A nice piece to perk us up from the Weekly Standard. While it is easy to despair, its not the battle but the war that determines the outcome. Worth going over for a read.
Last night’s victory was the culmination of Obama’s health care effort, which has been his version of Napoleon’s Russia campaign. He won a short-term victory, but one that will turn out to mark an inflection point on the road to defeat, and the beginning of the end of the Democratic party’s dominance over American politics. Last night was Obama’s Borodino. Obama’s Waterloo will be November 6, 2012.
The editors of National Review sensibly counsel conservatives, in the wake of last night’s victory for Obamacare: “‘Nil desperandum’–never despair.” I agree, though I’m more inclined to the mock-Latin motto of the Harvard band: “Illegitimi non carborundum”–don’t let the bastards get you down.
Why not? Because we can repeal it.
As National Review’s editors explain (and see also the strong Wall Street Journal editorial this morning), this legislation “will increase taxes, increase premiums, and increase debt, while decreasing economic growth, job growth, and the quality of health care.” So it will–if it is allowed to go into effect.
Luckily, key parts of Obamacare–especially the subsidies–don’t go into effect until 2014. So what Republicans have to do is to make the 2010 and the 2012 elections referenda on Obamacare, win those elections, and then repeal Obamacare. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/special-editorial-repeal It’s going to take real effort.
My grandma was a tiny, German lady who came over to America at the tender age of fourteen, worked in a tuna canning factory for two cents for every can she packed, and managed to save enough money to bring her whole family to this blessed country days before Hitler’s occupation. That is the stuff from which this country and its families emanated.
Today, most folks I know are horrified, depressed, and afraid. We have watched, with disbelief, as our freedoms and our voices have been snatched away by a government that would disgust my grandma. When she stepped foot onto American soil, she did not speak English, did not have a place to live, and had only a few pennies that my Great Grandfather had hidden away for her voyage. America did not give her a hand-out. This new country did not offer her subsidized housing or free (?) medical care. There were no employment counselors or social workers awaiting her arrival with extended unemployment benefits or career training. She could not get a student loan. She was alone in a foreign country with the fate of her loved ones weighing heavily on her heart. We will now use her courageous model to get through this difficult time.
1. The time for mourning is over. We have power and pull with our government. It is only if we quietly accept this outcome that those who would enslave our citizens win. And so, if your congressman or senator voted “yes” on Health Care, write, email, or call them and express your disdain. Most legislators will begin a dialogue with you. Be informed and stand your ground. Keep the dialogue going as long as you can. Months would be best.
2. Place signs and bumper stickers on your yards and cars expressing your outrage and determination to repeal the law.
3. Attend caucus meetings, if you are inclined, and make your voice heard. Do not let them bully you into defeat.
4. Comment on as many blogs as you are able. Use key words like repeal, revolution, socialism, grassroots, tea party, conservative, civil disobedience, and the reformulation of Congress.
5. Stay informed as much as possible. If you do not actually know the truth, you can easily believe lies.
6. Get serious about a food supply. It is going to get very expensive to live in America.
7. Tone down the rhetoric so that your information does not sound like the raging of an angry lunatic. However, do not miss an opportunity to educate those who have not yet figured out what happened yesterday.
8. Calm down. We must be focused, prayerful, informed, and wise. The other side is wildly drunk with power. It is easy to defeat an opponent that is out of control.
9. Keep the political spotlight on at all times. The progressives think we will forget our angst by November, learn to appreciate what they did to us, and settle in to apathy.
10. Become involved in a group that is a champion of freedom like The Fair Tax Campaign, a local Tea Party group, a Christian ministry like American Heritage or Christian Seniors Association, Focus on the Family, or ACLJ.
11. Tear up your AARP cards. Research the platform of ANY group you currently support. If there is even a breath of community organization, scandal, unrighteous endorsements, or progressive platforms, cancel your membership.
12. Donate, if you can, to organizations that support the American philosophy of free enterprise, free speech, life, liberty, and protection of the unborn.
13. Go to the polls in November and give every, single legislator that voted “yes” on the health care bill their walking papers. Carefully and thoughtfully, choose new representatives. Hold their feet to the fire.
14. Do not despair. There is One who holds everything in His Holy hands. “Be still, and know that I am God.” Your faith will sustain and strengthen you through it all.
An AP writer reveals the scary and illegitimate power of the US presidency, as well as his own bias for dictatorship and legalized plunder:
Rarely does the government, that big, clumsy, poorly regarded oaf, pull off anything short of war that touches all lives with one act, one stroke of a president’s pen. Such a moment now seems near.
After a year of riotous argument, decades of failure and a century of spoiled hopes, the United States is reaching for a system of medical care that extends coverage nearly to all citizens. The change that’s coming, if Sunday’s tussle in the House goes President Barack Obama’s way, would reshape a sixth of the economy and shatter the status quo.
What line of reasoning can justify such power, this infringement of the property and individual rights of choice of the people? What can legitimize it?
When did we all consent to allow one man (or 500) to rule our lives?
So shall I keep Your law continually, Forever and ever. And I will walk at liberty, For I seek Your precepts. Psalms 119:44-45
Image via Wikipedia
Today all the news programs were reporting on the eventuality of Obamacare becoming law. There were all the news anchors giving their assessments as to how many more votes were needed to pass this law, but not too many of them were addressing the underlying problem with this whole process. It is entirely unconstitutional. The manner in which the House of Representatives is going about trying to garner votes for a very unpopular bill is not permitted in the laws and statutes of our land. But this congress has proven itself to be totally lawless, and having no compunction they rush full speed ahead in shredding the very Constitution they swore to uphold. Although they have taken an oath to defend the Constitution, their daily actions betray that oath.
Once we stray from the statutes and limitations laid down by law, nothing is off limits, there is nothing to restrict our lusts for power and control. Congress is out of control. They are taking over more and more of the private economy and restricting personal freedoms by treating the Constitution as a list of suggestions rather than the law of the land it is supposed to represent.
God too laid down a foundation of statutes for which he intended his people to obey. These limitations on our freewill were statutes of liberation not domination. But when these laws are violated and disregarded then, instead of being a free people, we find ourselves enslaved to our own wants, needs and desires. We find ourselves unable to control our appetites for more and more. We find ourselves violating not one but all of these statutes repeatedly because we did not hold them up as infallible.
Each who calls himself a child of God, must hold to the statutes set forth by God so that our behaviors do not contradict our oaths of allegiance. These commandments are meant for a free people and not intended to enslave them. Our Constitution limits the reach of the federal government in order to protect the Freedoms and rights possessed by the people given to them by God. These rights do not need to be legislated nor granted, they are inherent in our natural birth, they do need to be protected however.
Once when Jacob was cooking stew, Esau came in from the field, and he was exhausted. And Esau said to Jacob, “Let me eat some of that red stew, for I am exhausted!” (Therefore his name was called Edom. ) Jacob said, “Sell me your birthright now.” Esau said, “I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?” Jacob said, “Swear to me now.” So he swore to him and sold his birthright to Jacob. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew, and he ate and drank and rose and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.Gen 25:29-34 (ESV)
When Obama speaks about the congress giving rights and adding to these rights, what he is really saying is that congress is eliminating our “natural rights” and replacing them with legislated permissions which must be granted by the government and by so granting they can also be regulated and controlled. Therefore you are no longer free for you have been bought with a price. These government rights are not rights at all but privileges granted under law, which of course will be regulated by the same law making body. True rights however are not regulated by any form of government but are granted freely by GOD to all equally. We have been born free, and yet so many are so quick to willingly trade their “birthrights” for a mortal of government stew, mere crumbs from the King’s table. Why beg for the stew of servitude when you can have the bountiful feast of freedom?
By rejecting the Creator who has granted to us all unalienable rights our actions subject us to rule by force and domination. By not holding God up as the source of our rights and freedoms we replace Him with edicts and dictates of men. These edicts and dictates enslave us and rob from us the freedoms granted to us by Almighty God (our natural birthrights). We therefore replace his statutes of liberty for laws of servitude.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
But those who are waiting for the Lord will have new strength; they will get wings like eagles: running, they will not be tired, and walking, they will have no weariness. Isaiah 40:31 (BBE)
Along for the journey
Related articles by Zemanta
The Slaughter Solution Will Probably Pass Constitutional Muster (minx.cc)
Judge Napolitano does Beck one better, urges states to ’nullify’ federal laws they don’t like (crooksandliars.com)
States Say We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Health Reform: Ann Woolner (businessweek.com)
Judge Andrew Napolitano: ’Lies the Government Told You’ (grantlawrence.blogspot.com)
No Boundaries (eagleviews.org)
States’ Rights Is Rallying Cry of Resistance for Lawmakers (nytimes.com)
There is a tension in America like there has never been before. This country’s leaders regardless of party are no longer listening to the American people. We are in the process of setting up a government over the people rather than a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The government now knows what is best and has forgotten that they are people just like everyone else. There is the growing feeling that the government is the solution to the problems that we are faced with. Also, there is this growing feeling that the government is the grantor of rights. This is the tension – the government is replacing God.
