The Ninth Amendment to the Constitution is the strongest statement therein that powers not expressly granted the State are retained as rights of the People. The State has misconstrued, misrepresented, ignored, and denied the People's rights by elimination of protections reserved alone to them, not recognized by the Supreme Court, the Legislative, and worst the Executive Branch in the illegitimate exercise of draconian powers which unlawfully disparage the inalienable rights of the People.

27 September 2013

"Thin Slicing", Necessity To Write, Your Top Public Servants In Congress Vie To Paralyze Government

      Thursday, 27 September 2013, WASHINGTON, DC - The Ninth Amendment Log editorial board recently was pleased to find itself with a thin slice* of free time with digital enthusiasm still growing, even if not necessarily reflected in ability. The dictates of writing emphasizing constantly to the editorial board that this craft unequivocally must have its time for reflection away from the constant demands of continuing publication of this living "tribute" ostensibly to Dr. Hunter S. Thompson.* Blink copyright 2005 Malcolm Gladwell is a fascinating compilation of brief examinations of situations in which literally just a "thin slice" (not really cutting into the brain!) of information in our own and sometimes in experts which enables us to predict human behavior even when provided with astonishingly little information. (As in a college professor who has distilled the work of examining married mail-female couples to the point that by just eavesdropping for a few seconds on a neighboring conversation at a restaurant he can predict to something like 95% accuracy whether they will be married in fifteen years.)
       The act of writing for us has become not just a pleasure but a necessity which drives us through intermediate method to final product. As many readers and others including a range of friends (including former and present government officials) by now are aware from conversations in person and remotely, and physical evidence some of which is under the protection and care of others that the Ninth Amendment (which is made up of individual persons) unfortunately suffered harm, damage, very large (for us) economic loss in order to either repair, upgrade, replace and/or secure former computers' integrity. This includes all manner of injury short of known physical assault from acts clearly evidencing technical malfeasance with our publication, identity theft known to include breaking into e-mail accounts, and related accounts, which were misused for so-called "side-door access" including to all significant functions we control allowing us to bring out the Ninth Amendment as we see fit.
       Furthermore damages were incurred and federal, state and/or local laws may have been violated under a lay reading of the plain texts of statutes by taking without authorization (theft) "Administrator" status such individuals were acting and purportedly writing legally significant and other correspondence under the name of myself, the editor-in-chief, of this publication. To the best of our knowledge we suffered the first service disruptions of any type consistent with those described above exactly on the same date that information became public of Texas Governor Rick Perry's impending self-imposed end to his unparalleled run in state office culminating in a string of Texas governorships spanning more than thirty-five years.
       According to statistics kept by Google page views of the most viewed page appearing in this Ninth Amendment Log is a more than three-year-old post reporting on Governor Perry which has as of the publication of today's post reached 1,376 specific page views. The Ninth Amendment Log is and always has been political satire, with scattered obvious solemn notes such as our statements honoring our war dead and wounded on Veteran's Day, celebrating the United States Constitution and the pressingly pertinent endurance of its words today, as well of its historical foundation to our County's current experience, and more reflecting a deep and abiding love of that Compact which roots this extraordinary Nation.
       The Ninth Amendment is recognized as such by reasonable persons from the moment they first see the cartoon caricaturing Dr. Hunter S. Thompson on the Ninth Amendment's landing page. Readers easily can discern the focus of the site's mostly political satirical coverage regarding nationally and globally known institutions and individuals.
       Upon learning that Google keeps a record accessible for site administrators such as ours detailing all account activity, including identifying information as to servers and their approximate location including objects from within a proximity of a few feet. More exact location need be pursued through some unfamiliar to us military/national security/similar we expect channels. Upon learning this persons including those participating in the digital publication of the Ninth Amendment consulted the Google listing for this Ninth Amendment Log, a so-called "blog" on Google's "blogger.com". The Ninth Amendment consulted the Google Account Activity site and found that the Ninth Amendment for years has had its server of record at an IP address in Mountain View, California.
       Nevertheless after about five years of uninterrupted publication since its inception in later July 2013 that IP address jumped (in the Google report with no discernable action on the part of anyone working on or for the Ninth Amendment) to a different server having been documented in earlier posts searchable by interested readers. A reverse IP address locater found that the server IP address 127.227.207.201 is at about the southwest corner of the intersection of Van Ness and Market Streets at a facility listed to a previously identified public information search as belonging to the State of California. The reference resource identifies California DTS-cis (?) as providing computer support services to local, state, and federal entities from this location.
      Now patient readers to change gears and assuage your boundless curiosity we reproduce first verbatim the below editorial. As readers see it has been presented by the New York Times unanimously by the Editorial Board. The below is copyright The New York Times. House leaders are threatening economic disaster with an absurd list of discredited demands of "or elses" that should be:

