Morgan Freeman on Black History Month

I recall thinking Black History Month was silly when I was in school. Of course saying so is "racist". So I am glad Morgan Freeman says we can help by stop talking about it

link to article and video

Bogle

I heard a review of “The Soul of Capitalism” by John Bogle on a podcast (Constitution hour I think). He was complaining about morality justice of CEO salaries. As though he owned the company. You have no say. Who cares what money they make? Don't buy their products. He claimed it was obscene compensation and that the people were looting. Fine, then fire them. Oh you can't. Don't work for the company. Don't buy their products if you want to protest. Keep your socialist government out of business.

Government Schools

I think government schools are a bad idea. I can think of much better ways to educate children. They seem to be obvious but many are opposed to them and state control of school has nearly unanimous support.
I like home schooling. No one is better suited to teach a child than its mother. Mothers do not cease to teach and educate their children from birth to a period extending beyond teenage years. The reasons given to turn this education over to others are pretty shallow. There is one good reason. Moms give their kids to specialists who will teach their children things that they do not know. That is a great sign of progression in the family. A daughter learning to play piano from an instructor because a parent cannot teach it is acceptable, for example. Advanced education will be difficult for a parent to provide (examples: calculus, quantum physics). So let’s limit this discussion to elementary school.

What is the purpose of school for children? Why does a mother turn her young child over to others for many hours to educate them? What are they supposed to learn? Why is home schooling a bad idea?

The main accusation against home schooling refers in some way to a lack of socialization. The first complaint is that the bulk of socialization received is very poor. I don't want my kids to act like those kids.

Pooling of resources
Worthless. A joke. See my posts on socialism. Don't force me to give my money for education at gunpoint (taxes!)

This was a comment I received after writing about the bad quality of government schools.

"And yet, despite (I'm assuming) your government education your entire life, you turned out okay."

Yes, children and society are resilient. Family and church help a great deal. I survived in spite of public schools not because of them. Homeschoolers consistently outperform public school education. It is not a drain on the system and doesn't crowd school buildings but instead of encouraging it, government fights against it because they control. The goal is controlled submissive kids, not smarter kids

Random Topics

My friend, Kevin, called and wanted to give me some blog topics. No time to write now but here is the summary:

Patriot Act – I have mixed feelings on this. It could be re-written I suppose to be safe but as it is gives government too many powers. It needs to define exactly what police and intelligence agencies may do and restrict all else.

Christmas – Say Merry Christmas, not Happy Holidays

Drilling in ANWR – Do it! The arctic desert isn’t going to care. I want the cheap oil that isn’t coming from islamists.

Pres. Bush and wiretaps

I wrote some comments about secret wiretaps on Small Green World

Specialization is for insects

quote from Robert Heinlein

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

supposedly from "Excerpts from the Notebooks of Lazarus Long" I didn't verify

Atmospheric changes

Atmospheric changes
I watched various discover channel shows recently. Someone commented on the size of plants and animals. It was unknown why everything was so big in the fossil record. The largest dragon flies now are about 20 centimeters. The largest in fossil record are 75 centimeters. That is more than 3 times increase in size. I don’t know anything about the behavior of the old dragonflies but assuming they are similar to dragonflies we see now they flew and hunted prey. That requires some speed and agility. Their bodies appear similar. If their flight patterns were the same and body construction was the same then it should require a different environment to allow the larger size. I wouldn’t expect a 75 centimeter dragonfly to be able to turn or sprint like a smaller dragonfly. Mass to lift ratios don’t match. Nature’s design appears to limit size. Although bird construction is very light there is a limit to the size of birds. Condors and vultures are the largest. I remember the old nature shows which would show these birds struggling to take flight after eating because they had reached their weight limit. Yet these are dwarfed by flying dinosaurs called pteranodons or pterasaurs. Some of these had wingspans of more than 35 feet. Again more than 3 times what we have today. Scientists agree that the designs could glide but debate about how they would have become airborne.

My guess is that the atmosphere was 3 times as dense as it is today. There must have been changes in the atmosphere. The size of dragonflies should be optimized for prey and environment. They would not have grown so large if flight was hindered. Fossils don’t seem to show structural differences to decrease weight or improve flight. The air must have been thicker to allow lift/buoyancy required.

I thought about it and did a search and found that some people have put a lot more effort into this.
http://www.levenspiel.com/octave/dinosaur1.htm

Death Penalty stuff

I pulled comments from Federalist Patriot who quoted Jeff Jacoby on the death penalty. I imagine it was inspired by Williams the gangster's excecution. This is for the benefit of the silly protestors who don't understand justice and the value of life. "When murderers keep their lives, human blood is cheapened. That is why reverence for life and capital punishment belong to the same ethical tradition."


"No passage in the Bible—Old or New Testament—disapproves of the death penalty... The penalty for those who violate 'You shall not murder' (Exodus 20:13) is made explicit just a few lines later: 'Whoever strikes a man and kills him shall surely be put to death' (Exodus 21:12). The text goes on to specify that this applies only to deliberate murder, not unintentional killing. Accidents are not capital crimes. But for a willful killer, there can be no sanctuary: 'Take him even from My altar and put him death' (Exodus 21:14). Similar declarations appear in all five books of Moses, nowhere more dramatically or universally than in Genesis. Speaking to Noah after the Flood, God enjoins him—and through him, all of human society—to affirm the sanctity of human life by making murderers pay the ultimate price for their crime. 'Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has man been made' (Genesis 9:6)... Scripture could hardly be more explicit... When murderers keep their lives, human blood is cheapened. That is why reverence for life and capital punishment belong to the same ethical tradition. Civilized communities have not only the right but the responsibility to execute murderers. It may be a difficult responsibility to carry out. It may involve an assertion of moral authority that modern thinkers condemn. But easy or not, popular or not, the duty is ours to perform. The protection of human life is a grave obligation—never more so than when it involves taking a life away." —Jeff Jacoby

Rachel Carson is a fraud

Before I begin -
I only write things when I get excited or mad so this blog represents the loudest of my opinions. I realize that sometimes it may sound crazy. There are lots of things that are correct but don't sound right without proper introduction. But I usually only login and type when there is something more interesting than a million other distractions.
-

As for Rachel Carson, I don't know a lot about her. I don't really care. I would never read her book because I think it is stupid. I described her and other environmentalist as human-hating creeps. I think they are. Or they just use it to make money and get power. The results are terrible and I think the motives are worse.

I thought the article that Mel shared was interesting, informative. But far too diplomatic for the damage that is done in countries plagued with malaria and other diseases. Steve Milloy has assembled a report here. Milloy's death clock estimates that 90 million people have died since malaria was banned.
Some statements from the Reason article are good

-"effects of DDT on wildlife, especially birds, still vexes researchers." Eggshell thinning is shown to be a fraud.
-"Carson improperly cited cases of acute exposures"
- "Carson’s statistic is essentially meaningless unless it’s given some context, which she failed to supply. It turns out that the percentage of children dying of cancer was rising because other causes of death, such as infectious diseases, were drastically declining."
-In fact, cancer rates in children have not increased
-Meanwhile, Carson’s disciples have managed to persuade many poor countries to stop using DDT against mosquitoes. The result has been an enormous increase in the number of people dying of malaria each year. Today malaria infects between 300 million and 500 million people annually, killing as many 2.7 million of them
-the legacy of Rachel Carson is more troubling than her admirers will acknowledge.


Article from Front Page illustrates some of the damage done by banning the chemical. Poor people die from diseases that are easy to eradicate. For example

"Malaria keeps Africa down, and down is where the rest of the world wants us to be. If this was a disease of the West, it would be gone," Mamadou Kasse, medical editor of Senegal's largest newspaper, Le Soleil, told Atlantic Monthly's Ellen Ruppel Shell for her August 1997 article, "Resurgence of a Deadly Disease."
If Carson's crusaders are really concerned about saving lives and helping developing countries, then must allow DDT to be used without repercussions.
"Malaria kills a few million every year; each life lost is a potential Mandela, Shakespeare, or Edison, and nothing is less reversible than death, nor more tragic than the death of a child," Dr. Roger Bate said. "Hundreds of millions suffer chronic illness, which creates a painful economic burden and perpetuates poverty. This may not be the intention of those who are debating a DDT ban, but it surely will be the outcome."
If that is not enough to convince them, Carson's crusaders should realize that their actions against DDT might eventually boomerang.
"[B]anning DDT worldwide is beyond ignorance, it is just plain stupid," Koenig said. "[Although m]alaria still is prevalent in the countries in the equatorial regions . [it] is only a matter of time, a short time, before we see these diseases again in the regions between the tropics and the poles."
Until that time comes, the malaria plague seems to be off the public radar. However, let there be no mistake: Rachel Carson and the worldwide environmentalist movement are responsbile for perpetuating an ecological genocide that has claimed the lives of millions of young, poor, striving African men, women and children, killed by preventable diseases.