A government has been established by God to not rule and control but to provide an atmosphere where good takes place. This is a land where there is peace. This is a land where fear does not exist. This is a place where government is God’s agent against those who practice evil. (Please read Romans 13 in the New Testament of the Bible). The early founding fathers understood this and understood that power and money comes along with government and this power and money often corrupts humans. They understood that if not set up right the political system lends itself to tyrants. Thus a government of the people, by the people, and for the people was established with an understanding that God is the grantor of rights not man.
When we remove God and replace God with man we establish a government over the people. This government no longer seeks to serve but rather to rule and enforce. Look at America today. Are we not in a transition?
The purpose of government as I understand it is to provide an atmosphere that protects, brings opportunity, and peace for life. The founding fathers set up this great experiment of setting a government of representatives of the people. These are leaders, statesmen and stateswomen who care for and give their lives to serve the people and provide this atmosphere of freedom and peace. However, when we remove God these safeguards are removed and the tension grows. The system of checks and balances begins to collapse. Leaders stop serving the people and begin to make decisions without considering the future ramifications. They believe that their opinion is the best and thus override the process. Their hearts may be right but by overriding the process they put the country in grave danger.
All of a sudden the very organizations put in place to regulate for the purpose of peace, liberty, protection, and justice become a political arm for twisting and control. The tax laws become so complicated they serve to beat on the people. The goal no longer is to help the citizens be successful in whatever endeavor they choose but to tell them what endeavor they should do. Freedom slowly disappears. It begins slowly. Smoking cigarettes, eating trans fat, salt, and sugar, health insurance, college bank loans, and cars we drive.
We are replacing God with the government. This is just the first evidence that demonstrates the death of the great American experiment (see previous article). I do not know the present president (nor do I know any from the past). Perhaps his motives are right. However, the truth, there is only one person who has the answers and solutions and He is God. If we continue down this path of rejection of God the result will be tyrannical rule. The government will seek to control our lives. Understand – this means telling you and me what to do and how to do it. Today the area of control may be something that you have no interest in, but mark my words, the day will come when it will.
Thus, in our desire to have everything there are those who will tell us it is possible –but you need to be real, please. We cannot nor will we ever have everything we need or want on this earth under the conditions that now exist. As well, in this world we never get something for nothing, thus do not believe that this government or any other will ever be able to give us anything we want or need without extracting something from us.
If we continue to give lip service to God and turn control of our life over to other people sooner or later a tyrant will rule. A government over the people will only result in the destruction of the great American experiment and why will this happen? First and foremost, because we have sought to replace God with humans.
A squeezed economy gives every collection of halfwitted chancers the opportunity to slip their own nasty little wheezes through the back door under the blanket of economic necessity.
So it should be no surprise that the high priests of stasiism have started lobbying the fountainhead of authoritarianism to cut costs on churning out free bus passes for pensioners. Producing passes costs money, and that’s money that could be saved if the old dears used those nice new ID cards instead. And Meg Hillier, Minister in charge of knowing where you live, is, of course, more than happy to have her arm twisted up her back on the issue.
Standing out amidst all the other shit dripped on us by this toxic collection of faceless megalomaniacs over the last 13 years is their sheer gracelessness in defeat. Nobody wants their bloody cards, nobody supports their grubby meddling in our lives: even from a position of power they can’t make their own flaccid arguments stand up, but will they just quietly move on to something else? Will they bugger. With all the shameless determination of the truly second rate to prove somehow, anyhow, that they are right they keep on trying to stuff their poxy cards down our throats.
I, along with large numbers of other people it seems, had a bit of a wobble a couple of weeks ago and couldn’t see a photo of Cameron without thinking of all the people whose lives are going to be buggered up just a little bit more by the return of the Conservatives and their less than caring approach to those at the bottom of the heap. Thanks for putting me right again Meg. Cameron might want to drown the minimum wage in formaldehyde, but Labour wants to steal our soul.
The time is now for the American people to get in their cars and trucks and come to Washington D.C. this Saturday and Sunday in the millions to stop political tyranny of the progressive radical socialists.
The goal is three million plus.
Otherwise, Obama Care or socialize medicine will pass.
Next on the progressive radical socialist agenda is amnesty and health care for illegal aliens, also known as comprehensive immigration reform.
If you doubt this, guess who is coming to Washington D.C. Sunday?
Illegal aliens demanding both amensty and once they get it, health care as well.
Heads Up American Citizens–Illegal Aliens Marching for Amnesty For Illegals in Washington D.C. on Sunday, March 21, 2010–We The People Tea Party Counter March Planned–Be There with American Flags Flying!
Benjamin Franklin was right when asked what type of government do we have:
Outside Independence Hall when the Constitutional Convention of 1787 ended, Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
Preserve, protect and defend the American Republic by marching in Washington D.C. on both Saturday and Sunday, March 20 and 21, 2010 for the Mother of All Tea Parties!
Join The Second American Revolution.
Make History not Socialized Medicine!
Bring your cameras and video camcorders to document the millions marching.
If you do not march, the progressive radical socialists will win:
Obama on single payer health insurance
SHOCK UNCOVERED: Obama IN HIS OWN WORDS saying His Health Care Plan will ELIMINATE private insurance
Obama SEIU’s Agenda is My Agenda
Meet President Obama’s Most Frequent Visitor ANDY STERN SEIU THUG COMMUNIST FAN
Andy Stern’s Healthcare Pledge
Background Articles and Videos
IWV discusses Health Care Poll on Fox News
Americans Oppose Health-Care Reform
Bret Baier Interviews Obama Part 1/2
Bret Baier Interviews Obama Part 2/2
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Obama Con–Lord of The Lies–Progressive Radical Socialist–Videos
Saul Alinsky
This Joker Is A Lost Cause: Keeping President Obama Honest on Health Care–Let’s But A Smile On That Face–Staying Alive
Voters Beware: The Radical Rules of Saul Alinsky and Leftist Democrats
Cloward Piven
The Cloward-Piven Strategy Of The Progressive Radical Socialists: Wrecking The U.S. Economy By Massive Government Dependence, Spending, Deficits, Debts, Taxes And Regulations!
Cloward Piven Strategy–The Crisis Strategy Of Barack Obama
President Obama’s Cloward-Piven Strategy of Controlled Crisis Creation Crippling Capitalism–Coup D-Etat On America
Services Employee International Union (SEIU)
American Citizens Want Jobs and Criminal Alien Removal, Not Criminal Alien Census and Health Care!
Public Option = Government Option = Pathway to Single Payer = Single Payer = Socialized Medicine = Blue Pill = Poison Pill
The American People Confront Obama’s Red Shirts (ACORN) and Purple Shirts (SEIU)–Bullhorns and Beatings Over Obama Care!
Obama’s Marching Orders For His Red Shirts (ACORN), Purple Shirts (SEIU) and Black Shirts (New Panther Party)–Progressive Radical Socialists
Health Care
Obama’s Big Whopper–”The largest deficit reduction plan in a decade.”–Delusional Deceitful Democrats–Massive Tax Increases and Economy Wrecker–Health Care Bill If Passed Is Unconstitutional!
Senator Coburn Educates The Educated Fools aka Progressive Radical Socialists Who Cannot Write, Read, Or Understand The Health Care Bill or Competitive Markets!
Senator Coburn Educates The Educated Fools aka Progressive Radical Socialists Who Cannot Write, Read, Or Understand The Health Care Bill or Competitive Markets!
Senator Tom Coburn Makes The Progressive Radical Socialists Read Their Socialized Medicine Amendment to Health Care Bill!–Three Cheers–Kill The Bill!
Progressive Radical Socialist Health Care Plan Written In Prison By Convicted ACORN Felon Richard Creamer!
Obama’s Trick On The American People: Health Insurance Reform=Huge Hikes in Taxes and Premiums for Health Insurance and Massive Medicare Funding and Payment Reimbursement Cuts–Congressional Coercion–It’s Alive!
Second Opinion: Doctors Speak Up On Proposed Health Care Reform–And A Third Texas Opinion!–Videos
American Citizens Want Jobs and Criminal Alien Removal, Not Criminal Alien Census and Health Care!
Illegal Aliens Can Buy Health Insurance Plans–No ID Needed:–Demand Criminal Alien Removal and Deportation!
Congressman Paul Ryan–Townhall Meeting–Health Care Reform and The Patients Choice Act–Videos
The Arrogance of President Obama: Hectoring Habitual Liar
Broom Budget Busting Bums: Replace The Entire Congress–Tea Party Express and Patriots–United We Stand!
Public Option = Government Option = Pathway to Single Payer = Single Payer = Socialized Medicine = Blue Pill = Poison Pill
Obama: First We Kill The Babies, Then We Kill The Elderly, Then We Kill The Veterans–Your Life, Your Choices–Your Time Is Up!
This Joker Is A Lost Cause: Keeping President Obama Honest on Health Care–Let’s But A Smile On That Face–Staying Alive
Fact 1. Federal Government Health Insurance Is Compulsory–Kill The Bill–H.R. 3200
Patient Empowerment: Health Savings Accounts–High Deductible Catastrophic Health Insurance–Affordable, Portable, Fair, Individual Health Care Plan–Consumer Driven Health Care Reform!
