NOTE CAREFULLY THAT IRAN IS THE THREAT.
THEY HAVE NO NEED TO BE THREATENED BY US.
Why?
Well, because we are the good guys, of course!!
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
WHO is the threat here?????
Each star below is a military base.
NOTE CAREFULLY THAT IRAN IS THE THREAT.
THEY HAVE NO NEED TO BE THREATENED BY US.
Why?
Well, because we are the good guys, of course!!
NOTE CAREFULLY THAT IRAN IS THE THREAT.
THEY HAVE NO NEED TO BE THREATENED BY US.
Why?
Well, because we are the good guys, of course!!
Sobran Column --- The Honor of Ron Paul
I miss Joseph Sobran.
Sobran Column --- The Honor of Ron Paul
I guess I’ve known Ron Paul for a quarter of a century now, and I don’t remember how we met. My first memory of him is a quiet dinner on Capitol Hill, during the Reagan years. He told me with dry humor of being the only member of Congress to vote against some bill Reagan wanted passed. For Ron it was a matter of principle, and he was under heavy pressure to change his vote.
What amused him was that the Democrats didn’t mind his voting against it; all the pressure came from his fellow Republicans, professed conservatives, who were embarrassed that anyone should actually stand up for their avowed principles when it was unpopular to do so.
That was Ron Paul for you. Still is. The whole country is getting to know him now, and the Republicans still want to get rid of him. The party’s hacks, led by Newt Gingrich, have even tried in vain to destroy him in his own Texas district.
They’re right, in a way. He doesn’t belong in a party that has made conservative a synonym for destructive. George Will calls him a “useful anachronism” because he actually believes, as literally as circumstances permit, in the U.S. Constitution. In his unassuming way, without priggery or histrionics, he stands alone.
He may have become at last what he has always deserved to be: the most respected member of the U.S. Congress. He is also the only Republican candidate for president who is truly what all the others pretend to be, namely, a conservative. His career shows that a patriotic, pacific conservatism isn’t a paradox.
If they can’t expel Ron Paul from the party, they can at least deny him the nomination. The GOP front-runner, Rudy Giuliani, who says he hates abortion more than any other constitutional right (or words to that effect), went into raptures of phony indignation during the first “debate” when Paul said simply that the 9/11 attacks were a natural result of U.S. foreign policy. The pundits applauded the demagogue, but millions of viewers were thrilled to find one honest man on that crowded stage. (By the way, Paul is a doctor who has delivered thousands of babies and never killed one.)
Ron — I’m very proud to call him my friend — fares well not only in comparison with the party’s sorry current candidates, but also with its legendary conservative giants, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. He lacks their charisma and of course Reagan’s matchless charm, but he excels them both in consistency, depth, historical awareness, courage, and honor. Heaven grant him some of Reagan’s luck!
Which brings us to the big question: does Ron Paul have a prayer? Well, he may have a prayer, but that’s about it. He doesn’t have a billion dollars; delivering babies, often free of charge, is not the way to amass a staggering fortune. He has nothing to offer the special and foreign interests who pour millions into Rudy’s and Hillary’s coffers. Sorry, this isn’t a Frank Capra movie.
But virtue — honor — is rare enough to be an asset, especially when the two big parties don’t have much of it. If both offer pro-war, pro-abortion New York liberals next year, there could be an urgent demand for a third option, especially since Giuliani could smash what’s left of the Bush-riddled GOP coalition while Hillary remains, well, Hillary.
What if Ron Paul runs for president on, say, the Constitution Party ticket? Who knows? I can only attest that to know him is to love him, and knowing him for many years has only deepened the esteem I felt for him when we were both much younger men. This is a man who strikes deep chords in people’s hearts.
Every attempt to portray him as an extremist, or even eccentric, founders on his palpable probity and wisdom. His words are the carefully measured words of one given to meditation. Ron Paul is a man you listen closely to.
The odds are heavily against his being elected president next year. But if he is on the ballot in November, the odds are far heavier against his candidacy’s being forgotten. He will say things worth pondering long after the votes are cast.
Until now, the GOP has been able to contain Paul by pretending he wasn’t there. But the silent treatment can no longer stifle this soft-spoken man. He has been proved right too often.
Sobran Column --- The Honor of Ron Paul
Monday, January 23, 2012
Human Life Sunday
Yesterday was "Human Life Sunday" and most evangelical churches are full of stuff about abortion. Everyone who has seen more than one post by me knows I think it a horror and a redo of the Holocaust and awful. Christians are mostly united on that issue.
Yesterday, though, was one of the best "Human Life Sunday" services I have ever been to. The reason is that it was NOT "against abortion." It sorta was, but in a really really good and different way. Someone has said that the best way to show a crooked stick is crooked is NOT to pull out the protractor, and give a detailed set of measurement codices, but simply to lay a straight stick beside it.
The message was on "adoption" and the nature of the family of God vs those not in the family. It was beautiful, inspiring, full of truth and a great message on the two families and the free and open invitation to join God's family.... and how family members share the same characteristics of the father (this is, in fact, how you know they are family members).
The "human life Sunday" part, though came in the exhortation to the congregation to do what the Christian church has done through the centuries, and that is take in the unwanted. Christians have historically been known as those who rescued abandoned and unwanted children, rescuing them from degradation, exploitation, starvation and abuse. The Roman cynic Julian complained that Christians not only cared for their own poor but rescued the abandoned children of the pagans. Amy Carmichael spent her entire adult life beating people up to send her money so she could buy child temple prostitutes from Hindu shrines and raise them (while she was horribly sick, btw). George Mueller ran an orphanage entirely "on faith" meaning he never asked anyone for a dime but ran close to a million dollar ministry simply asking God to show he was God by providing without publicizing needs. His bio is quite amazing. All these and more are part of the heritage of the Christian church. He brought up the quip of Barney Frank, who stated that "pro lifers think life starts at conception and ends at birth." While acknowledging that this is terribly unfair, he really hammered on the fact that we should be willing to sacrifice our standards of living to open our homes and take in the unwanted, including becoming foster parents, if not going all the way thru adoption. This, before attempting legislation, is the best way of repudiating the phenomenally selfish and barbarous ethic of abortion. Not saying that legal protection is wrong or misplaced. It is saying that an ethic of love is better led than driven.