I saw a headline from Milloy that people want to name a bridge in Pennsylvania after her. Her picture is on the wall at Bookman's. The Reason article said her book is the most influential of the last 50 years. So how does a person like this get a bridge named after her? One could argue she is responsible for more deaths than Hitler. (How is that for sensationalist?)

Response to Katrina

I thought I had previously posted a link to this article. Couldn't find it so here it is again. Author questions the response to Katrina from the government. If their goal was other than helping (like grabbing power) than they did pretty well.

Government did not fail

Communism vs. capitalism

Was it communism vs. capitalism in the Cold War? Joe says no. He writes about license and freedom. Very good and short

Topics

I have topics adding up again but not enough thought to finish a post.

Penicillin and DDT
Reading “Brave new world Revisited”. Huxley was speaking of overpopulation, on which he was dead wrong (along with Ehrlich and others) and said that advances in medicine and technology such as DDT and penicillin were saving so many lives that it was creating a population crisis. Interesting. I bet DDT saved more lives than penicillin ever has. Probably why the human-hating creeps like Rachel Carson wanted it banned.

Declaration of Independence
I would like to finish part II of what I wrote. I was comparing King George and the Brits to Pres. George and the DC bureaucrats. Americans had less taxes and more representation under the King.

Government School
I really don't like government schools. Waste of time and resources. I tire of explaining it. Hard to keep energy up in that fight. Too many people trying valiantly to save the monster.

More disgust with Katrina and the welfare

No good Arizona governor candidates

Individuals vs. collectives I think collectivism of any sort is evil :)

So many topics to write on........

Medicaid is welfare

New article from NCPA.org

Medicaid, the joint federal-state health program for the poor, is a welfare
program, says health policy expert Merrill Matthews. "So why isn't the goal to
get people off the Medicaid rolls and into private-sector insurance?"

Cracked me up when I read this - have to remind people that these socialist programs are welfare.

Training Armies for War

Training Armies for Wars
I enjoyed “Revenge of the Sith” despite its many flaws.  I thought of it while listening to President Bush’s speech this morning on the “Strategy to win in Iraq.”  It seemed the only thing he said was that we are training the Iraqi army.   They have new equipment, training, facilities etc.  He went on in great detail for about 20 minutes.  I didn’t like it.  It seems we are training them to fight but I don’t know what else they are learning.

The clones were the perfect army.  Obedient, well trained, well equipped.  Well led -until they obeyed the order to kill their generals.  Not the sort of thing we need in Iraq, or anywhere in the world.  Shouldn’t we give the Iraqis other sorts of training?  I propose giving them training that will help them live better and know when to fight and how to identify enemies.  (Not that most Americans get this in high school anymore)  Courses  on Western Civilization (not from university professors but from people like Victor Davis Hanson), Biblical studies and values, American history including Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights etc.  This will help them create their own peace and prosperity.

We have been “at war” with Iraq since 1991.   After so long I still don’t like the idea of 300 Iraqi battalions, especially because we trained them.  We should declare war on a terrorist or terrorist group (Zarquawi, Al-Qaida whatever) and then it would make sense to supply and train our allies in that war, hopefully the Iraqi people.  Then when the enemy is dead we can leave.

  

Hiring Illegal Aliens

I know it is illegal but....

Why is it illegal to hire illegal aliens?

Pres. Bush is in town talking tough on immigration. One thing I agree with him and Jeff Flake on. Let the Mexicans have jobs. I don't see how it hurts anyone, except as a consequence of other bad policies, mostly regarding taxes. Would anyone be opposed to hiring illegals if we could tax them?

Think about it. It is a silly position to take. Americans sound like the silly French and German socialists. "You may visit but you must promise not to work. It destroys our economy and steals our jobs. We are too fragile to adjust..." Blah blah blah. It is a very weak stance to take. Saying that "They are stealing jobs" is just whining.
Let everyone work. And let everyone pay for education, medical care, food, housing etc.

Brave New World

I am making my third attempt to read "Brave New World". It is a vile book.

Why government education fails

Government education cannot succeed because it is founded on incorrect principles. Many good people put in good efforts and attempt to keep it afloat. I consider this a waste of effort. There are reasons that government was separated from ties to religion influence in the past. They apply to education as well. more info at Separation of School and State.

I want to share some quotes from Bastiat. If we really educated young people in school then I would have heard of Frederic Bastiat before I was 25. Maybe that betrayal is one of the reasons I despise government schools. The following are some quotes from Bastiat. Buy the book or you can read more here

Bastiat makes the argument that the law can rightfully only be used be used for one purpose: To fight injustice. Whenever it is used for something else it is corrupted and will fail. His argument extends beyond education, of course.

Can the law -- which necessarily requires the use of force -- rationally be used for anything except protecting the rights of everyone? I defy anyone to extend it beyond this purpose without perverting it and, consequently, turning might against right. This is the most fatal and most illogical social perversion that can possibly be imagined. It must be admitted that the true solution -- so long searched for in the area of social relationships -- is contained in these simple words: Law is organized justice.
Now this must be said: When justice is organized by law -- that is, by force -- this excludes the idea of using law (force) to organize any human activity whatever, whether it be labor, charity, agriculture, commerce, industry, education, art, or religion.
The organizing by law of any one of these would inevitably destroy the essential
organization -- justice. For truly, how can we imagine force being used against the liberty of citizens without it also being used against justice, and thus acting against its proper purpose?

Here I encounter the most popular fallacy of our times. (1850's - why haven't we learned it yet?) It is not considered sufficient that the law should be just; it must be philanthropic. Nor is it sufficient that the law should guarantee to every citizen the free and inoffensive use of his faculties for physical, intellectual, and moral self-improvement. Instead, it is demanded that the law should directly extend welfare, education, and morality throughout the nation.
This is the seductive lure of socialism. And I repeat again: These two uses of the law are in direct contradiction to each other. We must choose between them. A citizen cannot at the same time be free and not free.

Since the law organizes justice, the socialists ask why the law should not also organize labor, education, and religion.
Why should not law be used for these purposes? Because it could not organize labor, education, and religion without destroying justice. We must remember that law is force, and that, consequently, the proper functions of the law cannot lawfully extend beyond the proper functions of force.

Why can't government education work? Because it perverts justice.

Free trade vs. Capitalism

I have had this on the list of things to write for months. Can't seem to compose thoughts on this topic although things I read on it are pretty annoying. The main problem with so-called "free trade" is that it is not really about free trade.
Free trade is not capitalism.
Also just the other day I heard something interesting When Pres. bush went to China and was taling about freedom. People were discussing the oppression and communism in China and that capitalism was not solving it as thought. I think capitalism is a good moral system (not just the best economic system) but it is not perfect. Christian charity is the best moral value. Without charity capitalism can beome just making money. Yahoo recently agreed to help the communist government censor the web access. Can't let people get ideas.

You can't rely on trade to instill values and make people be better. Companies want to make money. That is their purpose. They will find ways to make money with communists and dictators.
Free Trade
Trade does not occur between governments. Trade is between companies who trade and make agreements as equals. They decide on prices mutually. My idea of free trade is the government doesn't get involved. Government should stay out of trade and get out of the way. "Free Trade" agreements are extra government. They add layers of bureaucracy. The dangerous part is that they generally infringe on the soveriegnty of these United States. Anything that takes away soveriegnty is evil.

Pretty boring topic - very few people care about it except WTO protestors and they are on the wrong side. WTO should be banished but for the reasons that those losers throw rocks. I can write more on free trade if anyone cares.

two front war

Speaking with a friend at work I think I am convinced that the two most important ways to fight against our over powering government is by trying to end 2 things: 1) government education 2) withholding taxes

Both ideas now have a long history and seem to be standard practice. But they are bad ideas and contribute to other abuses of power. They condition people to be abused and manipulated. They need to ended in order freedom to the republic.

article on public education

Good one on education

brought to you by The National Center for Policy Analysis

http://www.ncpa.org/newdpd/dpdarticle.php?article_id=2547

Oil is not the enemy

Oil is not the enemy

I saw a trailer for movie Syriana and yelled at the TV again.  Bad behavior, I know.  I am sure the book See No Evil is better.   It has to be from what I saw.  

I only recall two quotes.   Something like
“We are running out of oil.”  “90% of what is left is in the Middle East”
Both lies.  
People spent millions making this thing.  All they have to sell it is lies?

My podcasts

My podcasts - updated with links

Earlier post I gave you my favorite daily sources of info. Now some of my favorite podcasts.

Some are daily, others weekly or periodic. In rough order of preference:

History According to Bob
Military History
Common Sense w/ Dan Carlin from HBN News
Irish and Celtic Music podcast
Matt’s Today in History
HistoryPodcast
Signal – Firefly stuff - really good
American View
Scifi Wire

Some others:
ChinesePod
Dave Ramsey
Beyond the News
Deutsche Welle
Slacker Astronomy

price gouging?