The Dangers Of A Single Payer Health Care System: Ronald Reagan On Socialized Medicine and Friedrich A. Hayek On State Monopoly
The American People Believe The Government Public Option Plan Is The Path To The Single Payer Government Plan–Socialized Medicine–Obama Caught Lying To The American People!
The American People Confront Obama’s Red Shirts (ACORN) and Purple Shirts (SEIU)–Bullhorns and Beatings Over Obama Care!
The Obama Depression Has Arrived: 15,000,000 to 25,000,000 Unemployed Americans–Stimulus Package and Bailouts A Failure–400,000 Leave Labor Force In July!
Obama’s Marching Orders For His Red Shirts (ACORN), Purple Shirts (SEIU) and Black Shirts (New Panther Party)–Progressive Radical Socialists
Health Care Resources
Republican Health Care Reform: The Patients’ Choice Act
Medical Doctor and Senator Tom Coburn On Health Care–Videos
The Senate Doctors Show–Videos
Obama’s Waterloo– Government Compulsory Single Payer Socialized Medicine!–Videos
President Obama’s Plan of Massive Deficit Spending Is Destroying The US Economy–The American People Say Stop Socialism BS Now!
The Bum’s Rush of The American People: The Totally Irresponsible Democratic Party Health Care Bill and Obama’s Big Lie Exposed
Chairman Obama’s Progressive Radical Socialist Health Care Bill Kills Individual Private Health Care Insurance–Join The Second American Revolution!
The Obama Big Lie and Inconvenient Truth About Health Care–The Public Option Trojan Horse–Leads To A Single Payor Goverment Monopoly of Health Care and The Bankruptcy of USA!
The Obama Public Option Poison Pill For A Government Health Care Monopoly–Single Payer System–Betting Your Life and Paying Though The Nose
Government Bureaucracy: Organizational Chart of The House Democrats’ Health Plan
Dr. Robert W. Christensen–Videos
John Stossel–Sick In America–Videos
Congressman Paul Ryan–Townhall Meeting–Health Care Reform and The Patients Choice Act–Videos
The Small Business and Self-Employed Perspective on Health Care Reform
These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country, but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Cloward Piven
The Cloward-Piven Strategy Of The Progressive Radical Socialists: Wrecking The U.S. Economy By Massive Government Dependence, Spending, Deficits, Debts, Taxes And Regulations!
Cloward Piven Strategy–The Crisis Strategy Of Barack Obama
President Obama’s Cloward-Piven Strategy of Controlled Crisis Creation Crippling Capitalism–Coup D-Etat On America
Collectivism: Socialism, Communism, Progressivism and Fascism
The Battle For The World Economy–Videos
Walter Block–Videos
Thomas DiLorenzo–The Economic Model of the Fascist State–Videos
G. William Domhoff: Who Runs America–Videos
Jonah Goldberg–Liberal Fascism–Videos
Paul Edward Gottfried–Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and the Welfare State–Videos
G. Edward Griffin- On Individualism vs. Collectivism–Videos
Mark Levin–Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto–Videos
George Gerald Reisman–Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian–Videos
Today’s Progressives–Obama’s Radical Socialist Democratic Party
The Racist Test for Judge Sonya Sotomayor and President Obama–Racism Unmasked!
Calling and Raising The Stakes for Race Card Players–Obama and Sotomayor
George Soros: Government Interventionist and Global Socialist–Obama’s Puppeter Master–Videos
George Soros: Barack Obama’s Money Man and Agenda Puppeter
The Cloward-Piven Strategy Of The Progressive Radical Socialists: Wrecking The U.S. Economy By Massive Government Dependence, Spending, Deficits, Debts, Taxes And Regulations!
President Barack Obama’s Role Model–President Franklin D. Roosevelt–The Worse President For The U.S. and World Economies and The American People–With The Same Results–High Unemployment Rates–Over 25 Million American Citizens Seeking Full Time Jobs Today–Worse Than The Over 13 Million Seeking Jobs During The Worse of The Great Depression!
Progressives
Progressive Radical Socialist Health Care Plan Written In Prison By Convicted Felon Richard Creamer!
Obamanomics–New Deal Progressive Radical Socialist Interventionism
Eugenics, Planned Parenthood, Population Control, and Designer Babies–Videos
The Great Depression and the Current Recession–Robert Higgs–Videos
The Obama Depression: Lessons Learned–Deja Vu!
Lord Christopher Monckton–Climate Change–Treaty–Videos
Progressive Radical Socialist Canned Criticism of American People: Danger, Profits, and Wrong Thinking
The Battle For The World Economy–Videos
Broom Budget Busting Bums: Replace The Entire Congress–Tea Party Express and Patriots–United We Stand!
Obama’s Civilian National Security Force–Youth Corp Wave–Friendly Fascism Faces–Cons–Crooks–Communists–Communities–Corps!
Obama’s Hidden Agenda and Covert Cadre of Marxists, Communists, Progressives, Radicals, Socialists–Far Left Democrats Destroying Capitalism and The American Republic
Yuri Bezmenov On KGB Soviet Propaganda and Subversion–Videos
The Bloody History of Communism–Videos
Obama Youth–Civilian National Security Force–National Socialism–Hitler Youth–Brownshirts– Redux?–Collectivism!
American Progressive Liberal Fascism–The Wave of The Future Or Back To Past Mistakes?
Today’s Progressives–Obama’s Radical Socialist Democratic Party
President Obama–Killer of The American Dream and Market Capitalism–Stop The Radical Socialists Before They Kill You!
The Progressive Radical Socialist Family Tree–ACORN & AmeriCorps–Time To Chop It Down
It Is Official–America On The Obama Road To Fascism–Thomas Sowell!
President Obama and His Keynesian Spending Cult of The Fascist Democrat Radicals–FDRs
Economists
The Battle For The World Economy–Videos
Frederic Bastiat–The Law–Videos
Walter Block–Videos
Walter Block–Introduction To Libertarianism–Videos
Yaron Brook–Videos
Thomas DiLorenzo–The Economic Model of the Fascist State–Videos
Paul Edward Gottfried–Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and the Welfare State–Videos
David Gordon–Five Best Books on the Current Crisis–Video
David Gordon–The Confused Literature of Globalization–Videos
Friedrich Hayek–Videos
Henry Hazlitt–Economics In One Lesson–Videos
The Great Depression and the Current Recession–Robert Higgs–Videos
Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Ethics of Money Production–Videos
Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Life and Work of Ludwig von Mises–Videos
Milton Friedman–Videos
Milton Friedman on Education–Videos
Milton Friedman–Debate In Iceland–Videos
Milton Friedman–Free To Choose–On Donahue –Videos
Israel Kirzner–On Entrepreneurship–Vidoes
Liberal Fascism–Jonah Goldberg–Videos
Ludwig von Mises–Videos
Robert P. Murphy–Videos
The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged and The Ideas of Ayn Rand
George Gerald Reisman–Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian–Videos
Murray Rothbard–Videos
Murray Rothbard–Libertarianism–Video
Rothbard On Keynes–Videos
Murray Rothbard– What Has Government Done to Our Money?–Videos
Peter Schiff–Videos
Schiff, Forbers and Bloomberg Nail The Financial Crisis and Recession–Mistakes Were Made–Greed, Arrogance, Stupidity–Three Chinese Curses!
Larry Sechrest–The Anticapitalists: Barbarians at the Gate–Videos
L. William Seidman on The Economic Crisis: Causes and Cures–Videos
Amity Shlaes–Videos
Julian Simon–Videos
Julian Simon–The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and Environment–Videos
Thomas Sowell and Conflict of Visions–Videos
Thomas Sowell On The Housing Boom and Bust–Videos
Peter Thiel–Videos
Thomas E. Woods, Jr.–Videos
Thomas E. Woods–The Economic Crisis and The Federal Reserve–Videos
Tom Woods–Lectures On Liberty–Videos
Tom Woods On Personal Rights and Property Ownership
Tom Woods–Smashing Myths and Restoring Sound Money–Videos
Tom Woods–Who Killed The Constitution
Tom Wright On The FairTax–Videos
Banking Cartel’s Public Relations Campaign Continues:Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke On The Record
Societies perhaps arise out of endeavour of creating meaning in/bringing about predictability wrt/ achieving a degree of control over life, requiring mass acceptance of some goals as more desirable than others and subordination of individual liberties towards achievement of those desirable goals, thus precipitating various pathologies (like the need to control the “other” individual arising out of frustrated “individual expression”.
Perhaps experimenting with individual liberty as be all and end all of life would create a healthier, happier and compassionate individual ( and hence the society) whose need for power would be satisfied through “complete individual expression”.
December 2008 in Athens a youth is shot dead by Greek police, this brutal act was the catalyst for the release of a wave of pent up anger and frustration of the Greek people, a wave that washed over Greece and many European cities for well over a month. April 2009 an innocent man walking home from his work in London is brutally assaulted and dies, again it is the hand of the police that is blood stained. Anybody who has been to demonstrations on a regular basis knows that the police are not there to keep the peace nor to enforce the law, their action is always provocative and intimidating. They are agents of the system and are there to stifle protest. The history of protest is written in the blood of ordinary people, blood shed by the various agents of the system. Each death causes shock among the ordinary people but our history is littered with such events. Who remembers Blair Peach? April 1979, he was clubbed on the head at a demonstration in London and died the next day, no charges were ever brought against the police officer responsible. Death by misadventure was the verdict.