My own experience is that the church where I go is the first one I have been for a LONG time where people who don't have a lot to bring to the table socially are welcomed in, affirmed and a conscious effort is made to make them know that "you matter."
This is so very contrary to everything out there in "normal" society and sadly (I speak from experience) contrary to much of the church. It should be the one place where the "what can you do for me?" values are rejected.
The fact that the unhip, the uncool, the uneducated, the slow, the odd folks are welcomed is of the same cloth as an emphasis that we should be welcoming to otherwise unwanted children.
Carole and I talked a few years ago about how God may call us to adopt a child, specifically a child from a different race, and maybe one with problems, partly as a statement that all people have value. Carole's response was most interesting. She said "how could we NOT do such a thing?" We had no idea that our "adoption" would be of the homegrown variety, nor of the pain that would be involved in how that was set up, but here we are.
Anyway, the pastor said he wanted the church to be KNOWN as the place where unwanted children could go, no matter what their problems or backgrounds or race or whatever. He is adopting a child from Uganda from an aids orphanage. The church has started a number of ministries focused on this, with resource links and funding pools. It is phenomenally expensive to adopt, usually costing upwards of $20,000 and often doubling that if you do so internationally. His attitude is "so what is my money for?"
Again, it was beautiful.
Yesterday, though, was one of the best "Human Life Sunday" services I have ever been to. The reason is that it was NOT "against abortion." It sorta was, but in a really really good and different way. Someone has said that the best way to show a crooked stick is crooked is NOT to pull out the protractor, and give a detailed set of measurement codices, but simply to lay a straight stick beside it.
The message was on "adoption" and the nature of the family of God vs those not in the family. It was beautiful, inspiring, full of truth and a great message on the two families and the free and open invitation to join God's family.... and how family members share the same characteristics of the father (this is, in fact, how you know they are family members).
The "human life Sunday" part, though came in the exhortation to the congregation to do what the Christian church has done through the centuries, and that is take in the unwanted. Christians have historically been known as those who rescued abandoned and unwanted children, rescuing them from degradation, exploitation, starvation and abuse. The Roman cynic Julian complained that Christians not only cared for their own poor but rescued the abandoned children of the pagans. Amy Carmichael spent her entire adult life beating people up to send her money so she could buy child temple prostitutes from Hindu shrines and raise them (while she was horribly sick, btw). George Mueller ran an orphanage entirely "on faith" meaning he never asked anyone for a dime but ran close to a million dollar ministry simply asking God to show he was God by providing without publicizing needs. His bio is quite amazing. All these and more are part of the heritage of the Christian church. He brought up the quip of Barney Frank, who stated that "pro lifers think life starts at conception and ends at birth." While acknowledging that this is terribly unfair, he really hammered on the fact that we should be willing to sacrifice our standards of living to open our homes and take in the unwanted, including becoming foster parents, if not going all the way thru adoption. This, before attempting legislation, is the best way of repudiating the phenomenally selfish and barbarous ethic of abortion. Not saying that legal protection is wrong or misplaced. It is saying that an ethic of love is better led than driven.
My own experience is that the church where I go is the first one I have been for a LONG time where people who don't have a lot to bring to the table socially are welcomed in, affirmed and a conscious effort is made to make them know that "you matter."
This is so very contrary to everything out there in "normal" society and sadly (I speak from experience) contrary to much of the church. It should be the one place where the "what can you do for me?" values are rejected.
The fact that the unhip, the uncool, the uneducated, the slow, the odd folks are welcomed is of the same cloth as an emphasis that we should be welcoming to otherwise unwanted children.
Carole and I talked a few years ago about how God may call us to adopt a child, specifically a child from a different race, and maybe one with problems, partly as a statement that all people have value. Carole's response was most interesting. She said "how could we NOT do such a thing?" We had no idea that our "adoption" would be of the homegrown variety, nor of the pain that would be involved in how that was set up, but here we are.
Anyway, the pastor said he wanted the church to be KNOWN as the place where unwanted children could go, no matter what their problems or backgrounds or race or whatever. He is adopting a child from Uganda from an aids orphanage. The church has started a number of ministries focused on this, with resource links and funding pools. It is phenomenally expensive to adopt, usually costing upwards of $20,000 and often doubling that if you do so internationally. His attitude is "so what is my money for?"
Again, it was beautiful.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Ron Paul is a Lunatic!
A slobbering on the chin, feces smearing on the wall, howling lunatic with CRAZY ideas.
Yep.
Yep.
Monday, January 16, 2012
I have a dream (redux)
I stole this from Zero Hedge. It is a reworking of MLK's most famous speech in light of the OCCUPY protestors (who have a legitimate gripe, even when their solutions suck).
This is
I HAVE DREAM (SLIGHT RETURN)
(it is surprising how little of this needed to be rewritten or edited to be apropos.
I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as
the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.
In 1776, the founding fathers, in whose symbolic shadows we stand
today, signed the Declaration of Independence. This momentous decree
came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Americans who had
been seared in the flames of withering political and economic
injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their
political and economic captivity.
But almost 250 years later, ordinary Americans are still not free. Two hundred and fifty years later, the life of ordinary Americans is sadly crippled by the manacles a government that is operating under the credo "by the corporation and state and for the corporation and state", rather than "by the people for the people."
Two hundred and fifty years later, countless Americans are living in a lonely island of poverty, struggling to get by on government handouts, in the midst of a vast ocean of obscene prosperity in many instances subsidized by their government.
Two hundred and fifty years later, Men women and children of all color are languishing in the corners of a privileged society controlled by the few and find themselves an economic exile in their own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.
In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would
be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, Washington DC together with it's financial enablers on Wall Street, have given the American people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "Too Big To Fail."
But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of economic opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of opportunity and the security of economic justice.