Only a minute to write but have to complain about Terry Goddard and other fools trying to punish gas suppliers for making money. Socialists. They think they own the gas and get to decide what it costs. Senate is holding hearings to ask oil execs why they are making money. How foolish. Terry needs to shut his trap. He does not get to decide gas prices. He has no authority or reason to get involved.

I don't understand the windfall profits tax. Wouldn't that be ex post facto?

Ever thought of Homeschooling?

well now is the time

new ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stating,

"There is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children...Parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students"

p.s. I have passed 100 posts on this blog

More on Citizenship

I got this quote the morning after writing about immigration. It brings up some related points I did not discuss

The Federalist Patriot
Founders' Quote Daily
"The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment."
-- George Washington

(Address to the Members of the VolunteerAssociation of Ireland, 2 December 1783)
Reference: George Washington, Address to the Members of theVolunteer Association of Ireland, December 2, 1783.


We welcome others to America. The land has always been open to the poor and tired, the huddled masses yearning to be free. But do we need to monitor or control immigration in order to preserve liberty?

There is something odd about America and citizenship. Maybe other countries also, I don’t know. I don’t understand citizenship. I witnessed a citizenship ceremony conducted by Justice O’Conner at Constitution Week and I still don’t get it. They swore allegiance to US and foreswore all connections to former country. There was a strange phrase about obeying civil authority and requirements of supporting civil service in time of need. It sounded wrong, I don’t think I could take that oath. I’d be interested to hear how it works in other countries.

How do we accept people into our country? How should you control the borders and police the population? I don’t want to get into discussion on terrorism, I think that is a separate problem. In a war, of course, you would defend your borders against the enemy. But the issue of citizenship is different. Why do shut people out from liberty? How do you become a citizen? When did you become an American?

My point in the previous post was to say that we can welcome everyone if we get rid of socialism. The more the merrier.

The Constitution says that if you are born here then you become a citizen. (14th Amendment. Meant for slave's children, not anchor babies) Is that all it takes? Why have an oath for immigrants? Why not an oath for all citizens when they turn 16? Of course, that brings up the problem of what do with someone born here but won’t promise

light of liberty

self promotion
I wrote article on Small Green World

read it

Conversations after reading Sobran

Conversations inspired by Joe Sobran’s article
"NATIONAL SERVICE" AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE

I am posting an edited version of email traffic with some friends because I enjoyed the conversation.

C - You know you reach a point with liberals and relativists, whereupon there is no point to continue to try to till. You can point out how government doesn't work, but they would say, "yes, but it makes me feel good."


ME – It’s a good article. When I say that government has only powers listed in Article 1 Section 8 they think it is crazy. "We wouldn't even have a government if they stuck to that list", they say. "Who will think of the children?!" If they don't stick to that list then what list of powers do you want them to adhere to? "oh, I learned about this debate in my history class in school. You are one of those that would have argued for state-rights and strict constructionism"I also do not believe that Law = Truth and Justice. Law is neither. I wonder how many, when they realize they are slaves, will accept slavery because they find out it is legal and upheld in the courts.

C - Perfectly said. Law = Truth or Justice. Once again, the Bible has a good basis for this. I believe the Bible provides a good foundation for liberty. The principles are there (Free Will, Responsibility, Consequences, Absolutism, Law as not being a substitute for Justice, Truth being found in God, Government not being the source of Rights nor the object of Worship).
You have also provided a perfect example of why the government schools are so damaging. They are the problem. People simply can't understand a concept if the limits of their thinking only extend so far, once government schools have set the limits. Try to tell a fish he is wet. "We wouldn't even have a government if they only did what you say" indicates that they have a very limited idea of the very essence of what government is and what it can possibly be. Checkmate. You can't imagine if you can't think beyond a certain point. "We wouldn't be fish if we didn't live in the ocean". Well, no, not exactly, you would just be a different kind of fish.This goes back to something called the Hegelian Dialectic.
Don't know if you're familiar with that, but it sums up this bankrupt thinking and sums up how most everyone views issues today. It is also one of the founding principles of Marxism. Marx combined this Dialectic with "materialism" to make Marxism.

ME - Don't know nothing 'bout HegelianI got in an argument once about how one could privatize anything. Roads, FDA, EPA, whatever. I said people can have all that stuff in a private agency. It doesn't have to be government run. Then I made the mistake of adding three more letters: FAA. They could not conceive of air travel without government control. He was a pilot and informed I knew nothing if I thought air travel was possible under private control. I guess everyone has their limits to freedom.

C - My "libertarian mentor", since he introduced me to the philosophy shortly after I started work) once said (probably copying the phrase from another guy somewhere), "Everyone's a libertarian for the liberties that they care about". I have found that to be true. Libertarianism, for me, is just realizing that I have to be a libertarian for the liberties I don't care about (drug use, homosexual "unions" (not marriage) etc.). That is why the "acid test" for libertarians is "should previously convicted felons have guns?" or the acid test can be something that applies to one's direct sphere of knowledge or profession, like this pilot, or like me, who will admit that I am guilty as charged for working at this white collar welfare factory.Ultimately there is a great deal of arrogance involved, an arrogance that few will openly admit. Liberals, the "humanists" of our time, are among the most arrogant people I've ever known, though many of today's neocons are simply liberals in different clothing. "I know what's best (for you)". I think it takes a certain degree of emotional maturity to get past a desire to run, direct, influence, control and stop projecting this desire on others. It is difficult to sometimes say, "I know more than most about how to make a decision in this area of knowledge, but I will still leave it up to you and your specific case, though I will offer you what I would do."

Doctors are my favorite example of this personality disorder, and, shock of all shocks, they overwhelmingly tend to be liberal. The "elite, educated, licensed experts" love to pat themselves on the back about how much good they do for people and disguise their central planning elitism as compassion. Hence one of my favorite stats is showing how many people AMA licensed doctors (the only ones who can "legally" practice medicine) kill or maim people every year, often from mis-prescriptions or just from properly prescribing drugs that have otherwise been approved by these doctors and the other government bureau of murderers, the FDA. I also think it's funny how so often you can find examples of how "medical consensus" changes, whether you're talking about recommendations for diet, SIDS, heart patients, vaccines or even dental fillings. As time goes on, you inevitably hear them say, "New info suggests.....". But when they're leveling their elitism at you, it's "I know, I'm infallible, you are wrong" as if they've never been wrong before.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Another conversation from the same article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Main Entry: slave
Pronunciation: 'slAv
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English sclave, from Old French or Medieval Latin; OldFrench esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from thefrequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe
1 : a person held in servitude as the chattel of another
2 : one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence
3 : a device (as the printer of a computer) that is directly responsive to another
4 : DRUDGE, TOILER-
slave adjective

C - The first definition means that someone owns you as property, or that someone owns you or your property first before it is yours. This is exactly the case with the subjects of the United States. Your property is theirs first. You are "free" to have what is left over after payingtribute.

N- ...don't defend the borders, don't defend property rights (Kelo decision), don't defend the right to engage in contracts (ban unskilled labor through minimum wage prohibitions), bypass Congressional due process in the power to declare war, bypass legal due process in presumption of innocence under Patriot Act, but for me the last straw is not being able to buy pseudafed for my allergies without being treated like a criminal or an airline passenger. How far we have fallen these last few years....

ME - What is the effective feedback system? Does a tyrant (even the compassionate ones) care when he has exceeded his authority? Example: President Bush claims authority to use military to quarantine bird flu victims. Is he running up the flag to see the response? I don't think he will get a response. Not from me. I have no inclination to write him a letter and explain that he has no authority for such actions. I buy another case of beans and shells instead because I see his declaration as an act of hostility.

He won't get a response from most people, I think he will be as surprised as the British were when the colonies revolted. "I thought everyone was happy. Haven't we protected them and provided for them? Why do they complain about stamps?" Tyranny never rolls back on its own. Is there any way to resist peacefully? Any feedback to provide a tyrant to say, "You have gone far enough. Don't push me any more."?
Can't we just all get along?

C - The reason I am so critical of today's conservatives when they come to power, is because they often are in a position to actually roll back the score to put some points back in the liberty column. This to me seems to be the main way to avoid tyranny. But if they can't be counted on to do this (and if they prevent real grassroots progress by conning those who would otherwise work for liberty, to vote for them) then they're simply helping the long march to totalitarianism, all the while thinking maybe that they're just "working within the system". The problem is that tyranny does advance, so liberty must also advance at times for conflict to be avoided. Kind of like, if you have many expenses 6 months out of the year, you had better use the other 6 months to SAVE, so that overall at least the balance is maintained. If you squander the opportunity of those 6 months to save, then you will be hurting all the more when you're in rougher times (when someone like Hillary is elected).



beginning of
"NATIONAL SERVICE" AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE
by Joe Sobran

Here in and around the Beltway, a local talk-radiohost started the day with a bright idea: Let's putwelfare recipients to work. This brainstorm was inspired,as you might guess, by the news footage of rioting andlooting in New Orleans.