It is time that the ordinary people woke up to the fact that the state kills workers who fight for a better life. Here in Glasgow we can go back as far as you want and the story is the same. 1787 Calton weavers strike, the strikers marched towards the Cathedral to make their point in a demand for a living wage, the military opened fire and killed 6 wounding many more. Jump forward to 1919 when workers were asking for a 40 hour week to try to soak up unemployment. They were baton charged in George Square and running battles ensued throughout the city the military with fixed bayonets were posted on the city streets, machine guns on the roofs at George Square and tanks stationed off the Saltmarket. Remember the brutal treatment hand out to the miners in the eighties? Our history is littered with such cases, struggle to improve your life and risk the wrath of the state, it’s there to protect the wealth of that army of parasites that feed off our backs. Until we build a mass grassroots movement to replace the system of profit and exploitation, and to protect us from the ravishes of such a system we will continue to suffer at their hands.
To today’s activists in the communities it must be perfectly clear by now that you can’t make a dent in the institutions of the modern state in the hope of changing them. The modern state is so entwined with the corporate world that they function as one and the same and the corruption of the political world is matched only by the corruption of the corporate world. To become involved in any of these institutions in the hope of change must eventually corrupt the ideals of those working for that change. You will be sucked in and become part and parcel of the system that you are trying to change.
In the hope of changing society for the better it becomes necessary to work outside those institutions, working in the community seeking alternative ways to shape those communities, circumventing and short circuiting the institutions of state and the corporate world. Eventually hoping to replace them.
Howard Zin explains it more fully in the following extract;
” If you work through the existing structures you are going to be corrupted. By working through political system that poisons the atmosphere, even the progressive organizations, you can see it even now in the US, where people on the “Left” are all caught in the electoral campaign and get into fierce arguments about should we support this third party candidate or that third party candidate. This is a sort of little piece of evidence that suggests that when you get into working through electoral politics you begin to corrupt your ideals. So I think a way to behave is to think not in terms of representative government, not in terms of voting, not in terms of electoral politics, but thinking in terms of organizing social movements, organizing in the work place, organizing in the neighbourhood, organizing collectives that can become strong enough to eventually take over – first to become strong enough to resist what has been done to them by authority, and second, later, to become strong enough to actually take over the institutions. –”
I would say “replace with new structures” rather than “take over the institutions.” We don’t need institutions based on privilege and power funded by greed. Tell ann arky your ideas on trying to change society for the benefit of all.
It is hard to determine which clause of the US Constitution is the most abused. The masters of the federal behemoth seem to take the most obscure parts of this great document and twist them so much it is almost impossible to understand what the original purpose of them was. However, if one is looking for the most misinterpreted and abused clause of the constitution surely the interstate commerce clause would be in the top ten.
As we are no longer taught that the United States of America is a compact between free and independent nations which created an agent to represent them as a whole to the rest of the world, and an impartial ‘referee’ to settle disputes among them, we no longer view the constitution from the correct perspective. Because of this it has been easy for the activist (progressive/socialist/Marxist) judges to manipulate the meaning of the interstate commerce clause into a license for the federal government to do things within the states that it has no real authority to do.
The interstate commerce clause is Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the constitution and reads as follows:
“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”
It is the clause in the constitution that gives congress the power to make laws, lay tariffs and import quotas for the imports from other nations. The last two segments of it, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes, exist so congress can keep the trade between the states fair and unbiased and to regulate what people within the states are allowed to trade with the Indian tribes.
We scarcely think about it today but before the constitution each state had laws that laid tariffs on goods manufactured in a different state that were ‘imported’ into it. They also levied taxes and established quotas on goods coming into them from the other states to give locally manufactured goods an advantage over the ‘imported’ goods with the buying public. Add in other regulations not germane to our discussion and it made it very difficult for goods made in Massachusetts to be sold in Connecticut.
The ratification of the US Constitution changed all of this. Under it selling the goods made in one state in all the others became a simple process that allowed the economy of all the states to thrive and the entire union prospered resulting in the economic superiority these United States enjoyed until the 1980s.
It should be noted here that all governments seek to control all levels of the lives of the people that live under them. It is the natural tendency for this to happen not for evil intent, but for the good of all. The argument is simply ‘we’ll be able to protect you from ‘X’ if you give up a little of your freedom so the government can do ‘Y’’. The state and federal governments of these United States are no exception to this rule. A good example is the provision in the Patriot Act that allows the NSA to monitor all private international phone calls. ‘Just give up a little of your right to privacy and we’ll be able to catch the terrorists before they can hurt you’.
The problems with this are:
1) When you give up some of your rights to solve a problem, once the problem is solved the government does not give back what you gave up
2) Once agents of the government have this power they will abuse it to protect you from yourself
3) If you keep giving up a little of your rights when ever there is a problem to solve eventually you have no rights left
So whenever the politicians in the state or federal government say ‘give up this little piece of your rights and we’ll be able to save you from ‘X’’ remember what Ben Franklin said:
“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”1
But I digress.
Today, thanks to activist judges and a congress that only respects the parts of the constitution which they can misuse to enhance their own power, the interstate commerce clause has been ‘mutated’ into a virus that affects the day-to-day activities of all of us. Sadly, we have become so used to this we don’t even question the constitutionality of the decisions made by these judges or the ‘laws’ passed by the congress. The absurdity of this boggles the mind.
For example, in 1941 Mr. Roscoe C. Filburn, a farmer in Ohio, exceeded his ‘quota’ the federal government set on him for his winter wheat crop. Mr. Filburn used the wheat to feed is farm animals, to make bread and other consumables used by his family and to sell locally. The Department of Agriculture levied a fine on Mr. Filburn of $117.00 because he had exceeded his quota of wheat. Mr. Filburn refused to pay the fine so the Department of Agriculture put a lien on his farm. In reaction to the governments’ actions Mr. Filburn filed a lawsuit against U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Claude R. Wickard in federal district court. Mr. Filburn won his case in the district court, so the federal government appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
In its’ ruling the Supreme Court stated:
“The maintenance by government regulation of a price for wheat undoubtedly can be accomplished as effectively by sustaining or increasing the demand as by limiting the supply . . . That [Filburn's] own contribution to the demand for wheat may be trivial [very small] by itself is not enough to remove him from the scope of federal regulation where, as here, taken together with that of many others similarly situated, is far from trivial . . . Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce . . . Congress may properly have considered that wheat consumed on the farm where grown if wholly outside the scheme of regulation would have a substantial effect in defeating and obstructing [the act's] purpose to stimulate trade . . . at increased prices.”2
The court further stated:
“Whether the subject of the regulation in question was ‘production,’ ‘consumption,’ or ‘marketing’ is . . . not material for purposes of deciding the question of federal power . . . But even if [Filburn's] activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce.”3
The Supreme Court overturned the lower courts ruling and ruled in favor of the government. In essence, the court ruled that the federal government can dictate how much of anything a person can grow on their own property for their personal use and, if carried to the logical conclusion, keep a person from growing anything for personal use on their own land.
The most recent ruling on this matter is as distressing as Wickard v. Filburn. Though it concerns the growing of marijuana for personal use the logic of how the court got to its’ decision is important to the discussion.
When California passed its’ medical marijuana law in 1996 Diane Monson began growing marijuana to alleviate a medical condition she had. She was following her doctors recommendation and as far as can be determined abiding by the laws of the state of California. The DEA raided Ms. Monsons’ property and seized her marijuana. In October of 2002 she filed suit against then Attorney General John Ashcroft and former DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson in federal district court. Though the plaintiffs lost in the district court they appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which decided in their favor, 2-1 on December 16th, 2003. The federal government appealed to the US Supreme Court which ruled on June 6th, 2005 that under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution the Congress may ban the use of marijuana even where states approve its’ use for medicinal purposes. What makes this particularly disturbing is the following ‘analysis’ by the court:
“Even respondents acknowledge the existence of an illicit market in marijuana; indeed, Raich has personally participated in that market, and Monson expresses a willingness to do so in the future. More concretely, one concern prompting inclusion of wheat grown for home consumption in the 1938 Act was that rising market prices could draw such wheat into the interstate market, resulting in lower market prices. Wickard, 317 U.S., at 128. The parallel concern making it appropriate to include marijuana grown for home consumption in the CSA is the likelihood that the high demand in the interstate market will draw such marijuana into that market. While the diversion of homegrown wheat tended to frustrate the federal interest in stabilizing prices by regulating the volume of commercial transactions in the interstate market, the diversion of homegrown marijuana tends to frustrate the federal interest in eliminating commercial transactions in the interstate market in their entirety. In both cases, the regulation is squarely within Congress’ commerce power because production of the commodity meant for home consumption, be it wheat or marijuana, has a substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity”4
If you follow this line of reasoning to it’s logical conclusion the congress can pass a law, which the executive branch will enforce, that prevents you from knitting sweaters for your family because you might give one to a neighbor which interferes with interstate commerce. Or, the congress can make it illegal for you to do your own tune-ups on your car because you might help a neighbor tune-up his car which would have a negative impact on interstate commerce.
