."

— from Funk & Wagnalls article corporation

When you recognize the similarities between constitutional governments and other kinds of corporations, all of the pieces fall into place.

".... By both the civil and the common law, the sovereign authority only can create a corporation ...."

— from Bouvier's article corporation

The same is true of governments, which under the Doctrine of Social Contract, are created by sovereign people.

A corporation is defined by its charter or act of incorporation.

".... All corporations, of whatever kind, are moulded and controlled, both as to what they may do and the manner in which they may do it, by their charters or acts of incorporation, which to them are the laws of their being, which they can neither dispense with nor alter ...."

— from Bouvier's article corporation

A constitutional government is defined by its constitution, which serves as the charter or act of incorporation. The constitution describes the objectives, powers, duties, and limits of the government, just as the charter of incorporation does for other corporations. Constitutions are defined similarly to charters or acts of incorporation:

"The fundamental law of a state, directing the principles upon which the government is founded, and regulating the exercise of the sovereign powers, directing to what bodies or persons those powers shall be confided and the manner of their exercise ...."

— from Bouvier's article constitution

Most corporations consist of officers, employees, and stockholders, as well as various kinds of property. In most corporations, the voting stockholders elect the officers of a board of directors, which includes a chief executive officer. These officers then exercise authority in the name of the voting stockholders. They hire or appoint various employees to do the work of running the corporation, and to manage its property. While doing so, they remain answerable to the voting stockholders.

In a constitutional government, the voters usually elect a legislative body and a chief executive officer. These elected officials then exercise authority in the name of the voters. They hire or appoint various bureaucrats and employees to do the work of running the government, and to manage its property. While doing so, they remain answerable to the voters.

The only intrinsic parties to the contract represented by a charter of incorporation are the stockholders, the officers, and the employees. Only by an express act of consent can someone else become a party to such a contract. Similarly, the only intrinsic parties to the contract represented by a constitution are the voters, the elected or appointed officers, and the various employees and bureaucrats. Only by an express act of consent can any other individual become a party to a constitution. The Doctrine of Social Contract not only is completely consistent with this view of governments as corporations, but requires it.

This leads to a new insight into the relationship between the people and the government. The Doctrine of Social Contract defines the residence of sovereignty. The corporate character of constitutional government identifies the parties from whom the government can expect obligations. The result is the realization that the proper boundaries of constitutional government are not geographical, but contractual. This deceptively simple idea has profound and far reaching implications.

Next Month — Part 3: Finis Empery

Word Abuse
observed by Sam Aurelius Milam III

I'm really tired of hearing accusations of genocide. Genocide didn't occur in Rwanda. The Khmer Rouge didn't get all the Cambodians. Hitler didn't eliminate the Jews. There are even a few Eskimos left. My point? Genocide is the intentional and complete extermination of some group of people. Mass murder, torture, atrocities, and terrorism happen all the time but genocide is rare. It cannot be claimed until an entire group is gone. What is being called genocide today is actually attempted genocide. You can't be charged with murder if your intended victim survives. Similarly, attempted genocide isn't genocide.

Some crusaders will corrupt the language for the sake of an agenda. They blur the distinctions between the meanings of words to the detriment of us all. In law more than elsewhere, sloppy thinking is dangerous. Any trial should be void if the accusation is incorrect, and accusations are meaningless when the meanings of the words have been destroyed. The fact is that anyone charged with genocide today should probably be acquitted.

----------

On Wednesday, February 1, 1995, the MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour presented a segment on the artist Jacob Lawrence. In this segment, while referring to some people who had exhibited notable courage, Charlayne Hunter-Gault used the words "heros and sheros". This is typical feminist lunacy about masculine pronouns, but the he in hero isn't even a pronoun. Besides that, there's already a feminine form of the word: heroine.

Oh well, we're lucky she didn't say personroes.

Answer to the Riddle for Chemistry Students:
It's a Ferrous Wheel.

SETI and Simplicity
by Sam Aurelius Milam III

The so-called Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence brings to mind one of my old observations: "Simplicity is a lost art." The people conducting the SETI are high-tech types who devise crafty theories to predict how ET's would try to get in touch with us. Then they build expensive receivers to receive the hypothetical signals and buy lots of fancy computers and complex software to analyze it all. In the process, of course, they're able to justify and obtain lots of money.

Maybe there's a simpler way. Twice in my lifetime (so far) I've heard a particular weird story. These two reports of similar observations came to me from completely independent sources. One was from my father. He told me, long after the fact, of a report he had read in a newspaper during or shortly after World War 2. The report told of someone in England who had received a television broadcast from a TV station that had been off the air for about 4 years before the transmission was received. I've no idea who the actual observer was. The other report was from a long-time personal friend of mine, named John. Sometime during the middle or late 50's, while logging broadcast band AM stations as a hobby, John heard a radio station that was reporting current events of the war. John isn't sure at this late date, but he believes the "current events" being reported were World War 2. He also recalls hearing a commercial for a new car model which he considered at the time to be an antique. John says that the sound quality was unusual, as if he were hearing it through a long tube. He listened to this broadcast for about 45 minutes before it faded. He doesn't recall the station identifying itself and he no longer has his old log. Crackpots? Mistakes? Consider another possibility: maybe these people actually experienced what they reported. What could it mean?

