Posts Tagged ‘Libertarianism’

From The Classic Liberal, we get a reminder of what it means to be Libertarian.

Recently a member of my family labeled me an extremist for my political activism so, this quote became my instant favorite:

“I have need to be all on fire, for I have mountains of ice about me to melt.” It is this spirit that must mark the man truly dedicated to the cause of liberty.

The article also posits a question: “Would you push the button?”

My answer: In a heartbeat.

How about you?

UPDATE: Richard McEnroe of Three Beers Later posts a Serious Libertarian Quiz in which he ponders the limits of property rights in a purely libertarian society.

And Wyblog’s Chris Wysocki questions the academic vs. real world applications of Rothbard’s button.

Be sure to join in the lively discussion after both of these pieces.

Here come the judge: “More freedom means less government.”

Which reminds me of an Automotivator I did a while back…

Thanks to Libertarian Buddha for the email pointing me to The Libertarian Buddhist.

Imagine that.    🙂

 

Here it comes…

Obama will soon double quadruple down on his failing socialist agenda. (Failing being a very relative term in this case.)

The talking heads on the left (read: Progressive/Marxist) are busy trying to paint themselves as centrist and objective while whining that their president has abandoned them. Or something. All to get the liberal base all wee-wee’d up to clamor for more spending and taxing and speeches about spending and taxing, which is what they do so well.

Our mighty mighty Photoshopâ„¢ friend Curmudgeon, over at Political Clown Parade has outdone their-self with a creepy Obama devil/alien/socialist/loser pic in answer to answer one Peggy Noonan quip.

Smitty takes time from tending his handsome newborn son to pen a few notes on the issue.

Dan Collins over at The Conservatory posted a reply to Mzzz. Noonan as well.

And Newsbusters’ Brent Baker catches three talking points being floated around the talk shows today.

What does it mean?

Classic democrat play book. The talking heads will pretend to be surprised that Obama has “moved too far to the right” when he has done no such thing; all the while painting the only adults in the room (read: TEA Party Conservatives and Libertarians) as the ones who are out of their minds for *gasp* addressing the true problems of over-spending and a government that is growing too big too fast which, in case you haven’t noticed, is the REAL crisis.

The Democrats/Progressives/Commies and RINO’s are deathly afraid that we will take away their credit cards, as well they should be because that would decrease their ability to buy more votes with your hard earned cash. So keep on fighting, calling your congress-critters and faxing the faxes because it ain’t over ’til the fat lady sings. The problem is, they would want you to believe that you’ve gained a little ground when you’ve actually been backed into another corner.

Don’t fall for it.

To quote a good friend of mine: WOLVERINES!

UPDATE: Joy McCann also posted on this yesterday at The Conservatory. Thanks for the heads-up, LMA!

A few days ago, I posted a video of CEO Steve Wynn railing on the Obama administration for their socialist, anti-capitalist policies. One commenter expressed his disappointment that Mr. Wynn didn’t give any examples of how Obama’s policies are contributing to and causing the continued economic decline.

Lucky for us, iainswife, who blogs over at Shout First, Ask Questions Later and is a contributor to the fabulous Potluck blog points us to a great article in the American Spectator that provides many facts to back up Mr. Wynn’s conference call assessment of President Obama’s socialist policies.

As to what I described in the comment thread as “uncertainty,” my good friend The CL from The Classic Liberal helpfully pointed me to Robert Higgs, who, in 1997 wrote a paper coining the term “Regime Uncertainty” to describe how the socialist policies of the New Deal had a chilling effect on the recovery from the Great Depression. Those similar policies, now employed and expanded by Obama, are having the same predictably disastrous effect today.

Hopefully these links will get you on the path to understanding the effects of an over-expanding federal government, the  incremental destruction of property rights that go along with larger government, the intended transformation of our capitalist economic system to a socialist one and ultimately, an understanding of the loss of liberty for the whole of any nation that implements socialistic policies and programs.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock, p. 292.

Our Constitution was not instituted to save us from ourselves. Our Constitution was written, mainly, to protect us from our government. It’s time we remembered that and elect people who understand it as well. The alternative is not one worth savoring.