We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to
rise from the dark and desolate valley of "moral hazard" to the sunlit path of creative capitalism. Now is the time to save our nation from the quicksands of chronic bailouts and "Too Big to Fail" to the time proven solid rock of creative destruction and economic opportunity. Now is the time to make economic justice a reality for all of our children.
It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of economic discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of transparent economic growth and opportunity. Nineteen sixty-three was not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that it was just the Negro who needed to blow off steam
and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation continues to allow Wall Street and much of corporate America to operate "business as usual."
And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until Americans are returned their citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.
But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which is engulfing America must not lead us to a distrust of all wealth, for many of our successful brothers in business, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their economic success is inextricably bound to our success.
We cannot walk alone.
And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.
We cannot turn back.
There are those who are asking, "When will you be satisfied?"
We can never be satisfied as long as outspoken Americans are the victims of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality.
We can never be satisfied as long as our country continues to be pillaged by greed and corruption.
We cannot be satisfied as long as Americans individually and as a people are
forced to struggle under the chains of unsustainable debt.
We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by pepper spraying goons protecting signs stating: "Keep
off the Grass."
Not only can we not be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote but equally as long as an ordinary person on Main Street USA is forced to accept that his worth less than those in the privileged club of Wall Street billionaires.
No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."
I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells.
And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for economic freedom and opportunity left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered
by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.
Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to downtown New York City, Oakland, Boston, Detroit and LA and the rotting housing tracts of California, Ohio, Massachusetts, Nevada, Florida and Arizona, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.
Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.
And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men, not corporations or banks but men, are created equal."
I have a dream today!
And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro
spiritual:
Free at last! Free at last!
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!
This is
I HAVE DREAM (SLIGHT RETURN)
(it is surprising how little of this needed to be rewritten or edited to be apropos.
I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as
the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.
In 1776, the founding fathers, in whose symbolic shadows we stand
today, signed the Declaration of Independence. This momentous decree
came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Americans who had
been seared in the flames of withering political and economic
injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their
political and economic captivity.
But almost 250 years later, ordinary Americans are still not free. Two hundred and fifty years later, the life of ordinary Americans is sadly crippled by the manacles a government that is operating under the credo "by the corporation and state and for the corporation and state", rather than "by the people for the people."
Two hundred and fifty years later, countless Americans are living in a lonely island of poverty, struggling to get by on government handouts, in the midst of a vast ocean of obscene prosperity in many instances subsidized by their government.
Two hundred and fifty years later, Men women and children of all color are languishing in the corners of a privileged society controlled by the few and find themselves an economic exile in their own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.
In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would
be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, Washington DC together with it's financial enablers on Wall Street, have given the American people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "Too Big To Fail."
But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of economic opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of opportunity and the security of economic justice.
We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to
rise from the dark and desolate valley of "moral hazard" to the sunlit path of creative capitalism. Now is the time to save our nation from the quicksands of chronic bailouts and "Too Big to Fail" to the time proven solid rock of creative destruction and economic opportunity. Now is the time to make economic justice a reality for all of our children.
It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of economic discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of transparent economic growth and opportunity. Nineteen sixty-three was not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that it was just the Negro who needed to blow off steam
and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation continues to allow Wall Street and much of corporate America to operate "business as usual."
And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until Americans are returned their citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.
But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which is engulfing America must not lead us to a distrust of all wealth, for many of our successful brothers in business, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their economic success is inextricably bound to our success.
We cannot walk alone.
And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.
We cannot turn back.
There are those who are asking, "When will you be satisfied?"
We can never be satisfied as long as outspoken Americans are the victims of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality.
We can never be satisfied as long as our country continues to be pillaged by greed and corruption.
We cannot be satisfied as long as Americans individually and as a people are
forced to struggle under the chains of unsustainable debt.
We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by pepper spraying goons protecting signs stating: "Keep
off the Grass."
Not only can we not be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote but equally as long as an ordinary person on Main Street USA is forced to accept that his worth less than those in the privileged club of Wall Street billionaires.
No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."
I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells.
And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for economic freedom and opportunity left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered
by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.
Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to downtown New York City, Oakland, Boston, Detroit and LA and the rotting housing tracts of California, Ohio, Massachusetts, Nevada, Florida and Arizona, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.
Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.
And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men, not corporations or banks but men, are created equal."
I have a dream today!
And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro
spiritual:
Free at last! Free at last!
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!
Friday, January 13, 2012
Rock Star Ron Paul and his critics
"What a lot of the media doesn't seem to understand about Ron Paul, is that he doesn't only attract people that agree with his views, he is also able to educate people so they change their views to match his." (AP)
This is true. You see, those who want "another Reagan" have one staring them in the face, they are just too ideologically blinded to see it. Reagan's great strength was that he was able to reach across the aisle and pull into the Republican Party huge numbers of ex democrats, or traditionally voting dem independents. He helped them see "your party no longer represents you, and we are the group more closely aligned to your interests." He also brought in huge numbers of young voters.
How did he do this? By enumerating a huge lot of libertarian principles (which he then failed to follow...., but hey, he at least got them out there on the table). THIS is why Ron Paul supported him (one of only three Congressmen who did so, defying the Republican leadership) back in 1976.
The ideas of traditional liberalism (what we call "libertarianism" because the Marxists have co-opted the word "liberal") are strong, and powerfully appealing. More than that, the arguments are intellectually cogent and EXTREMELY powerful in their moral suasion abilities. This is why Ron Paul has almost a cult like following among many. His "rock star" appearances befuddle the nay sayers because he has NOTHING "rock star" about him. His manner is weak, his voice squeaky, his suits don't fit, and he is contemptible compared to a Perry, or a Romney. However, in his speeches (which have NO pizzazz) an undercurrent of truth, honesty and common sense just boils out. He talks about freedom, the need to take back government, the immorality and ridiculousness of our constant wars, the intrusion of the state into our lives, and the corruption of our money/banking system through the federal reserve.... all those things ring true because they ARE true. It is like there is a burst of reason and common sense in a sea of lies and manipulation.