The idea of nonmilitary "national service" has astubborn charm for many Americans who should know better. Even William Buckley has endorsed it. So do some of myliberal friends. If the government is paying peoplemoney, shouldn't it be able to require something of themin return? Even rich people occasionally speak of "givingsomething back to the community."

What we are talking about here, of course, is slavery, more delicately called "involuntary servitude"-- not giving something back, but taking something thatisn't yours. Military conscription, or the draft, fallsunder the same heading, a violation of the unalienableright to life and liberty.

American courts have always exempted the draft fromthe Thirteenth Amendment prohibition against slavery. Thecourts do the same for taxes. If the government owns youand your labor, including your property, the thinkingseems to run, it isn't really slavery.

One caller to the talk show got it right: "nationalservice," he pointed out, is unconstitutional; and so arewelfare programs, which the government has no authorityto create.

The U.S. Constitution was an ingenious butunsuccessful attempt to specify and thereby limit thepowers of the Federal Government.
.
.
.

.........

Marxists killing people..... again

Same old story. Someone comes up with a grand plan to "redistribute wealth" and hopes to live in a worker paradise. You can only pray to escape with your life if you are one of the rich oppressors (owners). The story never has a happy ending. The dictator hands out the land and resources and but people don't know how to use it so it is wasted. Then people starve and die. Name a case when it is different. (as opposed to Russia, China, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia ....etc)

The only instances where people don't starve en masse is when there isn't enough socialism. For example, the strength of the American economy seems to baffle the socialists and their communists cousins. I am surprised that it has lasted so long and so well. I don't doubt that they will try harder though. More socialism is on the way. It will grow until people die from starvation or extermination.

I heard another example on the radio yesterday while listening to Michael Savage. Mugabe kicked out all the farmers years back and gave the land to non-workers who don't produce food. Surprise! Starvation has begun. When will it end? Not while that monster is in control of the country.

Riots in Paris

Muslims still rioting in France. Violence has lasted 8 days and spread to 20 towns. I wonder why there is no deathtoll released. I couldn't find a mention of it anywhere in the reports.

Emergent economic phenomenon

Reality is not optional.

Interesting article from Russell Roberts explaining emergent economic phenomenon that a friend recommended. Check it out at econlib. Shows that gas prices should not be controlled.

example

Who invented the verb "to google?" Or the nouns "cyberspace" or "blog?" More crucially, who decided that these words could be used in common parlance without explanation? No one. Because no one is in charge, we might expect language to be chaotic and random. But words don't fall like rain. Which words live and which words die, which words delight the mind and which words get ignored, isn't a random phenomenon. Human beings and their choices make these words (and not others) part of the English language because they are useful. But no one person is the arbiter. We all are, in some sense. But not in the usual sense that we use the word "we," the sense of a collective decision. There is no collective decision, merely the result of a sufficient number of individuals using particular words that spread by word of mouth. Language emerges from the complex interaction of those who speak, read and write it.

NRA supporting gun control again

NRA supporting gun control bill
Do you think of the NRA as “gun nuts”?  Another example of false politics.  NRA supports gun control.  Just not as much as some would want.  Liberals and democrats are upset because the dangerous gun lobby has pushed this bill S.397.  The republicans claim victory and their fake argument continues.  But they are all socialist gun banning goons.  A bill like this containing gun control measures would never have passed 10 years, not even under Clinton.    Where is the group supporting the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms?   I don’t think one exists.

Serenity is good movie

I recommend Serenity. The movie is good, no time in the plot for the sexual aspects from the TV show, Firefly. Of course there is more violence. I was a little surprised by that. If you enjoyed the TV show, you will love the movie. Joss Whedon has another hit.

One of the best films I have seen. Certainly one of the sci-fi ever.

"Clean" aka welfare elections

“Clean” aka welfare elections
Arizona passed a stupid law dubbed “clean” elections.  Don’t let it happen in your state.  The intent is to take the dangerous money out of the elections and let the taxpayers fund the election.  Another waste of tax money used to control behavior instead of run the government.  The republicans seem to have bought the idea after the disastrous loss to Janet Imamanatano.

Global warming

Global warming
It is all junk.  Just ignore it.   Any questions?




Jack Black looks funny in the latest propaganda film though.

Eminent Domain

Eminent Domain

Laura Ingraham had the Florida eminent domain case on her show this morning.  I forget the town but the mayor is terrible.  Typical socialist.  He doesn’t care about any arguments about property rights.  He totally disregarded all of that and said he has an emergency on his hands and that these poor people are in desperate need.

Need, emergency, and poverty do not trump property rights.  His argument is just tyranny.   The Supreme Court is wrong.  Eminent Domain cannot be used for commercial development or to “rescue people from poverty”.

Local jurisdiction

Constitution

We have a dual jurisdiction – State and Federal. The government may do only what we the people have authorized it to do; if it does more, it is guilty of usurpation. The people have reserved to themselves orto their State governments every right and power theyhave not delegated to the Federal government, which must always look to the Constitution and itsAmendments to find its rights, for it has none other. This system puts the great bulk of our daily life activities in the hands of our own neighbors who know us and our surroundings, and not in the hands of a bureaucrat in a far-away national capitol, who, to all intents and purposes, is an alien to us and our affairs. This plan gives us the largest possible measure of local self-government. Liberty will never depart from while we have local self-government controlling and directing matter pertaining to our personal liberties and to the security of our private property; it will not abide with us if shall lose this local self-government.
-J. Reuben Clark Jr.

Letter to John Shadegg

A letter I sent to John Shadegg


Glad to hear you are trying to educate congress on their authority through the Enumerated Powers Act.  Incredible that should a thing should be needed, as though it wasn't clear enough (9th and 10th Amendments).  One thing is missing for the Constitutionally illiterate.   Please clarify this to your colleagues and revise the act if you must submit it again to Congress.  

There are no powers granted to the government in the Preamble to the Constitution.   I have heard that according to House rules many bills cite the authority under which they should be implemented, which is a step in the right direction.   But rumor is they all say that they are promoting the general welfare.   “Promote the general welfare” is not a power of congress.  The powers of Congress are listed in Article I, section 8 and no where else.  Only a power monger would think otherwise.  (And they added Section 9 to tell Congress what they cannot do.)  

Again – there are no powers granted to the government in the Preamble.   This is only an introduction to the purpose of the Constitution and the government to be formed.

Idiot = Arpaio

“Idiot!”  - Napoleon Dynamite

Sheriff Joe is sending about 80 Arizona policemen to Texas and Louisiana to arrest and harass citizens of another state.  The news backed him up on his claim last night that this won’t cost taxpayers anything because the federal government will pay for it.  Where are the Feds getting their money?  

More on Washington

More on Washington

American Minute with Bill Federer
September 19

Like the Roman leader Cincinnatus, who twice led the Roman Republic to victory in battle and twice voluntarily gave up his power to return to a life of farming, George Washington led the American Republic to victory over the British, resigned, then, after having served two terms as President, chose to return to a life of farming at Mount Vernon.
In an age where ambitious men relentlessly sought political power, the world stood in awe as Washington voluntarily gave up his powerful position and on this day, September 19, 1796, delivered his Farewell Address.
He stated:
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports.
In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars...
Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion...
Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle...
Morality is a necessary spring of popular government...Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

___
www.AmericanMinute.com  1-888-USA-WORD  Permission granted to
reproduce.

New post on Washington

I wrote on Washington's Farewell Address and posted it at Small Green World

Williams on FEMA

Williams on FEMA

Don’t you love Walter Williams?  Cracks me up.  Has a great article here.  Look at his quotes from other Presidents facing disaster.   Why couldn’t Pres. Bush say as Cleveland did, “The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood."  

Wetlands are fine

Wetlands are fine
“Environmentalist” is a bad word.  They are evil, cruel, vicious people-haters who would rather commit suicide than damage snail habitat.   They will also kill you and your children to save the environment.  Don’t listen to anything they say.

They are upset about the damage that the storm (have you heard of Rita yet?) will cause to the wetlands.  Salt water is poison to freshwater water wetlands they explain.  Do they think we are stupid?  Is this the first time saltwater has ever been sprayed on the Texas coast?  Amazing that the wetlands ever developed.   I am glad that there were no hurricanes in the region for millions of years so that the ecosystem could develop.  Too bad it is all so fragile as to be wiped out this season.  They say it will all be gone, take some pictures as you evacuate.  Of course, they blame it on people and their interference and not the storm after all.

Blog Spam

Blog Spam
I added word verification to the blog settings because nerds keep spamming my blog. I am tired of deleting them. Just follow the instructions if you want to add a comment.

Is Rita that big a deal?

Is Rita that big a deal?