If this sounds to absurd to you remember it was under the interstate commerce clause that congress passed the ban on possession of a firearm within a ‘school zone’ denying those that live near a school their second amendment rights. The argument used for this law was that a child being intimidated by someone possessing a firearm, or injured, or killed by that someone, has a negative impact on interstate commerce which makes it legitimate for congress to pass, and the executive branch to enforce, such a law.
One may legitimately ask ‘do these Supreme Court decisions adhere to the principles espoused by the founders’? In Federalist number 45 James Madison said:
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined.”5
It appears that the Supreme Court, by way of its’ arguments, is in opposition to the father of the constitution. This is a situation that can only come from a progressive view of the constitution.
Alexander Hamilton also addressed the idea of federal encroachment on the internal authority of the states in Federalist number 17:
“The administration of private justice between the citizens of the same State, the supervision of agriculture and of other concerns of a similar nature, all those things in short which are proper to be provided for by local legislation, can never be desirable cares of a general jurisdiction. It is therefore improbable that there should exist a disposition in the Foederal councils to usurp the powers with which they are connected; because the attempt to exercise those powers would be as troublesome as it would be nugatory; and the possession of them, for that reason, would contribute nothing to the dignity, to the importance, or to the splendour of the national government.”6
It is clear from Hamiltons’ above statement that the idea the federal government would extend its’ reach to this level of control of the people is completely foreign to the intent of those that wrote the constitution. Hamilton also wrote of a self correcting condition built into the federal system. In the same essay Hamilton wrote:
“But let it be admitted for argument sake, that mere wantonness and lust of domination would be sufficient to beget that disposition, still it may be safely affirmed, that the sense of the constituent body of the national representatives, or in other words of the people of the several States would controul the indulgence of so extravagant an appetite. It will always be far more easy for the State governments to encroach upon the national authorities, than for the national government to encroach upon the State authorities. The proof of this proposition turns upon the greater degree of influence, which the State governments, if they administer their affairs with uprightness and prudence, will generally possess over the people; a circumstance which at the same time teaches us, that there is an inherent and intrinsic weakness in all Foederal Constitutions; and that too much pains cannot be taken in their organization, to give them all the force which is compatible with the principles of liberty.”7
From this it is clear that the founders intent was that if the federal government should usurp this much power that the sates, supported by the people, would redress the imbalance and restore the power stolen by the federal government to where it belongs, in the hands of the states and the people.
Thomas Jefferson said in a statement on this topic:
“To make a thing which may be bought and sold is not to prescribe regulations for buying and selling. Besides, if this were an exercise of the power of regulating commerce, it would be void, as extending as much to the internal commerce of every state, as to its external.”
So it is clear that the federal government, in particular the congress, was never to be able to attain this level of control. The US Supreme Court has granted to the Congress power they have no authority to give. This means they have stolen that power from the states and the people.
It is almost impossible to say how much better off you would be if this had not happened. The myriad horde of federal regulation that imposes themselves on our lives would certainly be less if we the people stood up to the federal beast and empowered our state governments to stand with us so we could rein in this abuse.
What do we want? We want the US Supreme Court to correct these misinterpretations of the power entrusted to it and to the congress, and we want the congress to cease legislating in areas it has no authority to legislate in. It is long past time for the federal government to behave itself.
1Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 175, US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 – 1790)
2 & 3Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942)
4Gonzales v. Raich (previously Ashcroft v. Raich), 545 U.S. 1 (2005)
PRESIDENT OBAMA has bowed to pressure from deficit hawks in Congress and on Wall Street by agreeing to their longtime pet project, a commission charged with reining in the federal budget.
The concept behind the creation of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform was invented on Wall Street. For more than two decades, private-equity billionaire Peter G. Peterson and an array of Peterson-affiliated groups such as the Concord Coalition and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget have been warning that deficits and “unfunded liabilities’’ would crash the economy. Funny thing, though, when the actual crash came it had nothing to do with projected public deficits and everything to do with excesses in private financial markets.
According to Peterson’s billion-dollar foundation, “Washington is broken,’’ and it will take an extra-legislative commission to provide the fiscal discipline that Congress has failed to achieve. In fact, however, the Clinton administration put the budget into surplus. It wasn’t “Washington’’ that pushed it back into deficit, but the Bush tax cuts and two off-budget wars.
Obama’s large deficits are mostly the result of the legacy of the Bush tax cuts and the depleted revenues resulting from recession, not the stimulus program. Before Obama took office, the projected deficit for 2009 was already in excess of 8 percent of GDP.
Since Republicans have made clear that they will oppose tax increases, the general assumption is that the 18-member commission, with six presidential appointees and the remaining 12 to be appointed by Congress, will recommend mainly cuts in Social Security and Medicare. This is quite a message to the American people:
Abuses in private financial markets whacked the value of your home, your retirement savings, and your job. Now, in order to pay for the costs of bailing out the banks, we will also have to cut back the two public benefits you can count on that were not tainted by private-sector excesses: your Social Security and your Medicare.
The commission’s members are mostly part of the club that supports deep cuts in social insurance. Five out of the six members appointed by Obama are basically deficit hawks. Peter Orszag, Obama’s budget director, is a longtime supporter of the commission and helped sell it to Obama.
The Republican co-chair appointed by Obama, former Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming, was a longtime crusader for Social Security privatization. Only one of Obama’s six appointees, Andy Stern of the Service Employees International Union, is a strong Social Security defender. Just one of the Senate appointees, Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, is opposed to cuts in entitlements.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has yet to name her three appointees, but at least one is likely to be a deficit hawk. So the deck is pretty well stacked before the commission even begins.
But, wait, aren’t deficits a real problem? Well, the Congressional Budget Office projects that the deficit will plateau at about 3 percent of GDP late in this decade. That’s about a point too high — if the deficit were 2 percent of GDP, the debt ratio would subside. A temporary spike in deficits is no reason to cap or privatize Medicare and Social Security, which is the real agenda of many of the deficit hawks. With unemployment projected to stay above 7 percent until 2014, it’s premature to obsess about deficits. If anything, we need bigger deficits and more public investment in the short run to bring about a stronger recovery. With more people employed and paying taxes and a higher growth rate, revenues would increase and we would not need such heroic measures to cut the deficit.
And if we restore progressive taxation, we can have both a responsible fiscal policy and the increased social investments that America needs without taking it out of Social Security or Medicare. That conclusion, alas, will be the minority report of Obama’s fiscal commission. It should be the majority report.
Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect and a senior fellow at Demos. His forthcoming book is “A Presidency in Peril.’’
The argument about the generation growing up with social media and handheld audio/visual recording devices (otherwise known as mobile phones) is a pretty good one. I wouldn’t disparage the generation out of hand, though. It’s entirely possible they grow into a heightened sense of online privacy and a clear understanding of just what’s important and not in the public/private legal debate.
From the link:
If the public wants online privacy it had better fight now for laws to protect it because businesses won’t and individuals don’t have the clout, security expert Bruce Schneier told RSA Conference attendees.
The longer information-privacy policies go unset, the more likely it is that they never will be set, says Schneier, an author of books about security and CTO of security consultant BT Counterpane. As young people grow up with broad swaths of information about them in the public domain, they will lose any sense of privacy that older generations have.
And they will have no appreciation that lack of privacy shifts power over their lives from themselves to businesses or governments that do control their information. Laws protecting digital data that is routinely gathered about people are needed, he says. “The only lever that works is the legal lever,” he says. “How can we expect the younger generation to do this when they don’t even know the problem?”
Just started a new dvd-set last night, the emmy award winning television mini-series from 2008; “John Adams”. Very promising start with street rebellions in Boston and forces of freedom, justice and liberty brewing towards the British colonial rule.
Episode 1: Rising tensions in Boston forces the independent-minded lawyer John Adams to take a political stand between the freedom of the people and the british rule and crown.
For about 1 year now I have been giving humanity messages from The Collective. Last night The Collective gave me another message to relay to the world. This is a very important message. I do not enjoy what I have to say, but it is for the benefit of Americans that I reveal this.
The Collective have told me that within the Next Year to Three Years, New York will again be attacked, by those people, who hate America. This time it will be to completely destroy the city and lay it to waste. 911 was just the tip of the iceberg.
Think about it for a minute. What better city could our enemies pick? It is a central trade hub of America. The Statue of Liberty represents freedom in America. New York has a huge Population and it is hard to escape from it in a rushed situation. The Big Apple has been a symbol of American, Liberty, entertainment, culture and immigration of free people looking for a better life. Why wouldn’t America’s enemies destroy that? It will also bring this country to it’s knees.
I do not know anything about bombs, Plutonium, Titanium, Dirty Bombs, Miniature Bombs or anything of this nature. However, I am going to relay to you, as it was told to me last night.