In the midst of this, you do see the people who resist this, and resist bitterly. They are mostly, although not uniformly the constipated metamucil crowd, as Ron gains 50% of the youth vote. He is most vociferously resisted by the greyhairs. Many Evangelicals also reject him, though mostly over a view of "Israel" which is related to a rather bizarre end times theology.
Why is this? Partly that kids are idealistic, but it is also something else. As a rule, no one in America has been educated in HOW to think, but rather WHAT to think is all they know. Zerohedge had a great article which I linked to here http://snarktown.blogspot.com/2012/01/lack-of-critical-thinking-is-key-to.html -- The biggest mental effort people put forth does not include actually evaluating arguments, but choosing their sources of information. Critical thinking skills are very rare in our culture today. Instead we simply mirror what the "experts" tell us in the media, and think freedom of thought means choosing our "experts," whether they be Limbaugh, Stewart, Alex Jones, Thomas Friedman or Ron Paul. MSNBC or Fox is their great excercise of freedom. That is why some of the stuff, like the current idiotic thread which asserts that Ron Paul is anti gun freedom, (this post originally was written in a local gun forum) is so abysmally stupid that one could walk through the deepest elements of the article and not get your ankles wet, and yet it is put forth as a serious critique. Further, contemptuous dismissal is met with moral indignation and a chorus of "you think you are so smart" or something like. The ability to distinguish between STATIST approaches to "gun freedom" and liberty based arguments are simply beyond the ken of the person who makes such arguments. I started to post in the thread but thought, "man! if that crap is thought a serious rebuttal, there is no point." The same kind of foolishness came from a recent "anybody but Ron Paul" by the pro life group "Americans for Life" who maintain the phenomenally mindless position that anyone who is for rolling back abortion by any means other than a constitutional amendment is "not pro life." This is nothing more than an inability (and often and unwillingness)_ to actually EVALUATE and think critically. Choose your expert and strap in. The idea that HOW we come to the results wished is actually more important than the temporary goal is just not within the processing capabilities of many oldsters, it seems. It is a learned habit. Hand me the remote, will ya?
There is another reason why the man is popular. Men were created for truth. We WANT to believe truth and we want to believe men are telling it. This is why we fall, over and over and over, for scam artists, hucksters, thieves and shysters. This belief that "he is genuine" is a chord that resonates deeply in the heart of men. Again, we WANT to believe that someone is honest and has integrity. Of course, there are many who think themselves "wise" because they has seen the truth that men are, in fact, liars and untrustworthy. There is a vocal element of that stripe here. Because of this, they think that bitter cynicism is the lodestone and they are above the rubes getting sucked in. These are the people who will tell you that Tim Tebow is a hypocritical money grubber, or bawl out continuous warnings about the messiah complex of Paulites. They have not a first scintilla of evidence, but they have a false view of man (virtue is not possible and redemption is a myth) and more importantly, they WANT to believe this because it make them wise and brighter than the naive simpletons who believe...... .ANYTHING. It often justifies in their own mind their own bitter hostility toward all things good/God. Good simply does not exist, outside kissing puppies and other personal acts of piety, be they secular or religious. They are largely bitter and angry people, and often self congratulatory that they are not "taken in" with the rest of the gullible. These are the folks who have no retort except to repeat over and over that "you have a mancrush on Ron Paul" or "you think he is a Messiah" or some other such. They think themselves wise and untouched by such hero worship. I like the phrase "above it all" to describe them.
This is why some Paulite diatribes (including mine) are so laced with scorn and contempt. Not because the people making the accusations are contemptible, but because the arguments are so obviously pandering lies, and obviously "rip and paste" hit pieces.
This is not to say that everyone not on the Ron Paul bandwagon is some dyspeptic sour old coot, a cranially vacant nimrod, or some other defective person. There are good and serious reasons to question his positions. Foreign policy issues do bear scrutiny, and the issue of Israel and the US is a touchy issue. You may wind up evaluating him on the basis of this and saying "no thanks" and that is certainly legitimate. I may think you are wrong and we can respectfully disagree.
My own first thought about the military stuff was "this is crazy and will never work"........., and then I began thinking about what was said. I started looking at some of the people he was quoting (none of these ideas are his, by the way. He is standing in a stream of political thought, the source of which goes back thru Hayek and Mises and Bastiat and Jefferson and Locke and Aquinas and Calvin and Augustine). I began weighing the different arguments I wrote to a friend of mine and asked him to pray for me, joking that I might wind up on the staff of the John Birch Society (I did not know who Alex Jones was at the time or I would have used him). I had discussions with a scholar friend of mine who teaches political science at Liberty University (that conversation was dismaying). I flew out to San Antonio to talk to a friend of mine who is a colonel (now retired) in Special Forces who was in Iraq. He is one of my closest friends, and I was really torn over my developing views on our foreign policy and my loyalty to men like him. He came home between deployments and I flew out to his home to have some long talks about where I was going (I know his wife just LOVED that! lol Had not seen the man for 11 months or so and someone shows up on his one week with her to talk politics!). I wound up where I am. I maintain close friendships with these guys whom I respect, but disagree with. I can respectfully disagree with you if you show any semblance of integrity on this stuff.
If you post stuff that consists of foolish tripe that has every appearance of completely unthinking pabulum shoved out by people with all the intellectual honesty of Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow, or all you have is "I don't like foreign policy" and then line up a bunch of sneers based on "electability" though, don't whine about being mocked. You deserve it.
This is true. You see, those who want "another Reagan" have one staring them in the face, they are just too ideologically blinded to see it. Reagan's great strength was that he was able to reach across the aisle and pull into the Republican Party huge numbers of ex democrats, or traditionally voting dem independents. He helped them see "your party no longer represents you, and we are the group more closely aligned to your interests." He also brought in huge numbers of young voters.
How did he do this? By enumerating a huge lot of libertarian principles (which he then failed to follow...., but hey, he at least got them out there on the table). THIS is why Ron Paul supported him (one of only three Congressmen who did so, defying the Republican leadership) back in 1976.