A few days after the post ‘Defining “American”‘ I received a comment from Kristen informing me of her decision to respond to the article as a project for her college English Argument class, and asking if I would be interested in reading her paper when finished. Since she was very polite, I responded in the affirmative, with the caveat that if she did indeed send the paper to me, I might publish some, all or none of the rebuttal. After much hand wringing on the issue, I have decided to publish her entire argument. I think anyone who has children in public school or college needs to know what they are being taught. And I think Kristen proves my point that far too many people have forgotten what it truly means to be American, even if she didn’t intend to.

If you haven’t already read it, you may wish to read my original piece, here. I’ll offer some thoughts after Kristen has her say.

Response to Defining American

Medicare is currently doing its job now without being excessive, according to the chart you provide. Social Security was one of the many programs passed as part of the New Deal in 1935. (Kelly) It was successful in getting America back to economic prosperity whether you consider it socialist or not and that is why it is still around today. So why, all of the sudden, in the near future would it be predicted that we would be sending so much more on Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid. Medicare has been around since 1965 and government health insurance has been around much longer than that. In the early 1900s states began to collect taxes to be used as insurance premiums from workers and employers. The reason this did not work was because individual states did not want to implement extra taxes that may put the business in their states at a disadvantage during the Great Depression. (Corning)

“One of the duties of the State is that of caring for those of its citizens who find themselves the victims of such adverse circumstances as makes them unable to obtain even the necessities for mere existence without the aid of others. That responsibility is recognized by every civilized nation. . . . To these unfortunate citizens aid must be extended by Government–not as a matter of charity but as a matter of social duty. (Corning) In my opinion that is part of what it means to be American, to not only keep up with the other civilized first world nations but to surpass them with our new ideas and high standards. Being American is about being able to have different opinions.

Saying that more people are against America as it was founded than slavery is a contradiction. America was founded on great principals but those principals often did not translate into reality. In theory it sounds good; America was founded on the principal of escaping oppression on the basis of religious persecution. But ironically early America, as it was founded, was a very oppressive place. It was oppressive to women, poor people, and anyone who was not white. The American voting system was designed to prevent majority tyranny but how can that work if the oppressed minority cannot vote to begin with? This method of preventing majority tyranny did not work then and it continues to fail today. (Garlikov) Even when the minority on any number of issues can vote they continue to be outnumbered and oppressed by the majority. This is why progress is slow but of course progress will come, as it always has, with America leading the way. I am a strong believer in Democracy because I believe that most people want to do things that are good and right. While we may agree on what those things may be we still have the same goal and we both want what is best for America. I know that progress takes a long time, like civil rights and women’s rights. I feel bad that those things could not have happened sooner but it came when the people were ready for it and I understand that only when a value is generally held by a society that it can work as a part of law. To me that is what it means to be American: paving the road to progress.

You say that Obama is redistributing the wealth but you are failing to mention that our previous president, George W. Bush, was guilty of exactly what you are accusing Obama of. We all know that the higher your income is the higher your taxes are, but Bush made special exceptions. A Congressional study said that families earning more than $1 million a year saw their federal tax rates drop more sharply than any group in the country as a result of President Bush’s tax cuts and that tax rates for middle-income earners edged up. (Andrews) Bush may have lowered taxes for everyone but the people who got the biggest tax breaks were in the top one percent income earners in the United States. He added tax cuts on investment income and on estates specifically to benefit the richest households. Just one decade of those tax cuts would cost a trillion dollars. (Andrews) And the people to pick up the tab for the money lost during the Bush administration will be my generation and maybe yours since I do not know how old you are. The bottom forty percent of income earners get money back from the government and pay what is considered negative taxes so they were not affected by the Bush tax cuts. (Andrews) Obama extended the Bush tax cuts to individuals making less than $200,000 per year and families making less than $250,000 per year. In 2010 Obama gave businesses a $5,000 tax credit for each new employee they added. (Khan, Jaffe)

In your blog you say The true definition of being an American has been diluted by diversity and diffused by political correctness. I believe that this statement reflects the opposite of the definition of American. America has always been a nation of immigrants. America is perhaps the most diverse nation in the world. Having a diverse mix of ethnicities, cultures, and opinions and being able to live with and accept it makes America great. I agree that political correctness is not always a good thing in certain specific situation when it does not reflect truth. We should be able to talk about and address all types of stereotypes, perhaps then we can overcome our differences.  In the words of Barack Obama “The anger is real, it is powerful, and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.” (Obama Tackles Race Divide in Major Speech)