Tired of the coverage yet?  I’d rather watch Senators not ask Roberts any good questions on C-SPAN.  All the meteorologists said that the hurricane would be downgraded to CAT 3 by Friday.  Will it be CAT 2 before it makes landfall.   This has to be over reaction to Katrina.    But the tragedy of Katrina was government failure.  Someone told the Feds they were in charge even though they are already $600 BILLION in debt this year and have NO Constitution authority to act in case of natural disasters.  FEMA has got to be disbanded or everything will become an emergency.  The lesson to learn was: don’t listen to the government.   They are not there to help.  Buy water, get out of floodplains, and buy a gun.  You’ll be fine.  

Notice how Bush preemptively called Texas a disaster area and rolled in to take control?  If we let them they will lock everyone up and say, “Its for your own good.”  

High Gas Prices are Your Fault

High Gas Prices are Your Fault

Yes, you. I am blaming you. You have allowed the executive to usurp legislative authority and that always leads to tyranny. Call your congressman and demand that he do his job which is to write law and allow no other body to write law. We have high gas prices because the Executive allows the stupid EPA to make up idiotic laws, the effect of which is that we don’t have enough refineries.

Disband the EPA. They are unconstitutional.

Millionaire Richard Branson was laughed at when he said he wanted to build a refinery to guarantee a supply of cheap gas for his plans. Why? Because even though this guy can do about anything, including start a company that will beat NASA to the moon, no one thinks he can beat the EPA and actually build a new refinery. He’ll have to do it in a third world country. Posh, posh, civilized people don’t build such silly contraptions as refineries.

Democracy

"Democracy is the most vile form of government... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
- James Madison

Judge Roberts is not pro-life

Stare Decisis
Family Research Council (FRC) bashed Sen. Schumer and Leahy weeks ago for their defense of stare decisis (settled law) when referring to abortion and the corrupt power of the courts to decide legislation. Today they applaud Roberts for not answering questions regarding even though he has said that Roe v. Wade is settled law. Roberts has said that the abortion decision has been decided and he will follow the law. This is not a pro-life position. Why does FRC continue to support a man for the Supreme Court who said,

“ROE VS. WADE is the settled law of the land … There’s nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent.”

....

portions of FRC press releases

FRC Applauds John Roberts' Roe v. Wade Response
The error occurred while processing an element with a general identifier of (CFFILE), occupying document position (44:1) to (44:104). -->September 13, 2005 - Tuesday
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 13, 2005


Judge Roberts refused to give hints or projections about how he might evaluate a future abortion case before the Court, but carefully stated what the law is on the matter of stare decisis and repeatedly pledged to follow the rule of law.


To: Friends of Family Research CouncilFrom: Tony Perkins, PresidentJuly 28, 2005 - Thursday
Stare Decisis: (stah-ree duh-sigh-sis) n.Stare Decisis is a Latin term meaning "to stand by things decided." The phrase is used in common law to express the notion that prior court decisions must be recognized as precedents, according to case law.

gun rights

"How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited, unless we could could prohibit, in like manner,the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation?"-- James Madison (Federalist No. 41, 1788)


This works on an individual basis as well.
"How could the carrying of handguns be safely prohibited, unless we could could prohibit, in like manner,the preparations of criminals"


Armed populace is the best guarantee of freedom. Carrying weapons is a right.

End Federal tax Withholding

This bill would change the world. My congressman is a co-sponsor, is yours?

End Federal Tax Withholding

-- Click Below to Support the Federal Tax Withholding Repeal Act:
http://capwiz.com/sicminc/issues/alert/?alertid=7963521&type=CO

ALERT: Want to start a REAL tax revolution?
Simple -- show the average American taxpayer just how much the government is taking from his paycheck every time. He'll get hopping mad in no time flat... and so will millions of others. Bam -- instant tax revolution. Well, we've got a chance to make it happen. Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN) is looking for supporters to co-sponsor his bill, the "Federal Tax Withholding Repeal Act of 2005" (H.R. 3409), which would repeal the law allowing the federal government to withhold federal income taxes and social-security taxes. Instead, this bill would implement a system in which employees would make quarterly payments to the federal government. Wouldn't that quarterly check-writing experience be an eye-opener for the American taxpayer? You betcha. Let's light the fire, shall we?
TAKE ACTION: As one blogger noted, "Federal withholding is primarily responsible for the lack of tax outrage in this country. When the ignorant masses apply for jobs, they don't care how much their actual salary is, they only want to know what their 'take home' pay is going to be... "There is also a large contingent of taxpayers that view their tax refund as a good thing. Ask them how much they paid in income taxes last year and they say something like, 'I didn't have to pay anything. I got money back!'"
Right now, the federal government WANTS "ignorant masses" when it comes to the withholding tax. Let's change that. Click to send a FREE message to YOUR Congressman, asking him or her to support the "Federal Tax Withholding Repeal Act" (H.R. 3409):

Bastiat and Katrina

Bastiat and Katrina

More bad economics. Bad logic leads to bad conclusions. There are some claiming that the destruction will cause an increase in jobs but this fallacy was described over 150 years ago by Bastiat. Williams tries to set it straight….. again.

As reported in "Gas Crisis Looms" (Aug. 31, 2005), written by CNN/Money staff writer Parija Bhatnagar, Mr. Chan said, "Preliminary estimates indicate 60 percent damage to downtown New Orleans. Plenty of cleanup work and rebuilding will follow in all the areas. That means over the next 12 months, there will be lots of job creation which is good for the economy."

Bastiat wrote a
parable about this which has become known as the "Broken Window Fallacy." A shopkeeper's window is broken by a vandal. A crowd formed sympathizing with the man. After a while, someone in the crowd suggested that the boy wasn't guilty of vandalism; instead, he was a public benefactor, creating economic benefits for everyone in town. After all, fixing the broken window creates employment for the glazier, who will then buy bread and benefit the baker, who will then buy shoes and benefit the cobbler, and so forth.

Those are the seen effects of repairing the broken window. What's unseen is what the shopkeeper would have done with the money had the vandal not broken his window.

The State and the Flood

The State and the Flood
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

"No one can escape the influence of a prevailing ideology," wrote Ludwig von Mises, and Gulf Coast residents know precisely what it means to be trapped—ostensibly by a flood but actually by statist policies and ideological commitments that put the government in charge of crisis management and public infrastructure. For what we are seeing in New Orleans and the entire Gulf Coast region is the most egregious example of government failure in the United States since September 11, 2001.
Mother Nature can be cruel, but even at her worst, she is no match for government. It was the glorified public sector, the one we are always told is protecting us, that is responsible for this. And though our public servants and a sycophantic media will do their darn best to present this calamity as an act of nature, it was not and is not. Katrina came and went with far less damage than anyone expected. It was the failure of the public infrastructure and the response to it that brought down civilization.
.......


NASA spends and spends and still can't seem to make a reliable space shuttle. The public schools absorb many times more—thousands times more—in resources than private schools and still can't perform well. The federal government spends trillions over years to "protect" the country and can't fend off a handful of malcontents with an agenda. So too, Congress can allocate a trillion dollars to fix every levee, fully preventing the last catastrophe, but not the next one.
The problem here is public ownership itself.
.........

The list of public sector failures hardly stops there. The outrageous insistence that no one be permitted to "gouge" only creates shortages in critically important goods and services when they are needed the most. It is at times of extreme need that prices most need to be free to change so that consumers and producers can have an idea of what is needed and what is in demand. Absent those signals, people do not know what to conserve and what to produce.
Bush was on national television declaring that the feds would have zero tolerance towards gouging, which is another way of saying zero tolerance toward markets.
......

Moreover, every American ought to be alarmed at the quickness of officials to declare martial law, invade people's rights, deny people the freedom of movement, and otherwise trample on all values that this country is supposed to hold dear. A crisis does not negate the existence of human rights. It is not a license for tyranny. It is not a signal that government may do anything it wants.
.....

Read the whole thing here



September 2, 2005
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail] is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com and author of Speaking of Liberty.
Copyright © 2005 LewRockwell.com
Lew Rockwell Archives

Welfare destroys charity

Quote taken from Federalist Patriot

"I once thought there was too much poverty for private charity to make much of a difference. Now I realize that private charity would do much more—if government hadn't crowded it out. In the 1920s—the last decade before the Roosevelt administration launched its campaign to federalize nearly everything—30 percent of American men belonged to mutual aid societies, groups of people with similar backgrounds who banded together to help members in trouble. They were especially common among minorities. Mutual aid societies paid for doctors, built orphanages and cooked for the poor. Neighbors knew best what neighbors needed. They were better at making judgments about who needs a handout and who needed a kick in the rear. They helped the helpless, but administered tough love to the rest. They taught self-sufficiency. Mutual aid didn't solve every problem, so government stepped in. But government didn't solve every problem either. Instead, it caused more problems by driving private charity out. Today, there are fewer mutual-aid societies, because people say, 'We already pay taxes for HUD, HHS. Let the professionals do it.' Big Government tells both the poor and those who would help them, 'Don't try.'... When you rely on the government to help those who need it, you don't practice benevolence yourself. You don't take responsibility for deciding whom to help. Just as public assistance discourages the poor from becoming independent by rewarding them with fixed handouts, it discourages the rest of us from being benevolent. This may be the greatest irony of the welfare state: It not only encourages the poor to stay dependent, it kills individuals' desire to help them." —John Stossel

President Bush news conference

Here comes President Bush claiming the federal government has an important role to play.