Now, back to SETI. If the ET's want to communicate with us, they'll send signals that we can receive. Nothing would be better than signals actually designed for our receivers. The logical choice would be to use our own transmissions. And how best to assure us that it isn't just random noise? By using our own broadcasts. We'd never mistake Oprah for noise.

Artificial electromagnetic signals have been radiating from this planet for about 100 years. Thus, anybody within a hundred light years might be aware of our existence. If they want to communicate the method is obvious. They'd record some signals, wait for the station to stop broadcasting, then send the signals back. They wouldn't even need to understand the signals. All that's necessary is to record them and send them back. All we have to do is quarter the sky with some directional antennas (AM, FM, TV, etc.) and we can pinpoint the source of re-transmission, if it exists. Amateur radio enthusiasts might be better at this than scientists. Simplicity isn't quite so foreign to the amateurs.

Poppa used to tell me that I'd learn a lot more with my mouth shut and my eyes and ears open. That's good advice. Maybe the only thing keeping us from discovering the home of our nearest neighbors is that we're drowning them out with our own talk shows. Of course, it doesn't help when we disbelieve those of our own kind who might already have received a message from the stars.

If you don't want to keep receiving this newsletter, print RETURN TO SENDER above your name and address, cross out your name and address, and return the newsletter. When I receive it, I'll terminate your subscription.

Back issues or extra copies of this newsletter are available upon request.

Permission is hereby granted to reproduce this newsletter in its entirety or to reproduce material from it, provided that the reproduction is accurate and that proper credit is given. Please note that I do not have the authority to give permission to reprint material that I have reprinted from other publications. For that permission, you must go to the original source. I would appreciate receiving a courtesy copy of any document or publication in which you reprint my material.

I solicit letters, articles, and cartoons for the newsletter, but I don't pay for them. Short items are more likely to be printed. I suggest that letters and articles be shorter than 500 words, but that's flexible depending on space available and the content of the piece. I give credit for all items printed unless the author specifies otherwise.

This newsletter isn't for sale. If you care to make a voluntary contribution, you may do so. The continued existence of the newsletter will depend, in part, on such contributions. I accept cash and postage stamps. I don't accept checks, money orders, anything that will smell bad by the time it arrives, or anything that requires me to provide ID or a signature to receive it. In case anybody's curious, I also accept gold, silver, platinum, etc. I'm sure you get the idea.

Back to the Frontiersman Directory

PDF Version of These Notes With Links

PDF Version of These Notes to Print

Notes on Penultimate Straw:
MacNeil Lehrer Newshour segment titled New Addition:

The segment was presented by Eliza Hobson, a correspondent for New Hampshire Public Television. Interviewees included: Richard Durost, Principal; Donna Lisnick, Susan Foye, teachers; Shannon Nadeau, Hillary Trainer, Andrea Grand, Heidi Roy, and Kyla Robins, female students from Presque Isle; Chris Taylor, male student from the Portsmouth, New Hampshire school district; Bonnie Wood, researcher at the University of Maine; Susan McGee Bailey, of the Wellesley Center for Research on Women; and Christy Hammer, of the New Hampshire Department of Education.
KSBW news item:

Dennis Lehnen, news reporter, KSBW (Channel 8) doesn’t remember the date that he ran the story about the girls on the boys wrestling team. He said it was sometime during the wrestling season, and as I recall it was about 4 or 6 weeks ago.

The name of the wrestling coach is Dave Raptas. The name of the school is North Salinas High School. The telephone number is 408 753-4230.

— March 8, 1995

Back to the Frontiersman Directory

PDF Version of This Insert With Links

PDF Version of This Insert to Print

Instructions for using this Acknowledgment:


•		Take this Acknowledgment with you when you go to any job interview at which you will be required to submit to a pre-employment drug test.

•		Before consenting to submit to the test, present this Acknowledgment to the manager conducting the interview.

•		Do not consent to submit to the test until this Acknowledgment is completed and signed.

•		Keep the signed Acknowledgment in a safe place.

This document is provided courtesy of

, 435 South White Road, San Jose, California 95127
and may be reproduced freely.

Saturday, November 5, 1994

Acknowledgment

I, ________________________________________

Name of Signatory, printed

hereby make the following statements.

I am _____________________________________

Title or Position of Signatory

at ________________________________________

Name of Employer

__________________________________________

Address of Employer

__________________________________________

I hereby confirm that

___________________________________________

name of applicant, printed

is being required to submit to a pre-employment drug test.

I acknowledge that, by requiring the test, I am compelling the applicant to

• prove his innocence after a presumption of guilt, and

• provide information that may be used against him.

I further acknowledge that these requirements are being enforced coercively, by the threat of denial of employment should the applicant refuse to submit to the test.

I make these statements and execute this Acknowledgment under penalty of perjury.

______________________________________

Date of Signature

_______________________________________

Signature

This document is provided courtesy of

, 435 South White Road, San Jose, California 95127
and may be reproduced freely.

Saturday, November 5, 1994

Back to the Frontiersman Directory

Back to the Beginning of This Issue