I agree with you that many people unrightfully have an entitlement mindset. These people tend to think “what can my country do for me and are ungrateful what for what we provide to them with our tax dollars. But we cannot let these people affect the way we think of everyone who receives welfare nor should they be able to ruin the system for everyone. You say that … the America we thought we knew is teetering on the precipice of a debt cliff caused by overspending on unearned entitlements. But it is estimated that only about four percent of the United States budget is being spent on welfare. (How Much Does the Nation Spend on Welfare? – Public Aid, State Expenditures For Social Welfare, Private Welfare Expenditures, Welfare-reform Legislation) Entitlement programs like Medicare and Social security are paid into by the public when they pay taxes, that is why they are entitled to them. Of course we all get the same benefits without paying the same amount of taxes. You may call that Socialism and in a way perhaps it is but I still do not believe it would be morally right to let the poorest people do without these programs, as they are the ones who need them most.

You talk a lot about what you call generational training which you describe as an inherent flaw with each younger generation that causes selfishness. I completely disagree. Selfish, greedy people have always existed and always will. My young generation of new voters has plenty of pride and work ethic. In fact it is the older generation that takes the most from government if you include the entitlement programs Social Security and Medicare, which take up over thirty percent of the United States federal budget. (Nullification: Are State Level Officials Really Opposed to Federal Encroachment?) But I understand that they need those things and have the right to them. I sympathize with them knowing that I will probably be old one day too and I hope that when that day comes the programs I am entitled to are there to help me after I have paid into them my entire life.
As much as our opinions on these issues may differ I believe that, like I said before, we share a common interest: to make America better. I can see that you have strong opinions, as do I, and that is a good thing. Our passion and enthusiasm about politics and America is something we have in common. And because this is America we both can freely express our opinions, which I think is wonderful.

-Kristen

Here is my reply, slightly abbreviated, as I feel my actual rebuttal lies in most of the posts already on my blog and those of many other conservatives.

Kristen,

I’m glad you chose my piece as the opposing view for your article and I hope you continue your search for what it means to be an American. It is one of the most important questions you will ever ask of yourself or your fellow Americans.

You mentioned in your accompanying email message that you didn’t want to start a debate but I cannot let these arguments go unchallenged. It is clear to me that you are concerned for the well being of your fellow Americans and that is admirable. It is also painfully clear that you’ve bought into the whole “victim mentality” that permeates much of our country and serves only to reinforce the entitlement culture. While you say we agree on the fact that some entitlements are unearned, you don’t propose any steps to alleviate the problem. In fact, you mention it once and proceed to gloss over it.

I could go through Kristen’s piece line by line, but I’ll just do the first. It exemplifies the rest.

Medicare is currently doing its job now without being excessive, according to the chart you provide.

Did you ignore the chart after 2011? Didn’t you see the projected outlay of money to social programs which, if left unchecked, will bankrupt the nation? Not being excessive? Really? We are currently living on borrowed money to enable these programs. The interest on that debt is a huge contributor to the projected debt levels in the chart, not to mention when Obamacare really gets going.

You mentioned also that, according to some guy who wrote something (FDR – Corning), it is the social duty of government to take money from those who have earned it and give that money to those who have not (The bottom line of your quote.). The qualifications for that “benefit” are also to be laid out by the government doing the taking. You don’t have a problem with that? You don’t see the potential for abuse of power being actualized at this moment by the politicians buying votes with peoples’ taxed (stolen) dollars? This is why the Founders were against social programs born of the Federal Government, because the Fed. is too far removed from the people it is supposed to serve. These programs belong at the local, regional, or state level, if they come from government at all. (See Romneycare for an example of more government healthcare failure.)

It is clear to me from your arguments that restraining the powers of the Federal Government to its original “few and defined” number, has ceased to be taught in our schools. In fact, it ceased to be taught years before the New Deal. If it had been, people would have never been duped into such a ponsi scheme as Social Security or many other New Deal type programs. The New Deal was the gateway drug to government’s addiction to taking it’s citizen’s property, leading the way to ever more taxes and increases on those taxes for some other new entitlement, and now that they have set the IRS as a redistributive tool, they disguise any thievery at all in some cloak of charitable outlay while accusing the taxed of being cold-hearted, uncaring and greedy. Witness political projection at it’s finest.