The ideas of traditional liberalism (what we call "libertarianism" because the Marxists have co-opted the word "liberal") are strong, and powerfully appealing. More than that, the arguments are intellectually cogent and EXTREMELY powerful in their moral suasion abilities. This is why Ron Paul has almost a cult like following among many. His "rock star" appearances befuddle the nay sayers because he has NOTHING "rock star" about him. His manner is weak, his voice squeaky, his suits don't fit, and he is contemptible compared to a Perry, or a Romney. However, in his speeches (which have NO pizzazz) an undercurrent of truth, honesty and common sense just boils out. He talks about freedom, the need to take back government, the immorality and ridiculousness of our constant wars, the intrusion of the state into our lives, and the corruption of our money/banking system through the federal reserve.... all those things ring true because they ARE true. It is like there is a burst of reason and common sense in a sea of lies and manipulation.
In the midst of this, you do see the people who resist this, and resist bitterly. They are mostly, although not uniformly the constipated metamucil crowd, as Ron gains 50% of the youth vote. He is most vociferously resisted by the greyhairs. Many Evangelicals also reject him, though mostly over a view of "Israel" which is related to a rather bizarre end times theology.
Why is this? Partly that kids are idealistic, but it is also something else. As a rule, no one in America has been educated in HOW to think, but rather WHAT to think is all they know. Zerohedge had a great article which I linked to here http://snarktown.blogspot.com/2012/01/lack-of-critical-thinking-is-key-to.html -- The biggest mental effort people put forth does not include actually evaluating arguments, but choosing their sources of information. Critical thinking skills are very rare in our culture today. Instead we simply mirror what the "experts" tell us in the media, and think freedom of thought means choosing our "experts," whether they be Limbaugh, Stewart, Alex Jones, Thomas Friedman or Ron Paul. MSNBC or Fox is their great excercise of freedom. That is why some of the stuff, like the current idiotic thread which asserts that Ron Paul is anti gun freedom, (this post originally was written in a local gun forum) is so abysmally stupid that one could walk through the deepest elements of the article and not get your ankles wet, and yet it is put forth as a serious critique. Further, contemptuous dismissal is met with moral indignation and a chorus of "you think you are so smart" or something like. The ability to distinguish between STATIST approaches to "gun freedom" and liberty based arguments are simply beyond the ken of the person who makes such arguments. I started to post in the thread but thought, "man! if that crap is thought a serious rebuttal, there is no point." The same kind of foolishness came from a recent "anybody but Ron Paul" by the pro life group "Americans for Life" who maintain the phenomenally mindless position that anyone who is for rolling back abortion by any means other than a constitutional amendment is "not pro life." This is nothing more than an inability (and often and unwillingness)_ to actually EVALUATE and think critically. Choose your expert and strap in. The idea that HOW we come to the results wished is actually more important than the temporary goal is just not within the processing capabilities of many oldsters, it seems. It is a learned habit. Hand me the remote, will ya?
There is another reason why the man is popular. Men were created for truth. We WANT to believe truth and we want to believe men are telling it. This is why we fall, over and over and over, for scam artists, hucksters, thieves and shysters. This belief that "he is genuine" is a chord that resonates deeply in the heart of men. Again, we WANT to believe that someone is honest and has integrity. Of course, there are many who think themselves "wise" because they has seen the truth that men are, in fact, liars and untrustworthy. There is a vocal element of that stripe here. Because of this, they think that bitter cynicism is the lodestone and they are above the rubes getting sucked in. These are the people who will tell you that Tim Tebow is a hypocritical money grubber, or bawl out continuous warnings about the messiah complex of Paulites. They have not a first scintilla of evidence, but they have a false view of man (virtue is not possible and redemption is a myth) and more importantly, they WANT to believe this because it make them wise and brighter than the naive simpletons who believe...... .ANYTHING. It often justifies in their own mind their own bitter hostility toward all things good/God. Good simply does not exist, outside kissing puppies and other personal acts of piety, be they secular or religious. They are largely bitter and angry people, and often self congratulatory that they are not "taken in" with the rest of the gullible. These are the folks who have no retort except to repeat over and over that "you have a mancrush on Ron Paul" or "you think he is a Messiah" or some other such. They think themselves wise and untouched by such hero worship. I like the phrase "above it all" to describe them.
This is why some Paulite diatribes (including mine) are so laced with scorn and contempt. Not because the people making the accusations are contemptible, but because the arguments are so obviously pandering lies, and obviously "rip and paste" hit pieces.
This is not to say that everyone not on the Ron Paul bandwagon is some dyspeptic sour old coot, a cranially vacant nimrod, or some other defective person. There are good and serious reasons to question his positions. Foreign policy issues do bear scrutiny, and the issue of Israel and the US is a touchy issue. You may wind up evaluating him on the basis of this and saying "no thanks" and that is certainly legitimate. I may think you are wrong and we can respectfully disagree.
My own first thought about the military stuff was "this is crazy and will never work"........., and then I began thinking about what was said. I started looking at some of the people he was quoting (none of these ideas are his, by the way. He is standing in a stream of political thought, the source of which goes back thru Hayek and Mises and Bastiat and Jefferson and Locke and Aquinas and Calvin and Augustine). I began weighing the different arguments I wrote to a friend of mine and asked him to pray for me, joking that I might wind up on the staff of the John Birch Society (I did not know who Alex Jones was at the time or I would have used him). I had discussions with a scholar friend of mine who teaches political science at Liberty University (that conversation was dismaying). I flew out to San Antonio to talk to a friend of mine who is a colonel (now retired) in Special Forces who was in Iraq. He is one of my closest friends, and I was really torn over my developing views on our foreign policy and my loyalty to men like him. He came home between deployments and I flew out to his home to have some long talks about where I was going (I know his wife just LOVED that! lol Had not seen the man for 11 months or so and someone shows up on his one week with her to talk politics!). I wound up where I am. I maintain close friendships with these guys whom I respect, but disagree with. I can respectfully disagree with you if you show any semblance of integrity on this stuff.