Russia now has the capacity and has made a miniature dirty bomb. For those of you who do not understand what a Dirty Bomb is, I will explain as best as I understand it. The military is into miniatures now. It is easier to get them into places we would not normally think of. Russia is out for themselves and they DO NOT CARE who they sell this technology too. This Dirty bomb that has been made, America has the technology as well.
However Russia is looking to sell this bomb on the black market and their are plenty of interested parties who want to buy it. They will pay huge amounts for this devastating Bomb. The intent of this bomb is to cause as much destruction in a small radius as possible.
These bombs have Plutonium Igniters on them. Plutonium is a rare radioactive chemical element. So if you have one of these bombs explode in the city of New York you will have radio active fall out.
The intent from America’s enemies is to lay to waste the city of New York. These bombs are also carried in a titanium casing. This keeps the bomb safe and they will not explode until the person sets the detonator.
One of three things will occur in New York with this intent from America’s enemies:
1. Radioactive fallout from the explosions.
2. Poison the water ways, in and around New York City.
3. Let loose a disease that will kill of millions of people.
You do not have to believe me or The Collective, however ask yourself this: How do I know about a technology that has been kept pretty much under wraps from the military?
Miniature bombs are the new design of the military. How could I know about the titanium cases they are carried in? Plutonium detonators (actually I had no idea what Plutonium did until I looked it up this morning. Now I feel sick knowing what kind of devastation it can cause.) All of this has been a big secret to the public from the Government and Military. As I have explained perviously, I do NOT KNOW anything about bombs. The Collective however, have explained to me as best as they could, what these bombs do and how this will all come to pass.
So how come I know? You cannot hide from the spiritual beings and what you are intending to do to humanity. This is why people like me are warning YOU. There is true evil out there. Do not become complacent. Stay Alert People. This was the message I promised to pass on to humanity today.
The other message from The Collective; was about the The Toyota Acceleration Problem.
The Collective say the problem with the cars isn’t in the peddles themselves, or the mats on the floors. It is in the computer programming.
Someone was paid a lot of money to mess with Toyota’s computer coding. After a few thousand accelerations the Prius and other vehicles like this, were designed for the computer system to kick in and take over the speed.
If Toyota want to fix the problem then they need to look at the computer coding. That is what I was told. Once again I know nothing about cars, computer coding and vehicles finger print encoding. However, I do know what The Collective say is truth.
So these are the messages for Today. It does not make me happy to say what I have. You can believe me or not. free will is your choice. However, things are now in place that will not be stopped. Wake up people, time is of the essence.
Jed Brandt, journalist, activist, self-professed communist, speaks out. Jed is also known as the “Bald Communist”
Warning: Offensive Language Used
Young Socialist protester from Detroit speaks out on National Day of Action to Defend Education.
[Thursday, March 4 was... National Day of Action to Defend Education, David Horowitz discusses what the protests were really all about.]
HOROWITZ: [In the 60's] I was a Marxist revolutionary… I was a leader of the new left and edited its largest magazine… What you see in these [education] protests is hundreds of groups… [with basicly] the same agendas, that corporations are evil, we want socialism, we want the government to own everything and control everything and create social justice…
We used to call it the hydraheaded monster… created… to fool people that we had different agendas from what the communists had. [Just] look [at] organizations [who attended the rally]… there’s one, Bail Out the People Movement… [t]his is a front group for International Answer, which is a pro North Korea Communist Party… [Y]ou have… Anakbayan… which means sons and daughters of the people… the movement… support[s] Hamas and Hezbollah, the terrorists… This is what I call the neocommunist core of the progressive movement. The progressive movement[s] fellow travelers…
And then you have SDS… [SDS is where the Weather Underground came from] which is a violent campus organization. [T]hey said we’re going underground and we’re going… to be authentic revolutionaries. We’re not just going to scream revolutionary slogans. We’re going to actually blow things up.
SDS war against the imperialists, June 23, 1969.
Weather Underground Organization was an American radical left organization. It originated in 1969 as a faction of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)… [t]heir goal was to create a clandestine [def. kept or done in secret] revolutionary party for the violent overthrow of the US government and the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariat [def. lowest economic and social classes in society]. Marxian theory predicted a transitional phase between the abolition of capitalism and the establishment of communism during which a “dictatorship of the proletariat” would suppress resistance to the socialist revolution by the bourgeoisie [def. the middle class], destroy the social relations of production underlying the class system, and create a new, classless society… [T]he group conducted a campaign of bombings through the mid-1970s… [including] the bombing of the United States Capitol on March 1, 1971. Source: wikipedia
HOROWITZ: … [I]f you understand how evil it is [Marxism, Communism] and destructive and it wants to destroy America…, you do what I did. I mean, you get out and you denounce them and you work against them.
GLENN: I was in a cab… yesterday and the cabdriver was from Russia, former Soviet Union. And he said, people in America, they don’t understand. We talked for a little while about the code language. He said, even my daughter who is in college now is falling for the code language, and she doesn’t believe me. And I keep telling her, listen, this is the code language of the Soviet Union.
HOROWITZ… I call them neocommunists. We have a term… neoliberals, neoconservatives, neo Nazis. These are neocommunists. Same agendas, different faith… [M]embers of the Communist Party never refer to themselves as communists. They were always progressives. The slogan of the Communist Party at the height under Stalin was peace, jobs and democracy… [I]f you just go down the list of these organizations [who attended the rally]… two communist unions, aside from the teacher unions would be the SEIU and ASME, which is the municipal employees…
There’s a[nother] good one that I like here [sarcasm]: Destroy Industry in Raleigh, North Carolina. I mean, that tells you what they’re about. It’s just terrible.
[w]hat this guy [the Bald Communist, Jed Brandt] is saying is what they believe. You know, there are [legitimate] ways of changing the world… you tell people… we want to create a society where the government controls everything, and you put it up for a vote…. But these people have… hidden agendas and that’s what makes them so dangerous.
[T]he people who were in [our Marxist Revolutionary] movement,… in the Sixties now are running the government and they run the New York Times and the Washington Post. All those people were part of the left, of the Sixties. And their agendas are the same… [but] their tactics are different… They feel he [the Bald Communist] is hurting their cause. [They] want to conceal… the agendas of the[ir] cause. But their agendas are identical…
[T]o defend the free market system, you defend private property, you defend individual rights and you oppose group collective rights… [A]ll these… liberals and progressives, they are against the First Amendment, they attacked the Supreme Court decision [to allows campaign advertising up to election day] which was a basic First Amendment decision …They are for racial preferences that is privileging certain designated groups who they call oppressed… they are for socialism.
…Obviously there wouldn’t be this unbelievable push for a healthcare plan that… a vast majority of people do… not want, if they didn’t have these agendas. They want control. It’s about control.
[If healthcare doesn't pass] I think the potential for violence… is very real… But much more serious is that they are integrated with our terrorist enemies. They have networks and their ideology links them into the Islamic jihad. I actually… have experience of this… I was a very intellectual leftist. I never threw a rock. But as the editor of Ramparts magazine, which is the biggest magazine of the left, I was approached… by a defector from our intelligence services. And we printed national secrets in the magazine and… nothing happened to us… I was advised… by Harvard law professor, still a professor of constitutional law, on exactly how to commit treason.
So this… revolutionary mentality, the idea that you can change the world or change America fundamentally, which is what Obama said, is a very, very dangerous mentality.
Source: Glenn Beck: Violence from the left?
March 5, 2010
Sadly, there are people who will argue that you have no right to defend your life and property. They claim to be peaceful people but in New York if you were to walk around with a tool capable of helping you protect yourself they would immediately call a man with a gun to come and threaten your life. See, the do-gooders don’t directly assault your right to self-defence they use government to do the job so that they can pretend to be peaceable. When you take the tools of self defence away from the law abiding citizens, you make possible the attacks of criminals.
What New York needs is Warren Redlich as governor. Without waffling, Warren, answers the Gun Rights Questionnaire. You can get his answers here. I’d like to see a governor of New York who actually follows Law, I don’t need a ‘leader’.
At ThinkMarkets, Roger Koppl urges supporters of liberty to get into market design. In effect Koppl says: it isn’t especially useful to oppose the growth of government and hold high the beacon of freedom and prosperity, if there is no way to get from here to there. What is useful is finding a way to bridge the gap.
I’m a fan of this way of thinking. One reason I advocate “restructuring” the electric power industry instead of “deregulation,” is that I think that restructuring is the faster way of achieving the good things that can come from the decentralization of valuation and control (i.e., increased liberty) in electric power markets.
Koppl is too modest when he mentions his own work: (“My work on improving forensic science in the criminal justice system is an example outside the usual context of ‘deregulation.’ See here and here.“) His work on the flaws inherent in government monopolization of forensic data collection and analysis is original and important.
Montana Shrugged TEA Party Patriots visited the Capitol in Helena Montana today to join up with many other patriots to rally around the theme of “Cut The Budget”!
Eric, Jennifer and Kimberly Olsen along with Nicole represented the Billings TEA Party group.
Many of Montana’s legislators were working at the Capitol to understand the dire circumstances surrounding the ever eroding surplus bragged about by our Governor-Schweitzer.
The fact is that there is not a surplus and we are headed into a huge chasm called deficit next year which could exceed $500 million….