Not far from where I live is a city called Port Arthur, Texas, which has a rich history in the oil exploration and refinery industry. The city has been run for decades by predominantly liberal policy. As of the latest tally the local unemployment rate stands at 16% to 17%, which is quite probably the worst in Texas. The jobs are available. High paying ones. There are many workers coming in from all over the country to fill positions the local people won’t take. Why? Entitlement Mentality. They have been trained for years by their government and culture to not take a job if it will interfere with their welfare or unemployment check, plain and simple. The unemployment rate in the state of Texas is 8%. Even if we assume that 8% of the population of Port Arthur is indigent, how do you explain the other 8%? I’ve lived here for 25 years and I can tell you that they do not want a real job, even when one is readily available. If you look at most any city or county across the nation (Detroit for example?) that has long standing leftist policies I believe you will find the vast majority to be the same. People won’t work if they are paid not to. It’s that simple. Look for yourself. Question what your professors tell you is “progress” and you will find that their version of progress only takes away a person’s will to provide for themselves. Is it any wonder that the Heritage Fundation’s 2010 Index of Dependence on Government finds

…the United States is close to the point at which half of the population will not pay taxes for government benefits they receive.

Half the population. How does that happen?

When I said “Generational Training,” I was not referring to young people being defective, as you inferred from my piece. I was referring to actual instruction, which you have obviously been receiving at the hands of the very people who wish to see you enslaved. The fact that you can veil all of your arguments into a guilt ridden projection of our countries past faults to justify more spending of money not your own is what I was referring to when I said “Generational Training.” Those types of thought patterns don’t happen automatically unless you have been so instructed.

As far as GWB goes, you won’t find me defending his over spending or any other republican for that matter. I’m no big fan of government spending no matter which side of the aisle it comes from or who argues for it. I find it funny that some people can criticize Bush for spending too much but praise Obama for spending ten times more. I don’t like either group spending our money and neither should you.

In closing, Kristen, you did a very good job of laying out the leftist talking points and guilt trips. The 16th through19th centuries were harsh times in the entire world. I’d doubt very seriously that women or blacks or any minorities were treated with the respect they receive today. But you fail to mention the fact that it was in America where those rights first began to emerge. It was Americans who abolished slavery. It was in America that women got the right to vote. It was in America where blacks got the right to vote as well. Why must we be forced to pay the price for something you and I had no part in? I don’t recall ever having owned a slave or preventing anyone a vote. Those arguments are old and tired. Can’t we just get past them to truly address the real problems of the country?

The idea of individual liberty is at the core of America and it is individual liberty that is under attack. It must always be fought for because there will always be someone wishing to take it from you, even under the guise of Social Justice or some other re-branding. Call it what you will, it is still slavery trying to raise its ugly head, and it is still wrong.

Yes. For some reason, it seems we need to.

The coming 2012 election should not be framed in ideology of Right versus Left, Republican vs. Democrat or Libertarian/Conservative vs. Liberal.

The main issue of this election is whether we the people of this country choose to enslave our neighbors using the machinery of mob rule democracy or reclaim our lost liberties and return to the original intent of our Constitutional Republic. That is the issue.

Either you are an asset to society or you are a burden on it.

The 2012 election should be framed in light of the government’s unbridled over-expansion. Today, the US government in engaged in an unhinged, un-American mission to encourage sloth and preach entitlement theology, enabled and encouraged by the uninformed citizen and the educated elitist alike while funding the assault on the backs of the very people they prostitute but claim to protect: the everyday American.

This is but one example from The Heritage Foundation 2011 Budget Chart Book

The world the Statists would establish is one of dependency on government as a patriarch who makes even the most mundane decisions for us and therefore, as a child of government, we will have no rights or property except what illusion they would allow.

This election is about American versus un-American.

It’s about Freedom versus Slavery.

I’ve been thinking along these lines for a while. After all, what is governmental redistribution of wealth but slavery? But the possibility that there may be more people in this country who are against America as founded than are for it really hit home when I saw this retweeted from Pat Dollard last week:

@MerlePearl Merle

Scary, but true. RT @PatDollard If Obama wins the next election, then there aren’t enough Americans left for it to be America anymore.

To which I replied:

Too true. Unfortunate as well is, that knowledge could serve to energize either base.

Have too many Americans forgotten what it means to be uniquely American?

It’s a bit terrifying to me that we’ve come this far down the road to Socialism, Communism or Statism. Call it what you will, but the America we thought we knew is teetering on the precipice of a debt cliff caused by overspending on unearned entitlements. If it is not reversed, America simply can not survive. No country can, or ever has when using the economic model being employed.