They have played their role and messed up the country. People wouldn't need rescue if they had to take of themselves. Socialism breeds disaster.

Chertoff is scary. I don't like him anymore after watching his statements. He does not understand the proper role of government. Without that restraint he is dangerous.

The president has no authority to put price controls in place. Messing with strategic petroleum reserve is a flawed attempt to control the economy. He has no authority or obligation to control the economy or gasoline flow. We need a law to make loans from oil reserve impossible. It should only be used for war.

The private sector is the only legal source of disaster relief.

President Bush asked for $10,000,000,000 in aid. With 300 million americans that is #33 for everyone. I am financially responsible for 6 of those americans so I just "donated" $200.

no federal aid

Neither Congress nor the president have authority to give billions for hurricane relief. It is wrong.

Restoring the Republic

this is good. Read Paul Weyrich on restoring the Republic

photo test

Sarbanes-Oxley is unconstitutional

As Epstein says in his column, this act is no good.

Sarbanes-Oxley is a moral and economic atrocity. It is past time to repeal this monstrous law and start treating businessmen as American citizens: innocent until proven otherwise.

Alex Epstein is a writer for the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) in Irvine, California.

individualists and statists from Gregory

Interesting writing from Anthony Gregory I got from a friend at work

“Capitalism” is as problematic a word as “socialism.” So problematic are they, it is accurate to say that America has become a socialist country – with policies approaching fascist every day – and also to say that “fascism” is simply a form of “socialism,” in which the state maintains the façade of “private property” in the hands of a few “capitalists.”
Is America capitalistic and socialistic? In some ways. But what most leftists, at least
the less evil ones, oppose when they bash “capitalism” is actually “corporatism.”

read the rest at the archives

Protection of Liberty

or in other words
Protecting Liberty

from Federalist Patriot
"Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood." --John Adams

Fred wrote in a recent column in reference to illegal searches and subway inspections.
"It is curious that an entire system of constitutional protections can be dismantled just by ignoring it. I would have thought it more difficult, but it isn’t."

How should liberty be supported? I agree with Fred that it is too easy to simply ignore protections of the the Constitution that guarantee our liberty. Those protections can be ignored as words on paper.

Sowell on successful ideas

"Some ideas seem so plausible that they can fail nine times in a row and still be believed the tenth time. Other ideas seem so implausible that they can succeed nine times in a row and still not be believed the tenth time. Government controls in the economy are among the first kinds of ideas and the operation of a free market is among the second kinds of ideas."
--Thomas Sowell

Challenge: Name one successful implementation of socialism?

Submit to tyranny

The Federalist Patriot
Founders' Quote Daily
"Nevertheless, to the persecution and tyranny of his cruel ministry we will not tamely submit - appealing to Heaven for the justice of our cause, we determine to die or be free...."
-- Joseph Warren
(American account of the Battle of Lexington,26 April 1775)
Reference: Documents of American History, Commager, ed., vol. 1(99)

I find it amazing to read what these people did to fight tyranny and to what people today will submit. Dr. Warren died fighting the British because of escalating events - Stamp Act, Boston Tea Party, closing the harbor, confiscating weapons etc. What started it? Mostly taxes. One reason is the Brits wanted the colonists to pay debts from the French Indian War and thought of creative ways to do it. Paying a tax for all paper and printed items was one way they thought of making money but the colonist wouldn't submit. They called it tyranny. The method was tyranical. But what about the amount of the taxes? I am too tired for extensive reaserch but wikipedia says "Taxes applied to all forms of legal documents. The rate of these taxes ranged from a half penny on a pamphlet or one-page newspaper to fifty pounds on a major commercial contract. "

People rebelled because of a half-penny! Most people think of their income in terms of "take home pay". Imagine if the colonists time travelled to the present day and saw our silly 401k schemes and neglectful Health Maintenance Organizations all built to scam a few dollars of pre-tax money out the truly tyranical "withholdings" system we use to pay taxes. What would they think? Wouldn't they tar and feather the IRS agents, burn the president and governors in effigy? They would die or be free.

Founders' Quote 2

The Federalist Patriot
Founders' Quote Daily
"Without wishing to damp the ardor of curiosity or influence the freedom of inquiry, I will hazard a prediction that, after the most industrious and impartial researchers, the longest liver of you all will find no principles, institutions or systems of education more fit in general to be transmitted to your posterity than those you have received from your ancestors."-- John Adams (letter to the young men of the Philadelphia,7 May 1798)

I have to admit I had to read this one twice to get it. But that me all the more fond of it.

Founder's Quotes 1

Ah, the wisdom of the past. I could re-post these all day
The Federalist Patriot
Founders' Quote Daily
"As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requiresa certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form. Were the pictures which have been drawn by the political jealousy of some among us, faithful likenesses of the human character, the inference would be that there is not sufficient virtue among men for self-government; and that nothing less than the chains of despotism can restrain them from destroying and devouring one another."
-- James Madison (Federalist No. 55, 15 February 1788)

I believe in the good nature of man which is why I advocate getting rid of government education and Socialism Security. We will survive and take care of things without being told to by govmint overseers.

"Smart Growth" is socialism

City planners who try to implement smart growth policies to combat "urban sprawl" are following guidelines from communist planners of 50 years ago. They are not deterred by the utter failure of communism and disgraceful living conditions produced by the communists in Europe. I am sure they think tighter rules are needed. They say to themselves, "communism is good in theory. Those guys just weren't communist enough. We can do better".

Let's give communism another chance
Capitalism is the only solution. Check out Chad's comments on this ideal.

Source: Randal O'Toole, "It's 'Smart Growth,' Comrade," Liberty, July 2005

Illinois smoking

The anti-smokers are on the loose in Illinois. They want to pass laws that no one can smoke in public places. Of course, nearly everywhere is a public place if you define it as places where the public can go. Every restaurant would be non-smoking. How lame.

Next they are going to raise taxes on cigarettes. Punitive taxes are not just. Estimates are that thousands of people will be out of work and millions of dollars lost because of these silly ideas.

Dave Ramsey gives financial advice

I like listening to Dave Ramsey's show on the radio. I don't want to give unsolicited financial advice so I will write some stuff I learned from him here on my blog.

I took some notes while listening to the Dave Ramsey show which you can get on podcast, very cool. This is the basics of his financial program. The complete program is in his book Total Money Makeover

How to get debt free!
1. $1000 emergency fund
2. Pay all debts except mortgage using debt snowball
3. Emergency fun equivalent to 3-6 months of expenses
4. Put 15% of income towards retirement
5. Save for kid's college and other future expenses
6. Pay off house

Debt snowball (step 2)
1. Determine all debts that need to be paid
2. Determine minimum payments required on all debt and balances
3. Create monthly budget (utilities, cars, entertainment etc) and allocate all extra funds to "debt reduction fund"
4. Pay off debt with the smallest balance using its minimum payment plus the debt reduction fund.
5. When that is paid off then add the minimum balance to the debt reduction fund so that it snowballs.
6. Pay off debt with the next smallest balance, adding the minimum balance to the debt reduction fund and repeat until all debt except the house is paid off.

French Joke

The AP and UPI reported that the French Government announced yesterday that it had raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The raise was precipitated by a recent fire which destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively disabling their military.

Where to buy gas? Not Citgo

There has been a campaign for several years now to boycott gas stations who get their oil from Soudi Arabia as punishment for their support of terrorists. I noticed a trend on some of the websites to buy gas from Citgo because they don't get their crude from Saudi Arabia but from Venezuela. I didn't realize it so I confirmed that Citgo is the company selling gas from Venezuela. I associate Venezuela with Chavez and communism. I don't want to support that creep any more than terrorists. I haven't seen any of these site suggest buying gas from American oil fields or to support oi drilling in ANWR. How ironic.

They hate big corporations unless it is a big corporation they like.

Check out this communist site

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0516-25.htm
"Instead of using government to help the rich and the corporate, as Bush does, Chavez is using the resources and oil revenue of his government to help the poor in Venezuela"

Jeff Cohen is supporting this "Buy-Cott" I don't know him but just read he worked for Kucinich. Enough said.

Communism is still evil.
Check out the Department of Energy website to learn where oil companies get their crude.
And support nuclear energy.

Links

Allow me to recommend my Links. I have linked about a dozen webpages that I like to visit. These are the ones I read every day. Several of them have email lists that you can subscribe to which I also recommend.

I don't comment on everything I read there because there is too much and I only find so much time to write.