If you post stuff that consists of foolish tripe that has every appearance of completely unthinking pabulum shoved out by people with all the intellectual honesty of Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow, or all you have is "I don't like foreign policy" and then line up a bunch of sneers based on "electability" though, don't whine about being mocked. You deserve it.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Lack of Critical Thinking is Key to the Corrupt Status Quo Maintaining Their Power | ZeroHedge
Insightful article with a focus on financial ideological subversion, but has implications for every aspect of culture. Key point is that we have replaced "how to think" with "what to think" so that critical thinking skills are very rare in our culture today. Instead we simply mirror what the "experts" tell us in the media, and think freedom of thought means choosing our "experts," whether they be Limbaugh, Stewart, Alex Jones, Thomas Friedman or Ron Paul. Very good article.
Lack of Critical Thinking is Key to the Corrupt Status Quo Maintaining Their Power | ZeroHedge:
'via Blog this'
Lack of Critical Thinking is Key to the Corrupt Status Quo Maintaining Their Power | ZeroHedge:
'via Blog this'
Monday, January 09, 2012
NEVER. in my WILDEST WILDEST dreams....
did I EVER think I would be agreeing with Phil Donahue on ANYTHING.
Sunday, January 08, 2012
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Friday, January 06, 2012
Ponzi Planet: The Danger Debt Poses to the Western World - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International
This is a FANTASTIC article in the German Magazine "Spiegel." I am amazed that it made it into print. It is a barnburner, despite being very long.
In summary, it shows where the central banks of western countries have done EXACTLY what Bernie Madoff did. They have engineered a huge Ponzi scheme.
Like all Ponzi schemes, someone eventually gets left holding the bag. This is why they are illegal, except when it is the lawmakers themselves running the scam.
Ponzi Planet: The Danger Debt Poses to the Western World - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International:
'via Blog this'
In summary, it shows where the central banks of western countries have done EXACTLY what Bernie Madoff did. They have engineered a huge Ponzi scheme.
Like all Ponzi schemes, someone eventually gets left holding the bag. This is why they are illegal, except when it is the lawmakers themselves running the scam.
Ponzi Planet: The Danger Debt Poses to the Western World - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International:
'via Blog this'
Racist Ron Paul Newsletters, memo from CNN HQ
OK, here it is. Final proof that the letters that caused such a stink back in the early 1990s were NOT being written by Ron Paul.
https://rpnewsletter.wordpress.com/2...trategy-guide/> https://rpnewsletter.wordpress.com/2...trategy-guide/
Here is a scan of one of them, which clearly shows the author during that period of time to be a Mr. "James Powell." At present, this story is still breaking.... and of course WE aren't going to be looking for what really happened....., so we don't know yet if James Powell is
1) a guy at the CATO institute - my guess.
or
2) one of the directors at FORBES (who is also connected to FOX media! have someone look at this)
Either way, it lends clear credence to the portrayal by Ron that this was in the early days of the libertarian movement, and it was wild, freewheeling, with huge freedom and disorganization and a lack of "control" (hmmmm, kind of like libertarianism). If something happened that was inappropriate, you simply said "nope, that is not me" and fired the person doing it, or disassociated yourself from them.
THIS IS NOT THE THREAT TO US IT APPEARS TO BE
This is actually what terrifies the control freaks and wet diaper whiners of the right and left. We can use this to our advantage. Without any help from us, they will moan and complain and shriek in terror about the "dangers" of such a lack of rules to protect us and make sure we wear our star of David..... er, I mean show our papers..... no, that is not it either...... well, you know what I mean just like I do.... I think. Anyway, these mewling crybabies can always be counted on to moan that THERE HAVE TO BE RULES. Of course, we here at Pentagon/media/banking/congress.com will be happy to allay their fears Otherwise we will have dogs and cats living together and everyone doing what we want and no CONTROL.......and in short, CHAOS, not to mention a loss of money and power here. This cannot be tolerated.
Because of the violation of this principle of control, these libertarians MUST BE STOPPED. Truth must NOT be a barrier. Responsible journalism must give way to guilt by asking the same damfool questions over and over and accusing the same lies a million times no matter what answers are given.
In short, we have to enshrine the standards of Gloria Borger, who encapsulated so well this policy by asking the same question 8 times over and over in one interview, finally pissing off the object of her witch hunt...... and then editing the released clip to make her intended quarry appear to be flipping out over a simple reasonable line of questions. This is a masterful application of the Goebbels journalism standard, which consists of an absolute REFUSAL to go digging into the archives of the Ron Paul newsletters themselves to try and uncover the facts (it took a Ron Paul supporter to do that!), but rather to simply wave the offending articles and shriek "admit your guilt!!!"
We can always count on the aphorism of Mark Twain "h'aint we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain't that a big enough majority in any town?" The left has long been known as an idiot crowd who lust for government control like a horny 17 year old boy gazing longingly on internet porn. However, the delightful discovery that is coming out is that the "conservative" movement is full of meat heads who are just as committed to centralization and totalitarianism. It took less than 4 hours for these useful tools to begin sneering at the "hypocrisy" and gravely intoning their predictions that "the media" will destroy the candidate over this. The idea that the truth might come out has never entered the thought horizon of these persons. This actually shows them to be tools because they WANT to be tools. They will simply repeat what we tell them.
Now that the truth has come out, these rubes have forgotten the original issue and are fixated on another of our accusations. We have moved on, and so have they. By the time we finish waving the current issue (an offending tweet re: John Huntsman) in their faces, the truth that twitter can be hacked quite easily has also vanished from the picture. We have the garrulous "GIVE ME MY METAMUCIL, DAMMIT!" crowd from the right so eating out of our hands that they never even consider that when the offending contemptuous tweet about was taken down, it mysteriously RE APPEARED a few moments later. Americans are such imbeciles that we can spin this to insinuate that Dr. Evil is a gibbering old fool who is hopelessly obsessed with spiteful evil and childish gloating and simply cannot help himself, but MUST post in gleeful triumph over a candidate who wasn't even running. Again, we can count on the stupidity of the right to coalesce with WHAT THEY WANT TO BELIEVE to aid us, here.