It’s as if there is some genetic defect that keeps mutating every generation, eating away at our Self Reliance Gene. Everywhere you look, before acting, (pod) people stop and ask themselves what kind of government subsidy can they get for doing A, B or C or what entity they need approval from to do X, Y or Z, or boast to a co-worker about how much Uncle Sam gave him for his clunker or how much they received from some other such government incentive program. Where do you think that money comes from?

It is through slow, methodical, generational training that you feel these things are normal.

Once upon a glorious free country, you needed only the approval of your heart and a fearless ambition to pursue whatever you set in your mind to. As long as no-one else or their property was harmed, then by all means, go ahead. You were free to succeed and free also to fail. Now, that freedom to act at will has been taken from us. We must get a permit to do just about anything. Someone or some entity must approve of your plans before you can break ground on a homestead, start a business or attempt to market your latest invention, all under the guise of government knowing better than you. Slowly, generation by generation, the evil that is an unrestrained government has eaten away at the American foundation of self reliance.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C. S. Lewis
English essayist & juvenile novelist (1898 – 1963)

Make no mistake folks, this election is about the survival of America as she was founded.

It will be the single most important election in which you ever will cast a vote. America lives or dies in 2012. This election is about defining what it means to be an American. The true definition of an American has been gerrymandered and perverted by the media, in legislation and regulation and in the halls of “higher education.”

“Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.”
Milton Friedman

The true definition of an American has been diluted by diversity and diffused by political correctness. Our defining characteristic, what makes us Americans, has in some cases been stolen along with our dignity. We must reclaim our pride in our American heritage and reassert our love of liberty by standing up to the detractors, the apologists, the America haters and the would be en-slavers.

This election is about American self reliance versus forced servitude. It is also about framing the question as such.

The good news is that, according to the Obama administration, the rich will pay for everything. The bad news is that, according to the Obama administration, you’re rich.
P. J. O’Rourke

It is un-American to take from your neighbor so that you may have what he doesn’t.

It is also un-American to take from someone who works so that you don’t have to. Right now there are working class people who toil away at their jobs under threat of losing their livelihood if they show up late, fail a drug test, are insubordinate to their employer or any number of prerequisites for employment while at the same time, the people who benefit from those stolen monies are not required to adhere to any such standards. That is un-American to its core. It is also thievery.

In America today one can’t get a decent job without background checks and drug tests and aptitude tests and any number of requirements for employment. It’s a circus of flaming hoops, but we do it because we love our families, we still have our pride and we need to make money to survive. What pride the takers once had, they exchanged for a welfare check or a stack of food stamps and a cell phone at the behest of a ‘benevolent’ government. Without renouncing their selfish attitude, is there any question to what they will vote for? They will vote for more of your money and they will do so because of generational training.

These people are our brothers and sisters. They are our fellow Americans. They don’t desire our pity, nor would we grant them any. They have simply lost their feeling of self worth and may not even be aware of it. I believe some of them deep down, know or suspect the wrong they are doing, the harm they inflict on their own country, but peer pressure and the entitlement culture beckon them to stay in the fold. Sadly, the ultimate irony is, the problem was created by the very bureaucrats they vote to keep in office, urged to do so by demagogue leaders willing to sell them down the road to maintain their own minor pedestals of power. It is a fact that inequity exists in the American system, truly, it exists in all governments to some degree, but one cannot legislate equality of outcome, only equality of opportunity. That is the promise of America’s Constitution.

That some achieve great success, is proof to all that others can achieve it as well.
Abraham Lincoln

When the politicians and political hypochondriacs scream that some true libertarian/conservative wants to end Social Security or that the TEA Party wants to kill grandma or end some so-called entitlement, they are selling all Americans into slavery, plain and simple.

We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.
Abraham Lincoln

It’s time for Americans to re-claim what it means to be a true American.

Instead of thinking “What is government going to give me?” (What can I take from my neighbor?), we need to think about what we can do for our neighbors.

Like the Founders before us, we can give them freedom. It’s up to all of us to keep it.

That is what it means to be a true American.

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

Gerald Ford

Further Reading:

Change, Intervention, and Dependency

Individual Rights Vs. The Collective

Man Under a Totalitarian State Functions Differently than a Man Under Liberty

UPDATE: Graciously linked at The Other McCain, Caught Him With A Corndog & Adrienne’s Corner. Thanks!