Have other great sources or interesting things. Let me know, I will also take recommendations

Declaration of Independence

I wrote on my other blog which I have to promote here. Go read my movie review of National Treasure which is an introduction the Declaration of Independence. More to come on that topic over at Small Green World

...so we don't have to face them here at home

I am getting tired of the phrase often repeated by President Bush and his staff that "we are fighting the terrorists in Iraq so that we don't have to face them here at home." I don't know if they are saying it everyday or if the media is just replaying it over and over again. It was repeated several times after the London subway bombings. We seem to be disrupting bin Laden by chasing him through Afghanistan but that doesn't stop some islamic killer from blowing himself up in America for no reason. Do the suicidal murderers have to be ordered to kill in order to be called a martyr? (That sentence barely makes sense - I think its time to invent a few more words to describe these lunatics)

I like the idea of killing terrorists in Iraq. I think our Army is good at that. But I don't think it guarantees safety at home. (We need defense but that is a separate issue.) Repeating it so often will make it sound stupid if there is another attack in America. I think this is a setup for failure. There may be a subway bombing in New York. That will not mean that killing terrorists in Iraq is a bad strategy. But you can bet it will certainly be portrayed as such.

I offer an alternative phrase.
We are in Iraq to kill as many terrorists as we can. We have posted our flag there and are prepared to defend it. We challenge all enemies of America and freedom to fight us there as we intend to help the Iraqis establish a constitutional government modeled after our own, if they want it. We know that God-given rights are worth fighting for and we pray that God will help us defend our homes as we kill islamic terrorists and their dictator governments.

Curb Judicial Tyranny

I am back after a fun vacation.

Something needs to be done to reign in judges and end the tyranny of judges who make law. One idea is end lifetime tenure

ADD (7/11 am)
I remove my endorsement of this solution to judicial tyranny. For more look at the comments section

Socialism is not Christianity

Being very opposed to socialism, I think those that propose it are evil. But there are many good people that think socialism is a fine idea. I don’t think they are evil, just deceived.
Socialism is not a Christian value. It is not giving to the poor as Jesus commanded. There are many examples of Charity in the life of Jesus and that is the example we should live. Socialism is opposed to all those values.

Jesus said to the rich young man, “Give everything you have to the poor and follow me.” But the young man was said because of his many possessions. The lesson is that we should be willing to give what we have to the poor and follow Jesus. We must love our fellow man more than our gadgets. Giving is an act of charity. It should be done out of love. Jesus did not ask the man to get elected to Congress and pass a law demanding that all people give everything they have and follow Jesus. That would have certainly meant more money going to the poor. But that is not charity. It is communism and it is wrong. Giving is personal. The joy of giving and receiving cannot be achieved by mandated wealth re-distribution.

Is capitalism a Christian system? Not really. It must be restrained by morals. Jesus whipped the money changers from the temple because they were trying to make profit from worship on holy ground. A capitalist economic system includes guarantees of property rights and without property it is difficult to give. One must own something legally in order to give it away.

Socialism involves government control of resources. Implied in that control is government superiority in deciding how to use that resource. “We know better”, should be the name of the federal tax withdrawal system. They can’t dare to let you take it home for fear that you might forget to pay. You might decide you want that new TV instead of a new road sign or schoolbook.

Political Compass

I took the test at politicalcompass.org

Here are my results
Economic Left/Right: 6.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.77

pretty far to the right, neutral on authority

The test is still inadequate to capture the complexities of political thought. It does not differentiate between economic and social authority. For example, I think free markets and capitalism is good but that marijuana should be illegal. I think alcohol should be illegal. Abortion bad, Walmart good.

Emperor Bush

This socialist at work came over to tell a joke to some friends about how President Bush is like Emperor Palpatine and wants to take over everything. He said he was really worried about this new proposal to scrap the 22nd Amendment that limits Presidents to two terms.

I laughed and said this must be like last year when the democrats introduced a bill to revive the draft after accusing Rumsfeld and Pres. Bush of trying to re-instate the draft to cover the huge losses in the war. Of course it was a scam.

Quick search showed that it was Democrats introducing a bill to repeal the 22nd Amendments. Looks they are the ones hoping the Sith will lead them.

Kennedy waving the flag of defeat

Ted Kennedy is a terrible man. How can this guy stay in office? Throw him out! His latest speech is evidence of his treason or at least sedition. He is stuck on getting Rumsfeld to resign but he is the one that has to go. Go Away!

What is going wrong in Iraq? We have accomplished every mission there. They are about finished with writing their Constitution. We cleaned up Afghanistan and chased those terrorists into the hills and now working on Iraq. It has gone far better than I ever thought it would. Kennedy said we have lost. He claims it is over. He gives all these numbers to show how bad everything is. We have had over 1,700 soldiers killed after 3 years of conflict. That is very sad but actually a very good record. The anti-smoking freaks in Illinois claim that 8 people die from second hand smoke every day in Illinois. If true that means you are 4 times as likely to die as a citizen of Illinois from second hand smoke as you are to be blown up from a car bomb as a soldier in Iraq. How can he seriously claim that the military is crumbling in the face of the assault from the enemy?

add - Victor Davis Hanson does a good job of analyzing numbers from the war

Supreme Court is wrong

The Supreme Court ruling violates property rights. It is an abuse of power. It is not justice. They are wrong.

What is the plan when the Supreme Court is wrong?

Jacoby on education

I am opposed to government schools. Here is another great quote from the Patriot.

"There is nothing indispensable about a state role in education. Parents don't expect the government to provide their children's food or clothing or medical care; there is no reason why it must provide their schooling. An educated citizenry is a vital public good, of course. But like most such goods, a competitive and responsive private sector could do a much better job of supplying it than the public sector can. Imagine how diverse and vital American education could be if it were liberated from government control. There would be schools of every description -- just as there are restaurants, websites, and clothing styles of every description. ... With separation of school and state, the roiling education battles would come to a peaceful end. Robust competition and innovation would dramatically lower costs. Teachers, released from their one-size-fits-all straitjacket, would be happier in their chosen profession.
Children would be happier, too -- and, perhaps best of all, better-educated to boot." --Jeff Jacoby

More at Alliance for Separation of School and State

Socialism thru Seatbelts

Walter Williams off of the Patriot.

"The NHTSA's 'Click It or Ticket' program is another step toward making Americans serfs of the state. Let's look at it. I personally believe that wearing seatbelts is a good idea, and I buckle up and remind my passengers to do so as well. Because seatbelt usage saves lives, mandating such is an abomination in a free society. There are many other legislative actions that are offensive to liberty and can have saving as their justification, a matter I'll turn to later. But let's talk about the immorality of mandated seatbelt usage. Let's start with the question: Who owns Walter E. Williams? Is it President Bush, the U.S. Congress, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, or do I own myself? I'm guessing that any reasonable person would agree that I own Walter E. Williams. The fact that I own myself means that I have the right to take risks with my own life but not others'. That's why it's consistent with morality to mandate that my car have working brakes. If my car doesn't have working brakes, then I risk the lives of others, and I have no right to do so. If I choose not to wear a seatbelt, then I risk my own life, which I have every right to do. ... Some might rejoin by saying, 'Williams, if you're not wearing a seatbelt, and don't do us the favor of dying in an accident and become an incapacitated vegetable, society will have to bear the expense of taking care of you.' That's not a problem of liberty and self-ownership. It's a problem of socialism. There's no moral case for forcing anyone to care for me for any reason. When we buy into socialism, we buy into paternalistic government." —Walter Williams

Anything collectivist will fail

Rumsfeld on Gitmo

I pulled these quotes from a aim.org article

Rumsfeld concluded his opening statement at that briefing by saying,

"So, to the men and women who wear our country's uniform, and to their families who support them, I want you to know how proud we are of all of your able service. We are in your debt. And to those who may be considering serving our nation, know that there is no finer calling, no nobler cause, and no greater act of patriotism."

Another

"Much was made recently of a news story falsely accusing service members of flushing a Koran down the toilet," Rumsfeld said. "But little has been said about the great lengths that the military go to at Guantanamo Bay to accommodate the religious practices of detainees in their care," he noted. "There are specific instructions as to how those involved in the custody of detainees should handle themselves with respect to religious matters. Special meals are provided to meet cultural dietary requirements. Schedules are respectful of prayer. Indications of the direction to pray are provided. Detailed guidelines are provided to the service people as to the-which govern the handling of the Koran."

Pretty nice treatment for killers who should be executed once it is determined they have no useful information.

Mark Steyn on Senator Durbin

Senator Durbin is an idiot and Steyn lays it out beautifully

Arizona Governor

Who is running against Napolitano for Arizona Governor? Is it too early to start this election? I wish it was, I don't like the 2 year long elections. But I haven't heard of a good candidate stepping up to challenge her. I know lots of people I would rather see as governor. Who is the game? Isn't this Matt Salmon' job as State party chairman to organize?

Social Security: A Student's Perspective

This the title from a good article written by Amy Davis, an intern at Accuracy in Media.