In short, the observation of the reporter covering the pentagon that "if Ron Paul is elected over 1/3 of these people will lose their jobs"... while a horrifying prospect, is not really on the immediate horizon. While his ideas are hugely popular with the young voters (with over 50% of them in Iowa voting for the libertarian nutcase), we have a good buffer zone of bible thumping Christian Sharia advocates on the right that we can use to scare the sh*t out of the soccer mom crowd, and of course, the left has been in our pocket for some time. The collapse of the centralized collection of congress, military, media, and banking is not likely to occur soon...... at least until we can all safely collect our pensions.
Be of good cheer and carry on.
1993: The Ron Paul Strategy Guide | @RP_Newsletter:
'via Blog this'
https://rpnewsletter.wordpress.com/2...trategy-guide/> https://rpnewsletter.wordpress.com/2...trategy-guide/
Here is a scan of one of them, which clearly shows the author during that period of time to be a Mr. "James Powell." At present, this story is still breaking.... and of course WE aren't going to be looking for what really happened....., so we don't know yet if James Powell is
1) a guy at the CATO institute - my guess.
or
2) one of the directors at FORBES (who is also connected to FOX media! have someone look at this)
Either way, it lends clear credence to the portrayal by Ron that this was in the early days of the libertarian movement, and it was wild, freewheeling, with huge freedom and disorganization and a lack of "control" (hmmmm, kind of like libertarianism). If something happened that was inappropriate, you simply said "nope, that is not me" and fired the person doing it, or disassociated yourself from them.
THIS IS NOT THE THREAT TO US IT APPEARS TO BE
This is actually what terrifies the control freaks and wet diaper whiners of the right and left. We can use this to our advantage. Without any help from us, they will moan and complain and shriek in terror about the "dangers" of such a lack of rules to protect us and make sure we wear our star of David..... er, I mean show our papers..... no, that is not it either...... well, you know what I mean just like I do.... I think. Anyway, these mewling crybabies can always be counted on to moan that THERE HAVE TO BE RULES. Of course, we here at Pentagon/media/banking/congress.com will be happy to allay their fears Otherwise we will have dogs and cats living together and everyone doing what we want and no CONTROL.......and in short, CHAOS, not to mention a loss of money and power here. This cannot be tolerated.
Because of the violation of this principle of control, these libertarians MUST BE STOPPED. Truth must NOT be a barrier. Responsible journalism must give way to guilt by asking the same damfool questions over and over and accusing the same lies a million times no matter what answers are given.
In short, we have to enshrine the standards of Gloria Borger, who encapsulated so well this policy by asking the same question 8 times over and over in one interview, finally pissing off the object of her witch hunt...... and then editing the released clip to make her intended quarry appear to be flipping out over a simple reasonable line of questions. This is a masterful application of the Goebbels journalism standard, which consists of an absolute REFUSAL to go digging into the archives of the Ron Paul newsletters themselves to try and uncover the facts (it took a Ron Paul supporter to do that!), but rather to simply wave the offending articles and shriek "admit your guilt!!!"
We can always count on the aphorism of Mark Twain "h'aint we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain't that a big enough majority in any town?" The left has long been known as an idiot crowd who lust for government control like a horny 17 year old boy gazing longingly on internet porn. However, the delightful discovery that is coming out is that the "conservative" movement is full of meat heads who are just as committed to centralization and totalitarianism. It took less than 4 hours for these useful tools to begin sneering at the "hypocrisy" and gravely intoning their predictions that "the media" will destroy the candidate over this. The idea that the truth might come out has never entered the thought horizon of these persons. This actually shows them to be tools because they WANT to be tools. They will simply repeat what we tell them.
Now that the truth has come out, these rubes have forgotten the original issue and are fixated on another of our accusations. We have moved on, and so have they. By the time we finish waving the current issue (an offending tweet re: John Huntsman) in their faces, the truth that twitter can be hacked quite easily has also vanished from the picture. We have the garrulous "GIVE ME MY METAMUCIL, DAMMIT!" crowd from the right so eating out of our hands that they never even consider that when the offending contemptuous tweet about was taken down, it mysteriously RE APPEARED a few moments later. Americans are such imbeciles that we can spin this to insinuate that Dr. Evil is a gibbering old fool who is hopelessly obsessed with spiteful evil and childish gloating and simply cannot help himself, but MUST post in gleeful triumph over a candidate who wasn't even running. Again, we can count on the stupidity of the right to coalesce with WHAT THEY WANT TO BELIEVE to aid us, here.
In short, the observation of the reporter covering the pentagon that "if Ron Paul is elected over 1/3 of these people will lose their jobs"... while a horrifying prospect, is not really on the immediate horizon. While his ideas are hugely popular with the young voters (with over 50% of them in Iowa voting for the libertarian nutcase), we have a good buffer zone of bible thumping Christian Sharia advocates on the right that we can use to scare the sh*t out of the soccer mom crowd, and of course, the left has been in our pocket for some time. The collapse of the centralized collection of congress, military, media, and banking is not likely to occur soon...... at least until we can all safely collect our pensions.
Be of good cheer and carry on.
1993: The Ron Paul Strategy Guide | @RP_Newsletter:
'via Blog this'
Thursday, January 05, 2012
The mental process of Christians astounds me sometimes
From Volokh http://volokh.com/2012/01/05/santorum-states-do-not-have-the-right-to-do-wrong/
Santorum: “States Do Not Have the Right to Do Wrong”
Jonathan H. Adler • January 5, 2012 11:02 am
It is absolutely amazing to me that CHRISTIANS are flocking to this guy. The rationale of this is, of course, that the 14th amendment incorporates the 9th amendment. This is the purview of liberal, interventionist statist court rulings that "conservatives" have been condemning for years....., until they find that it is convenient to use the same reasoning to get what they want. "Conservatives" in the Republican party are statists, totalitarians and power freaks just as much as the socialist counterparts they profess to hate.
The best thing I can say about them is that they are dying off.
This articlehttp://cnsnews.com/news/article/ron-paul-won-all-age-brackets-under-40-iowa-caucuses-says-entrance-poll shows that Ron Paul won over 50% of they youth vote. He absolutely blew out the rest of the people. The voters for Romney are over 60, and the Santorum vote was mostly 40-60.