UPDATE II: The Lonely Conservative links in.

UPDATE III: Doug Ross links.

UPDATE IV: The Troglopundit links in from his Wisconsin cave dwellings.

UPDATE V: Linked by A Conservative Pup. Arf!

UPDATE VI: Linked at NoOneOfAnyImport, The Classic Liberal and The Camp of the Saints. – Thanks!

UPDATE VII: Peace or Freedom throw us some linkage. TYVM

UPDATE VIII: Linked at Wyblog. – Thanks!

I missed the Peter Morrison Report in my inbox Friday.That’s OK though, it’s not too late, because there are still some excellent points Peter asks us to remember as we go to the polls tomorrow. You are going to vote tomorrow, aren’t you?

In case you’re not acquainted with Mr. Morrison, he writes a newsletter concerning National,  Texas State and southeast Texas issues from a conservative / libertarian perspective. If you haven’t signed up for his newsletter, I highly recommend it.

Here is The Peter Morrison Report:

Will 2010 Elections Be a Repeat of 1994?‏

Election Day is fast approaching, and if the long lines for early
voting here in my hometown of Lumberton are any indication, big
changes are coming. It appears that the Republican party is almost
certainly going to win back control of the US House of
Representatives. There is even a slight possibility that they will
also win control of the Senate (although that is less likely). You
don’t have to be a prophet to see that this election is going to be
a major setback for Barack Obama and the Democrats. All the polls
point to major gains for the GOP. Republicans need to take at
least 39 seats currently held by Democrats to become the House
majority party. Five Thirty Eight, the website which was amazingly
accurate in its predictions for the 2008 elections, is currently
projecting that the GOP will pick up 61 seats.

Some pollsters are projecting lower numbers, but still enough to
control the House, while others are saying that the GOP could even
pick up 70 seats. Peter Hart, a well known Democratic pollster,
stated bluntly: “It’s hard to say that the Democrats are facing
anything less that a Category 4 hurricane.”

Of course, anything can happen between now and November 2nd, but
barring some sort of shocking development, it seems pretty clear
that the anger and energy we’ve seen expressed over the past couple
of years at town hall meetings and Tea Party rallies is still going
strong, and Democrats are going to be held accountable at the
ballot box for signing on to Obama’s radical leftist agenda. This
is certainly good news, and it shows what conservatives can
accomplish when we work hard and refuse to give up the fight.

However, if we’re not careful, a massive GOP victory could actually
be a setback in the long run. Many conservatives will be lulled
into a false sense of complacency if the GOP takes control of one
or both houses of Congress. Far too many people are locked into a
“Democrats bad, Republicans good” worldview; they assume that with
Republicans in place to oppose Obama, there’s nothing to worry
about. This attitude is widespread, and it has been one of the
main reasons conservatives have seen our agenda remain unfulfilled.

In 1994 a very similar realignment occurred. Voter anger at Bill
and Hillary’s left wing activism–NAFTA, ordering the military to
stop discharging homosexuals, and attempting to socialize health
care (not to mention the Waco massacre)–led to the so called
Republican Revolution, when the GOP took control of the House and
Senate for the first time in 40 years. For all the talk of
revolution, very little came of it. Which should have been no
surprise as the first thing the GOP majorities did was elect Newt
Gingrich Speaker of the House, and Bob Dole Senate Majority Leader.
Gingrich, for all his conservative bluster, has always been most
interested in advancing his own career, not pursuing an authentic
conservative agenda. Bob Dole was a McCain style Republican, a
“moderate” who prided himself on being able to compromise with the
Democrats.

Both Gingrich and Dole (and most other Congressional Republicans)
had helped Bill Clinton pass the disastrous NAFTA “free trade”
agreement prior to the 1994 election. After the “revolution”, they
then helped Clinton secure Congress’s approval of GATT/WTO.
Together these trade treaties have nearly wiped out America’s
manufacturing base, and led to increasing economic dependency on
Communist China. In spite of all these betrayals (and many more),
conservatives became complacent after the 1994 election, simply
because they assumed that with Republicans in charge, everything
would be fine.