As a young college student about to graduate and enter that big, mean, financial quagmire of a "real world" on my own, I have started to pay more attention to Social Security. I wanted to know exactly where this money went that was taken out of my paycheck, and how (if at all) I benefited by its removal.

Privatization of Government

CONSTITUTION
They keep talking about drafting a Constitution for Iraq. Why don't we just give them ours? It was written by a lot of really smart guys, it's worked for over 200 years, and we're not using it anymore.

Funny joke, all the more so since there is some truth to it. The main theme of the Constitution is limited government. We don't have limited government. We have so much government that there is not an easy way to reduce it. Bureaucracies have a life preservation instinct. Perhaps transplantation would work. Instead of trying save the country by killing all the unconstitutional programs I propose spinning them off into the real world. Create a corporation of each program or department or agency. Everyone can keep their jobs and functions. The heads of the agencies would become the CEO of a new company. The new companies would be supported by revenue from their services instead of living off tax payers.
Some examples to help you visualize: The FDA would become the Fantastic Drug Authenticators instead of the Food and Drug Administration. They would function like Underwriter's Laboratories; instead of getting a UL stamp your cough medicine would get an FDA stamp. People will pay for the confidence. The drug companies would support the testing like they do UL. A perfect business model. All the scientists and researchers and doctors and lawyers and writers and admins get to keep their jobs and the taxpayers get to keep their money.

This same pattern can be followed with every government agency. Post Office would compete with UPS and the other company. NASA, HUD, Highways, Forest Service, everything but the military. We could do one agency every six months to allow them to transition and to let Congress lower your taxes and send a refund. EPA would become environmental consultants. Medicare would become an insurance company. I imagine Social Security becoming a big non-profit like the American Red Cross or United Way. (A fantasy I know. To be honest this is the biggest flaw in my master plan because, if privatized, Social Security would be shut down in a week due to fraud)

All these agencies will continue to offer their services in the marketplace.

Pentagon Press Conference

I saw a Pentagon press conference last night that drove me nuts. The General was very impressive and handled himself well. Those commanders are very cool but my wife made me shut it off because the reporters questions were so annoying. She said she is going to ban me from C-span. The general and the pentagon spokesman tried to educate them but they didn't care. I figured he should give them a schooling they couldn't miss - step off the stand and pummel them! I am not talking about infringement of freedom of the press. Just punishment of stupidity. They asked when the soldiers were coming home. Why were so many being injured and killed? Is the "insurgency" becoming a "jihad"? On and on and on. He tried so hard to be nice, it was embarrassing. I should look up his name again. This is what I would have told the reporters:

Our mission was to get rid of Saddam. That was easy and only took a few weeks. Our next mission was to put the country under our thumb until we could figure out if anyone was on our side. We found a couple guys we could tolerate so our current mission is to keep them alive long enough to establish a government. We kill as many terrorists as we can along the way.

The generals best line came from a "Vietnam quagmire" question. He basically recounted the history that Americans were vastly superior in every engagement but that was not the war. It did not matter. The true battle was for support of the American people. The communists and liberals and media (but I repeat myself) were much more aggressive and slowly wore their enemy down until we gave up and left. He said he would leave when the President tells him to and prays for the support of America until that day.
If the press wasn't helping the enemy than that day might come sooner. The question shouldn't be when are the troops coming home but when will we let them win.

Greatest American

Have you heard of the Greatest American contest that Discovery Channel is running?

This is silly. Gearge Washington is the obvious winner. This can only be a contest if you are looking for the second greatest American.

One might argue if Thomas Edison is more inspiring than Lance Armstrong but there is no contest in importance to America between the Father of the Country George Washington and the "Queen of Talk" Oprah

Gilbert Diversity

Citizens of Gilbert are arguing over whether or not to create a "Diversity Office". I don't know the official name. I don't care. It is stupid. Why is this even considered? What is the value of diversity? It's all rubish, I say!

You may have as much diversity as you wish. Pay for your own diversity officer. This doesn't require taxes

Reagan on families

I am reading American Life by Ronald Reagan. It is a good book and I recommend it. Federalist Patriot put together some quotes for the anniversary of his death including this one.

"Families must continue to be the foundation of our nation. Families -- not government programs -- are the best way to make sure our children are properly nurtured, our elderly are cared for, our cultural and spiritual heritages are perpetuated, our laws are observed and our values are preserved. Thus it is imperative that our government's programs, actions, officials and social welfare institutions never be allowed to jeopardize the family. We fear the government may be powerful enough to destroy our families; we know that it is not powerful enough to replace them. The New Republican Party must be committed to working always in the interest of the American family." --Ronald Reagan

Small Green World

Chad and I are trying an experiment. A Team blog. We will both post ideas and commentary. I added the blog to the links. You can find it here

Capitalism

Why do I like capitalism? I don’t think it is a perfect economic system or philosophy. To some it means "just to make money" but it is the only system that will guarantee individual rights and property. Uncontrolled it can turn into a disaster. Men would take and survive according to their strength, wit and power. Survival of the fittest. In the past men have tried to control capitalists with labor unions. I guess that worked. I am not in favor of unions but if that was their intent and only interest it would be okay. I have no hope that they could ever limit themselves because once they have power they want to keep it.
The reason I support capitalism is because of charity. Seems odd maybe but think about property rights. You can only give something away when you own it. Under socialism you own less and less. Under communism the government owns everything. When that happens, only the government can help the poor and needy. That is one of the evils of socialism. It takes away chances to help people. Socialism claims to help people so you don’t have to I guess. It’s a lie. It doesn’t work. Not only does it not function in practice but in theory it cannot work. It doesn’t help to make bad ideas bigger. Take education for example. Government education isn’t very effective. It has some success because of the strenuous labor of some dedicated individuals. Any success one could claim is the success of a parent or a teacher and not the system. How does government try to improve the system? By making it bigger and more powerful. That only makes it worse. Education would be better without government involvement.
In the same manner social causes would benefit greatly if government was not involved. Those in need would received better care and it wouldn’t cost as much.

I support capitalism, not to make money but to give it away.

Missions and bureaucracies

from K

Today's Q - NASA funding good or bad? Spend more, spend less, change mission?

Short answer is: They must die!

What I mean is that all programs should have end dates. NASA was a good idea, Social Security, whatever. They may have served a purpose. But the purpose of any bureaucracy is to grow. Doesn't matter if it is needed or not. Bureaucracy never dies or trims itself. They will always provide convincing evidence of their current value and future need So you must purposefully kill them. If you give a capitalist a goal he will achieve it, if he can make money, if there is a future payoff. If you say to NASA, launch 3 more satellites - and then we don't need you, (go to Boeing, Space Ship One instead or something) than the satellites would never get launched. NASA would never finish and self-destruct.
Taxes and programs never go away. remember the story a few years ago when they decided to end the telegraph tax that was originally used to fund the Spanish-American war? Income tax was temporary measure to pay for WWI. Federal withholding was an emergency measure to stabilize cash flow for WWII.

OK - this is no longer a short answer. NASA is cool but there is no reason it could not be disbanded or replaced tomorrow. Our success has made us think that things can't change. I think we have the 6th oldest flag in the world. Almost every country in the world was created since our revolution. We have some of the oldest corporations and institutions, libraries, museums etc in the world. The first corporation was the Dutch East India company I think. We claim to be the new world but it most respects it is no longer true. I think it is because America is the best. The best idea has value and has endured. But there is no reason not to change things that no longer have value.
I would disband the FDA in a minute. They served a purpose but are no longer needed. Labor unions are archaic. The EPA has been around too long. The UN no longer has value. NATO should be revised. People act like all these have been around since the dawn of man and must continue until the end of time. They were ideas and served a purpose. No longer needed so they should go away. They only survive because we continue to pay taxes for them and the monster of bureaucracy constantly tells us how miserable we would be without it.

K- when you say FDA, EPA, and NASA should go away, does that mean they should be replaced with a new organization with a new charter (truncated of course with a fixed end) to be re-evaluated in the future?

I don't think NASA has a clear mission. I think they did. I wouldn't say the whole thing was a waste. It proved our system was better than communism. I think they should complete the space station and downsize. You can always hire more people if they are needed in the future but most space needs can be met by private enterprise. What mission couldn't be?

I don't like the FDA. What purpose do they serve? I would spin them off as a private company and make them compete in the marketplace. They could try to become the "UL listing" of food and drugs. (Underwriters Laboratory) People trust UL. FDA could make money if they gave people the same confidence. This is not a government function, to control what people put in their bodies. And we have plenty of lawyers to punish fraud. I think the FDA was intended to end corruption and deception. I think it has. That culture will continue whether or not the agency does.
EPA = waste. I don't like so I haven't bothered to learn much about them. Bunch of crazies in my opinion. Collecting fines for bad air seems to be their main goal. America has the best air and water in the world. It is has nothing to do with the EPA. Deceptive tree hugging freaks. How is that for convincing logical argument?