Thanks Governor and thanks to the liberal voting members of the chamber for that one!
A large number of patriots attended the event. Event organizers from Helena put on a good show. We thank you for all of your time and commitment in order to get it all accomplished!
They reckoned a seven foot log to be the budget and proceeded to trim a portion of the budget with a two man cross cut saw.
Tim Ravndal finished cutting the budget off the log with many noisy slices made with a Stihl chain saw.
As Tim used to be a lumberjack, he made quick work of trimming the remainder of the $500 million deficit.
Conservative lawmakers watched on close by knowing they were safe, whilst the nervous budget busting liberals watched nervously from the second floor of the capitol with their drippy noses making a mosaic on the previously clean windows. We also got a couple middle fingers from the second floor bystanders!
Eric gave a short speech to the crowd praising them for their attendance and their continued efforts to fix America..Starting with Montana.
Many of the conservative GOP legislators gave their two bits of great advice to the hungry crowd.
A great many news reporters from the television media, radio and newspapers worked the concerned crowd.
Off in the distant a number of liberal plants moved into view holding a sign stating that Denny Rehberg is a RINO… a face without emotion gave him away as a deadbeat libtard. Along with him a lone young lady was searching frantically in the crowd to get a signature on her petition to outlaw trapping of animals. Her requests fell on deaf ears.
The Cut the Budget rally lasted for two hours and was a great show and inspiration to all.
The weather was beautiful and bright and gently warm. A perfect day for a ‘Budget Cutting Rally’.
5
۵
- ـ ۵ شنبه شادی
و
- ـ ۴ شنبه سوری
- ـ ۴ شنبه سوری
یا حشن آتش و روز بعد آن پیروزی و شادی یا غلبه اهورامزدا بر اهریمن
Wednesday is the fire festival or chahaar shanbeh souri (#4sS), followed by Thursday
or panj shanbeh shaadi (#5sS) or victory day, Happy Day
.
.
.
.
.
.
_____ Don’t forget to
Sign Petition by one click at http://act.ly/t4
At least go & see the top 100 people who have signed it. It is only 2 lines to read.
.
NextPage is about
* Supreme Leader
* New Idea
* Revolution
* People Protesting on the site
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
%%%%%%%%
now is /are here. welcome! Come back at 12 day/night
The District of Columbia’s murder rate plummeted by an astounding 25 percent last year, much faster than for the US as a whole or for similarly sized cities. If you had asked Chicago’s Mayor Daley, that wasn’t supposed to happen. The Supreme Court’s 2008 decision to strike down DC’s handgun ban and gunlock requirements should have lead to a surge in murders, with Wild West shootouts. The Supreme Court might keep Daley’s predictions in mind today as they hear the oral arguments on Tuesday in the Chicago handgun ban case.
Everyone in DC now knows that murder rates rose after the handgun ban and fell after they were removed. Unfortunately, Chicago never learned that lesson. The forthcoming third edition of More Guns, Less Crime shows that in the 17 years after its ban on new handguns went into effect, there are only two years where Chicago’s murder rate was as low as it was in 1982. Chicago’s murder rate fell relative to other largest 50 largest cities prior to the ban and rose relative to them afterwards. For example, Chicago’s murder rate went from equalling the average for those other cities in 1982, to exceeding their average murder rate by 32 percent in 1992 and by 68 percent in 2002. There is no year after the ban that Chicago’s murder rate fared as well relative to other cities as it did in 1982.
Similar comparisons exist for the top ten largest cities, the US as a whole, or the counties that boarder Chicago. The accompanying figure shows how Chicago’s murder rates changed relative to the rates in the adjacent counties. In the five years before the ban, Chicago’s murder rate fell by 28 percent relative to those counties. (County level crime data only goes back to 1977.) in the five years after the ban, Chicago’s murder rate doubled relative to those other counties.
It shouldn’t be to surprising that Chicago’s murder rates rose after the ban. Every time gun bans have been tried murder rates have risen. In the United States, gun ban proponents have blamed this failure on easy access to guns in nearby states. But the experience in other countries, even island nations that have gone so far as banning handguns and where borders are easy to monitor, should give gun control supporters such as Mayor Daley and some of the members of the Supreme Court some pause. Whether one looks at Ireland, Jamaica or England and Wales the experience has been the same. Not only didn’t murder rates decline as promised, but the rates actually increased.
The results also confirmed recent research showing that gunlocks increase crime by making it more difficult for citizens to use guns to protect themselves from criminals. In DC’s case, the drop in violent crime is probably more attributable to eliminating the law that guns be locked and unloaded. Relatively few handguns were licensed to the rifles and shotguns that now could be stored loaded and unlocked.
There is a certain irony that so many Chicago politicians understand the protection that handguns provide. Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote in 2008 that there are two types of people who are allowed to have handguns in Chicago: “The criminals. And the politicians.” Mayor Daley has round the clock armed bodyguards. Members of the city council get to become deputized police officers.
We all want to take guns away from criminals, but all too frequently gun control laws disarm law-abiding citizens not criminals. Police are extremely important in protecting citizens, indeed probably the single most important factor. But, as the police know all too well, they almost always arrive on the crime scene after the crime has been committed. If the government can’t protect its citizens, the last thing that it should do is make the crime situation even worse.
Apparently, there is a legitimate difference between “Christian Libertarian” and Libertarian Christian” – at least that’s what Wikipedia says:
Libertarian Christianity is a facet of Christian theology. Its advocates believe that it is the most biblically, rationally, and practically correct legal and political philosophy. This type of libertarianism derives from a specific blending of systematic theology and biblical theology.[1] Advocates claim to be Christians first, and libertarians second. As libertarians they believe that all secular governments exist to protect natural rights, and only to protect natural rights; and they believe that natural rights are necessarily defined in terms of private property, at least in the legal and political arena. — Although they readily acknowledge the distinction between their legal / political philosophy and the rest of their theology, they are suspicious of any attempt at separating the two, because separating the two leaves the visible Church without a viable, Bible-based legal philosophy.
Of course, there is the other side of the coin:
The glossary at Reformation Online says that Christian libertarianism is the view that supports maximum individual liberty under God’s law; that Christ came, among other things, to grant men liberty under God’s authority. It refers to John 8:36 in the Bible and says that the authority of all human individuals and institutions is strictly limited to what the Bible authorizes.[2]
Some people do not distinguish between Christian libertarianism, libertarian Christianity, and Christian anarchism. Others believe the distinctions are important: (a)Christian libertarianism is an extension of Christian theology, usually by people from theonomic and reconstructionist schools, so that this amalgamation includes many principles and perspectives of secular libertarianism. (b)Libertarian Christianity differs from Christian libertarianism in that it uses a different set of biblical hermeneutics from those used by Christian libertarianism. Even so, libertarian Christianity finds many principles and perspectives in common with Christian libertarianism.
My first impression is that the phrase “libertarian Christian” attempts to highlight the idea that I am a Christian first and a Libertarian second, but nothing in either reference states that Christian Libertarians don’t do this as well. I’m not quite sure what the full difference is or whether there is enough of a difference to matter, but I’m willing to keep an open mind on this one. If anyone has an insight here, I would appreciate it! As always, comments are welcome!
An interview where I am asked some nice open-ended softballs on liberty, regulations, and the future. This blog is apparently supporting a particular politician, but I do not personally support or endorse any politicians, and the fact that the interview is posted to this blog should be interpreted as support. It goes without saying that the views expressed in the interview are my own and do not represent the views of any other organization or person.
Here it is.
(Oh, and I am referred to in the post as an “economist” and “Dr. Morehouse”, neither of which I am.)
Here are two updates on the story of the Pennsylvania High School that admitted to remotely spying on their students and then said they weren’t :
1. Regarding the alleged “improper behavior” that set everything in motion – the kid was eating Mike and Ike’s candy and the vice principal thought he was taking pills.
2. Stryde Hax did a little research and found that the school’s tech admin had spent quite a bit of time online talking of, um, alternative uses of the spyware on the laptops in question:
The primary piece of evidence, already being reported on by a Fox affiliate, is this amazing promotional webcast for a remote monitoring product named LANRev. In it, Mike Perbix identifies himself as a high school network tech, and then speaks at length about using the track-and-monitor features of LanRev to take surreptitious remote pictures through a high school laptop webcam. A note of particular pride is evident in his voice when he talks about finding a way outside of LANRev to enable “curtain mode”, a special remote administration mode that makes remote control of a laptop invisible to the victim. Listen at 35:47, when he says: “you’re controlling someone’s machine, you don’t want them to know what you’re doing”
-Mike Perbix
It isn’t until 37 minutes into the video till Perbix begins talking about the Theft Tracking feature, which causes the laptop to go into a mode where it beacons its location and silent webcam screenshots out to an Internet server controlled by the school.
Along with that, he noted some of the things the other students at the high school were saying:
The truly amazing part of this story is what’s coming out from comments from the students themselves. Some of the interesting points:
Possession of a monitored Macbook was required for classes
Possession of an unmonitored personal computer was forbidden and would be confiscated
Disabling the camera was impossible
Jailbreaking a school laptop in order to secure it or monitor it against intrusion was an offense which merited expulsion
and more specifically quoting:
“My name is Manuel Tebas. I was a student at Harriton High School, in the graduating class of 2009. We were the first year on the one-to-one laptop initiative. [...] I saw your post about removing webcam capability from the Macbook. It is possible – I did it last year. I will preface this by saying that when I did it, I was almost expelled, saved only by the fact that there was, at the time, no rule against doing so.”