Nothing could be further from the truth, and by now it should be
crystal clear that the words “Republican” and “conservative” don’t
have the same meanings, and that the problem isn’t just limited to
Gingrich and Dole. Look at how George Bush treated us. He teamed
up with Ted Kennedy to give us No Child Left Behind, the expensive
folly that won’t do a thing to close the achievement gap, but will
fill decent public schools with bad students after their own
schools have been shut down by NCLB. He pushed banks to lower
lending standards for minorities, leading directly to the mortgage
crisis. He bailed out Wall Street to the tune of 700 billion
dollars. In 2004 he mobilized Christians and conservatives to
rally to the polls to re-elect him by talking tough on gay
marriage, but after he won re-election he never mentioned the
subject again. He and the GOP Congress gave us the prescription
drug bill, which is projected to cost America trillions in the
future. They also did nothing as millions of illegal aliens poured
into America under Bush’s watch.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve recently read several bloggers posting in what can only be described as another one of those “I’m a Libertarian and anyone who criticizes Libertarians, no matter how stupid those Libertarians acted, is a big fat poopy head” arguments. The funny thing was the topic wasn’t even Libertarians in general. The topic was the California gay marriage ruling by some wacko homosexual activist judge.

There are a few points missing from your arguments. I’ll start with those.

1: James Madison, the Father of our Constitution, clarified the authority of the federal government in the Federalist Papers #45: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined.”

The Federal Government is growing beyond our control. This is the leviathan we fight. Define it as that. Our problem is with the Federal Government, if you have a problem in your State, battle it in your State either now or after the fight to get the Federal Government reeled back in.

2: Madison continues: “Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”

Remember that line?

What part of numerous and indefinite don’t you understand? It’s mighty convenient for someone to spout off about “The State” when “The States” might just be our knights in shining armor that begin the march away from Socialism and against the Federal encroachment that (can we agree?) the Federal Government  has been pursuing.

3: Don’t confuse 1 & 2 and don’t paint them as equal. Over generalization doesn’t suit you. You’re smarter than that, and besides, aren’t we trying to restore some semblance of a Constitutional Republic?

I thought we were.

On the gay marriage issue: You know, the one that started the whole thing?

The California ruling by an openly homosexual and obviously activist judge struck down, for the SECOND time, a public vote (the very basis of our Constitutional Republic) against gay marriage. This is no small pittance of an issue but seems to be disregarded in all defenses of Libertarians for Gayness. I’ll state my views now and let the chips fall as they may.

I’m against “gay marriage” and all that comes with it. Reason being is that it is nothing more than another attempt to legitimize and promote an abhorrent activity. The gays and lesbians have used this issue and others to infiltrate our school system with the indoctrination of our children along with Hollywood and the media and their incessant promotion of the “alternative lifestyle” that if any of their parents had practiced, they would not be here to promote in the first place.

Let me state the freaking obvious for all of you who wish to quote me. There is an argument against homosexuality that stares you in the face each and every day. That argument is called anatomy and reproduction. Without the male and female sexes being different and shall we say, “accommodating” by design, uniting to produce a another human being, or procreation, would not be possible, much to the chagrin of the leaders and activists in the gay and lesbian community who would like nothing more than to promote the homosexual lifestyle to our children as legitimate. Perhaps in the glorious future it will be possible for us lowly humans to reproduce asexually, but we can’t right now, thank God. This is just one facet of the fight and you didn’t even address it!

I don’t care what someone does in the privacy of their own home, but this issue to me is about our children and the left’s attempt to sell homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle. It is not, in my mind, legitimate, I would rather let the child grow up to make up their own mind, not influenced by some pre-indoctrination from the schools or the government or the media in general. This stance is not so much anti-homosexual as it is pro-creation.

If someone continues to sidetrack these issues, your arguments will no longer hold water with me. I don’t care what political bent you side yourself with, if you would support those who would promote a lifestyle that denies the very basics of human nature and design, then you are on the wrong side of the issue.

Likewise you’d better subject yourself to the same scrutiny that you apply to others when you accuse some brother in the fight of using over generalizations and ad-homonym attacks against your particular ism.

You have done yourselves a disservice in my eyes. Maybe I’m the only one who holds that opinion, but I don’t think so. I encourage you to re-read the entire exchange. The topic quickly went from a legitimate rant about an activist judge ruling against the will of the voters to some defense of Libertarianism in general, which was taken somewhat out of context with the discussion at hand.