Editorial

A Republican Ransom Note

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

Published: September 26, 2013 14 Comments

On Wednesday last, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew sent the House a very serious warning that, for the first time, the United States would be unable to pay its bills beginning on Oct. 17 if the debt ceiling is not lifted. House leaders responded on Thursday with one of the least serious negotiating proposals in modern Congressional history: a jaw-dropping list of ransom demands containing more than a dozen discredited Republican policy fantasies.

House G.O.P. Raises Stakes in Debt-Ceiling Fight (September 27, 2013)

Today's Editorials

Editorial: Some Progress on Syria (September 27, 2013)
Editorial: Food Stamp Regression in the Statehouse (September 27, 2013)
Editorial: Prison-Based Gerrymandering (September 27, 2013)

Connect With Us on Twitter

For Op-Ed, follow @nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow @andyrNYT.

Readers’ Comments

Share your thoughts.

We’ll refrain from deliberately sabotaging the global economy, Speaker John Boehner and the other leaders said, if President Obama allows more oil drilling on federal lands. And drops regulations on greenhouse gases. And builds the Keystone XL oil pipeline. And stops paying for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And makes it harder to sue for medical malpractice. And, of course, halts health care reform for a year.

The list would be laughable if the threat were not so serious. A failure to raise the debt ceiling would cause a default on government debt, shattering the world’s faith in Treasury bonds as an investment vehicle and almost certainly bringing on another economic downturn. Unlike a government shutdown, a default could leave the Treasury without enough money to pay Social Security benefits or the paychecks of troops.

The full effects remain unknown because no Congress has ever allowed the government to go over the brink before. The Government Accountability Office estimated that simply by threatening to default in 2011, Republicans cost taxpayers $1.3 billion in higher interest payments because of that uncertainty. The 10-year cost of those higher-interest bonds is $18.9 billion.

Any sober-minded lawmaker should realize that the danger of trifling with the debt limit is far too high. But Mr. Boehner has been encouraging his members to toss their pet projects — hey, let’s insist on Congressional approval for every major federal regulation! — onto the towering list of demands.

By day’s end, many Republican members remained skeptical of the leadership plan. But the House leaders clearly hope the president will take the bait and negotiate on a few items on the list, forcing him to break his promise never to bargain over the debt ceiling. Many items on the list are intended to put vulnerable red-state Democratic senators on the spot should the plan wind up in their chamber. One of them, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, said Thursday he could support a year’s delay on health reform. If the unified Democratic opposition to the debt-ceiling threat is shattered in the Senate, the pressure on Mr. Obama to come to the table would be intense.

But the absurdity of the list shows just how important it is that Mr. Obama ignore every demand and force the House extremists to decide whether they really want to be responsible for an economic catastrophe. He made a mistake by negotiating in 2011, hoping to reach a grand bargain; that produced the corrosive sequester cuts.

To prevent the House from making every debt-ceiling increase an opportunity to issue extortionist demands for rejected policies they can achieve in no other way, the president has to put an end to the routine creation of emergencies once and for all by simply saying no.

Meet The New York Times’s Editorial Board »