“I remember that the laptop was a requirement in school for many classes. That may remain so.”
” had brought in my own personal computer to work on a project for school one day. I was doing a presentation involving programs not available on the regular computers, only in specific labs. I happened to have a copy of my own. My personal property was confiscated from me in a study hall when I was working on a school assignment because it was against the schools ‘code of conduct’.”
“Hi, I’m a 2009 Graduate of Harriton Highschool. [...] I and a few of my fellow peers were suspicious of this sort of activity when we first received the laptops. The light next to the web cam would randomly come on, whether we were in class, in study hall or at home minding our own business. We reported it multiple times, each time getting the response: “It’s only a malfunction. if you’d like we’ll look into it and give you a loaner computer.”
“The webcam couldn’t be disabled due through tough tough security settings. Occasionally we would notice that the green light was on from time to time but we just figured that it was glitching out as some macbooks do sometimes. Some few covered it up with tape and post its because they thought the IT guys were watching them. I always thought they were crazy and that the district, one of the more respectable ones within the state, would never pull some shit like this. I guess I was wrong.”
“I am the father of a 17 y/o Harrington High student. She has had one of these laptops for 2 years. She has noticed the “green light” coming on but was not computer literate enough to know what initiated it”
This was an essay for a class I had to write on a modern ethical concern. I had to argue it using Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” for my basis of ethics.
Abortion is defined by Webster’s dictionary as: “the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus”. Abortion is the death of an individual for the selfishness of the mother. Death is in the definition of abortion, and it is a sad truth. In 1996, there were about 3,750, on average, abortions per day. (abortionno.org). This is an ethical concern because this is taking away life from another individual, stripping away their rights, which is why it is unethical. A lifetime of experiences, events, revelations, and ultimately potential that is taken from not only the individual, but the world. That potential and their own cave and enlightened experience they could never have. Their “fire” is taken away from them. Abortion is the convenient answer that gives people a way out from their current problems in expense of the baby’s life. “93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).” (abortionno.org) That statistic is big, most arguments are for abortion if they were raped or some huge complication similar, when only 1% of abortion happens if they were raped or because of incest. This means that 93% of baby’s are being thrown away because it’s an easy way out for the mother. The infants are taken from the world before they’ve had the chance to choose. Their destiny is controlled by the mother that chooses to abort.
“Personhood”, begins at conception. I cannot see how anyone else can see different. After conception, it’s not going to turn into anything else. From conception, its developing, but the unborn child is still a person. Arguments say since it cannot live outside the womb in the first trimester, the child technically not a person. But again, the unborn won’t become anything else, unless its life is taken from it, it will still become a person. Now, compare babies and children to the unborn infants. Are they deemed anything less than human because they cannot live on their own or fend for themselves at birth? Infants cannot walk or talk or feed themselves, but they are deemed human, just the same for unborn children. They too are human. On a ”Personhood” Initiative in Colorado, which would change the definition of personhood to baby’s in the womb, politician Dave Schultheis said “I think that it’s warranted,” he said. “To me it is unconscionable to deny the fact that life begins at the moment of conception. We all know it deep down and there are too many who continue to resist for ideological reasons.”(The Colorado Independent) Politician Scott Renfroe also commented on the issue saying “I think it is a shame that we have allowed the killing of so many babies over the years. And the science shows assuredly that it is a life and that we should protect it.”(The Colorado Independent) Life begins at conception, and that’s what women realize post-abortion. The rights of citizens are getting taken away with each and every abortion and currently there is nothing we can do about it.
The rights of the mother seem to be the main argument against pro-life causes but the right of the infant inside gets no justice. Abortion is the termination of a baby. This baby gets no right to vote on abortion laws, but mothers do. They get their life taken away from them before they get the chance to live it. Just in 1996 alone, that is approx. 1.37 million people who could have voted against abortion. There was a commercial that aired during the current “NFL Superbowl” of Tim Tebow, the Heisman winning quarterback of Florida, and his mother. They told a story of how Tim’s mother was urged to get an abortion because the baby’s health and her health were at great risk. She decided not to get one, and the baby and mother came out fine. That potential that could have been lost through that decision could have affected the world in great ways that cannot be conceived now. “They must continue to ascend until they arrive at the good” (lines 58-59) Good is defined by Webster’s dictionary as “good intentions” or “free from infirmity or sorrow”. Where are the good intentions in abortion? Most arguments don’t focus on the baby, but on the mother. One argument is that it puts a burden on the mother. But there are many other options to choose from. Adoption is a viable option, and there are many parents that want children but cannot. Another argument is that they were raped. At Boston College, an article from the school newspaper wrote about a debate on abortion. Dr. John Rankin was arguing the pro-life side and asked “Does an abortion unrape the woman? Does one act of destruction repair another act of destruction?” It creates a cycle of sorrow and destruction with the mother and the baby. Even a baby that was produced from rape, the rapist doesn’t get punished, the baby does. That cannot be good intentions, and that cannot be ethical. A baby conceived from rape is still a baby and can still be put up for adoption either way. And the mother can relinquish responsibility for it if there is no true attachment to it because of rape. Abortion is a selfish act and if it hurts anyone else, then it cannot be truly good.
“The virtue of wisdom… contains a divine element… is rendered useful and profitable… or hurtful and useless.” This happens with post-abortion women. This is a tragic and traumatic experience that doesn’t seem so at first, but that experience is like going out of the cave, it’s blinding, and after, the now-known experience it’s what was unforeseen and it hurts women, psychologically. Abortion patients don’t see what they are doing is killing a life until after, and that revelation, learned through that experience that what they were doing was wrong. This “seeing the light” hurts them through what they now know. A study taken 8 weeks post-abortion revealed that “44% complained of nervous disorders, 36% had experienced sleep disturbances, 31% had regrets about their decision, and 11% had been prescribed psychotropic medicine”. This disturbs the women, and that a third regret it. In the famous court case “Roe v Wade”, Jane Roe won the right to get an abortion, but even her, in the famous landmark case, she regretted winning and ”she joined an effort called “Operation Rescue.” She has become an outspoken figure in the pro-life movement.” (nysun.com), and tried to overturn the decision. Women believe it’s alright, but they are living in a cave still, and the abortion is the catalyst that frees them from their chains, but for the worse. That revelation that they don’t see and seems good in the present affects the rest of their life. It cannot be ethical if it harms people. Happiness in that one second of judgment does not justify the rest of life in pain. The ultimate good should be the goal in one’s life. Just as something cannot be good if it hurts the people around them, it also cannot be good if it hurts the future selves of them.
Laws aren’t bad. People see laws as restrictions and hindrances on their rights, but that is not the case. Liberty is defined by Webster’s dictionary as “a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant, permission especially to go freely within specified limits”. These limits make it possible to have freedom to do whatever you want, but with limitations that prevent bad things from happening. The major concern is that lawmakers are stripping rights from women, but in actuality, they are creating a just and hospitable environment for people, which is the object of liberty and what this country was founded upon. In the allegory of the cave, the enlightened person, goes back into the cave, and tries to help turn their reality so they can see what they are truly seeing, just as Roe tried to do. “For they are just men, and the commands we impose on them are just”(lines 64-66) This is what the enlightened man does, he becomes the lawmaker and tries to rule, but they still try to kill the enlightened person. This is a sad truth, they don’t like the regulation even though it is good, and it will create a good environment. Having a ruler and regulations aren’t bad, the allegory of the cave shows that there must be structure that provides and protects the common good, which makes for a better environment. This better environment leads to happiness. Instead of taking away rights like it seems to do, it instead provides the structure to create a better environment, and leads to enlightenment.
Plato’s ethics came from seeing the light and then coming back down to liberate them from their false reality. But in this case, liberating us from abortion will have to go through pain, since moral logic of good does not seem to win over people’s innate weaknesses. Complete freedom does not free us as a whole, but it stops progress because complete freedom causes chaos with such power to do anything. And what’s set in the heart of people is not always good, and for the unenlightened, they look toward themselves, for themselves. That is why abortion is so popular. Just as Roe regretted it, and the psychological pains that were unforeseen but inevitable, so will all the rest of abortion patients. And the “Silent generation” of people never to let their voices be heard, cannot do anything about it. We need to look at this ethically and stop abortion. Liberty is such a sweet concept to have and work unabashed in this country, but people sometimes fail to see the good of pure liberty because they are clouded by the shadows they see, that false reality that they see is right. There are much more ethical solutions and it shouldn’t take an actual abortion to see that it is wrong.
Insight for your “Journey across the Sky”
Image via Wikipedia
ann arky’s home.
Boston Globe
Episode 1: Rising tensions in Boston forces the independent-minded lawyer John Adams to take a political stand between the freedom of the people and the british rule and crown.
is /are here. welcome! Come back at 12 day/night