Something was in the water that few days is all I know. The usually well reasoned folks I’ve come to respect had gone off and created some weird-ass feud as if we don’t have an enemy already. Grow up people. Not everyone is impugning your particular point of view and no-one would know of your bias unless you opened your own blog and removed all doubt.

The funny thing to me  in reading the rebuttals was, like I said, the original bitch got thrown out of the kennel, roaming free in the woods to breed some more while some of the would-be handlers got caught in the pen, arguing about what type of dog food is best for the pack.

I’m an admitted newcomer to your particular blogging party, but I’m no idiot and I can call out inconsistency when I see it.

Police yourselves people, and remember whose side we are on and who and what it is we are fighting for.

And BTW, marriage hasn’t always been sanctioned by religion, but it has nearly always been a legal contract and as a contract, if it is broken, bears legal consequences as to possessions and the rights of children etc. Who is going to preside over the separation and subsequent issues of ownership and custody if not the State or some local form of government?

http://www.essortment.com/all/historyofmarri_rimr.htm#

This week the Robot’s featured blog is known to many in the blogospere because of his tireless work linking to other fine blog posts with his damn near daily “Right Wing Links” in which is invariably featured some beautiful Rule 5 action to help us all wash down the inevitable bad news we are about to stomach. Mike has great taste in the female form and never disappoints in that regard.

His insight into the Liberal psyche is just as keen, as he displays when speaking on subjects such as the economy or his absolute passion for the Classic Liberal ideals of Libertarianism. He and I may disagree on a very few finer points of application of those ideas, but you will never hear me discount the rightness of them.

I learn something new every time I visit The Classic Liberal and I know you will also. So quit sitting there reading my incoherent drivel, check out The Classic Liberal Blog and be sure to tell him a drunken automaton said hello.

Yes! It can be done.

If you’re like me, you have an interest in economics, but all the economic jargon thrown around gets a little confusing. With all of the news these days about the Wall Street takeovers, bank and insurance company bailouts, plus Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac doing whatever it is they weren’t supposed to, it helps to have the reference tools available to make sense of all that information.

That’s why I’m glad to know Mike, The Classic Liberal. He’s got  a B.A. in Finance and has professional experience as a stockbroker, entrepreneur, and bank officer. He also has a solid background in Austrian economics.

The CL has put together a small collection of posts that explain these seemingly complex issues in a way that’s easy for even a Mind-Numbed Robot to understand and for that, I’m thankful.

  1. What is Money (Currency)?
  2. Money (Currency) Inflation Explained
  3. Money, Inflation, and the Federal Reserve
  4. Inflation Illustrated
  5. Federal Reserve Bank: Counterfeiting Machine
  6. Fractional Reserve Banking: Money Out of Thin Air
  7. Possibility of Money Inflation in America
  8. The Very Real Threat of Currency Inflation
  9. Gold and Central Banks
  10. History of the Federal Reserve Bank

These links will be duplicated on the “Prime” page, but I first wanted to give you a heads up here on the front page.

Be sure to stop by Mikes place take a look around. There’s lots more where this came from.

Over the past eleven months, a recurring theme of mine has been to ruminate on the perils of big government and what we can do to combat the over reaching arm of federal encroachments on our liberty and freedom. Since some of you are new to the blog, and since I transferred quite a few of those essays from the old site yesterday, I thought I would take the opportunity to point you to the “Prime” tab which will hold links to those essays for your reference.

As an introduction, in reverse order of appearance, here are ten essays on

The Perils of Big Government


Note also that within the “Prime” tab are what I consider to be some of the best writing by other bloggers I’ve run across in my travels. I don’t always have time or think of bookmarking a post so the list is a bit short for now. Most of my time online lately is focused on defeating the Godzilla of a government we’ve been growing, so if your wondrous work is absent, please take no offense at the omission, it may be that I simply haven’t read that particular work or wasn’t in a situation where I was able to make a note. Either way, the fault I’m sure, lies with me.

In addition to the random readings titled “From Other Blogs,” my friends at The Resistance have been very busy assembling valuable information for us to use and peruse. Those links will be posted on “Prime” also as they come available. I will try to make a note of when I make an addition to the “Prime” tab here on the front page but do check out that page from time to time as I may have forgotten to make note. They don’t call me “Mind-Numbed” for nothing.

Twitter
Categories
Subscribe via email
June 2019
M T W T F S S
« Mar    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930