It is clear that the future belongs to noninterventionist, non statist, small government ideals. It is also clear that the dyspeptic legalist prune juice church lady crowd is going to lose influence, simply because they are dying out.
The only question in my mind is whether they will drag the entire nation into bankruptcy and tyranny with their good intentions, or have the decency to die first.
For the love of God, please go.
Santorum: “States Do Not Have the Right to Do Wrong”
Jonathan H. Adler • January 5, 2012 11:02 am
The WSJ Law Blog reports on comments by former Senator Rick Santorum (unearthed at RedState) on federalism and the authority of different states to adopt different policies on moral questions.
I’m a very strong supporter of the 10th amendment . . . but the idea that the only things that the states are prevented from doing are only things specifically established in the Constitution is wrong.
Our country is based on a moral enterprise. Gay marriage is wrong. As Abraham Lincoln said, states do not have the right to do wrong. And so there are folks, here who said states can do this and I won’t get involved in that.
I will get involved in that because the states, as a president I will get involved because the states don’t have a right to undermine the basic fundamental values that hold this country together. America is an ideal. It’s not just a constitution, it is an ideal. It’s a set of morals and principles that were established in that declaration, and states don’t have the right, just like they didn’t have the right to do slavery.
If Senator Santorum is a “strong supporter of the 10th amendment,” he might want to read it, as it seems to say precisely what he denies.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The Constitution only prohibits states from doing those things the Constitution prohibits, and the federal government may only constrain state autonomy pursuant to those powers delegated to the federal government. Santorum may think same-sex marriage is wrong, but nothing in the Constitution prevents states from recognizing same-sex marriage nor does anything in the Constitution authorize the federal government to stop states from doing so.
The reference to Lincoln is also interesting, and does not exactly support Santorum’s claim that “states don’t have a right to undermine the basic fundamental values” of the nation. Contrary to Santorum’s suggestion, states did have the legal authority to permit slavery prior to adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment (which was adopted, incidentally, well after Lincoln’s death). The Emancipation Proclamation, issued pursuant to the President’s War Powers, only applied in those states that had seceded. The federal government had the authority to limit slavery, such as by ending the slave trade or (prior to Dred Scott) prohibiting slavery in federal territories, but states retained the authority to “do wrong.”
A more charitable interpretation of Santorum’s remarks would be that there is nothing in the 10th Amendment that would prevent a constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriage. That would be true, but trivially so. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents the adoption of additional amendments on anything (with one exception still relevant today). But this only makes the point. Were a constitutional amendment adopted prohibiting same-sex marriage, then states would be specifically prohibited from recognizing such marriages by the Constitution, not by some conception of America’s “moral enterprise” or the “basic fundamental values” of the nation.
It is absolutely amazing to me that CHRISTIANS are flocking to this guy. The rationale of this is, of course, that the 14th amendment incorporates the 9th amendment. This is the purview of liberal, interventionist statist court rulings that "conservatives" have been condemning for years....., until they find that it is convenient to use the same reasoning to get what they want. "Conservatives" in the Republican party are statists, totalitarians and power freaks just as much as the socialist counterparts they profess to hate.
The best thing I can say about them is that they are dying off.
This articlehttp://cnsnews.com/news/article/ron-paul-won-all-age-brackets-under-40-iowa-caucuses-says-entrance-poll shows that Ron Paul won over 50% of they youth vote. He absolutely blew out the rest of the people. The voters for Romney are over 60, and the Santorum vote was mostly 40-60.
It is clear that the future belongs to noninterventionist, non statist, small government ideals. It is also clear that the dyspeptic legalist prune juice church lady crowd is going to lose influence, simply because they are dying out.
The only question in my mind is whether they will drag the entire nation into bankruptcy and tyranny with their good intentions, or have the decency to die first.
For the love of God, please go.
Land of the free
It may have looked like they were ready for war or some deranged person looking for his late Social Security benefits.
But it was only Federal Protective Service officers with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security who were conducting a random training operation early Tuesday morning when they surprisingly showed up at the Social Security Administration office in downtown Leesburg.
With their blue and white SUVs circled around the Main Street office, at least one official was posted on the door with a semiautomatic rifle, randomly checking identifications. And other officers, some with K-9s, sifted through the building.
"I thought someone was upset about not getting there check," said Laura Kelly, who took a friend to the office on Tuesday.
According to one Homeland official in the Washington, D.C. office, Operation Shield. is an effort that uses routine, unannounced visits by FPS inspectors to test the effectiveness of contract guards, or protective security officers -- "detecting the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities."
Part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, FPS is the federal law enforcement agency that provides integrated security and law enforcement services to over 9,000 federally-owned and leased buildings, facilities, properties and other assets.
Officers on the scene would not speak to the press and by noon they were gone. But Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said while the visit came as a surprise, the office was ready. He added the officers checked videos, security measures, alarm system and more.
"It was to make sure security measures are in place and properly followed," Milligan said.
Daily Commercial - <p>Training excercise startles locals</p>
But it was only Federal Protective Service officers with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security who were conducting a random training operation early Tuesday morning when they surprisingly showed up at the Social Security Administration office in downtown Leesburg.
With their blue and white SUVs circled around the Main Street office, at least one official was posted on the door with a semiautomatic rifle, randomly checking identifications. And other officers, some with K-9s, sifted through the building.
"I thought someone was upset about not getting there check," said Laura Kelly, who took a friend to the office on Tuesday.
According to one Homeland official in the Washington, D.C. office, Operation Shield. is an effort that uses routine, unannounced visits by FPS inspectors to test the effectiveness of contract guards, or protective security officers -- "detecting the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities."
Part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, FPS is the federal law enforcement agency that provides integrated security and law enforcement services to over 9,000 federally-owned and leased buildings, facilities, properties and other assets.
Officers on the scene would not speak to the press and by noon they were gone. But Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said while the visit came as a surprise, the office was ready. He added the officers checked videos, security measures, alarm system and more.
"It was to make sure security measures are in place and properly followed," Milligan said.
Daily Commercial - <p>Training excercise startles locals</p>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)