Our rights do not originate with government, but they are to be "secured" by government.
Formerly: Libertarian Party of Citrus county

Monday, June 29, 2009

Talk Show Hosts are Terrorists!

I know this is from California, the land of fruits and nuts, but WOW!. Karen Bass (D-LA) Speaker of California’s Assembly said the following when asked "How do you think conservative talk radio has affected the Legislature's work?".

The Republicans were essentially threatened and terrorized against voting for revenue. Now [some] are facing recalls. They operate under a terrorist threat: "You vote for revenue and your career is over." I don't know why we allow that kind of terrorism to exist. I guess it's about free speech, but it's extremely unfair.
- Karen Bass (D-LA)

So law makers now think people who hold lawmaker accountable through the ballot box, and actually express that opinion on the radio (and probably other media like this) are terrorists. Bass just got caught saying this out loud.

This is what leftists think, it’s even worse in colleges and universities where students have been turned into the police and investigated for saying and talking about ideas the left doesn’t want others to hear. The web site for The Fire - Foundation for individual rights in education, is filled with dozens of stories about students being punished if it doesn’t agree with the left.

This isn’t just a California problem. Congress is pushing HR 1966 which would make blogs which “intimidate” others a crime. Some say this blog does that. I’m sure it could be used to shut down those who would want congress persons recalled if they vote to raise taxes, as that is intimidating to a member of the legislature.

Make sure when you vote, you know where you candidate stands on free speech.

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Rights and Government

Here in the USA we have a unique form of government founded on principles that no other government created before or sense has ever been based. This form of government was codified in two very short documents, the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.

Let’s first discuss why a government exists. A government is loosely defined as: The Body or group which exercises the control and administration of public policy in a political unit. Most if not all societies have regarded man as a sacrificial means to the ends of others, and society as an end in itself. The common characteristic of most societies and hence their government’s is the fact that the government stands above the moral law. To put it succinctly whatever the government deems as moral is moral. Governments through history impressed upon individuals that self-sacrificial devotion to social duty was regarded as the main purpose of ethics in man’s earthly existence.

To quote Ayn Rand, "The most profoundly revolutionary achievement of the United States of America was the subordination of society to moral law.... All previous systems had held that man’s life belongs to society, that society can dispose of him in any way it pleases, and that any freedom he enjoys is his only by favor, by the permission of society, which may be revoked at any time." Our Forefathers held a different belief that a man’s life is his by right, and that a right is the property of an individual. They believed that society as such has no rights. They wrote about and established the government of the United States based on the idea that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights.

A "right" is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the others are its consequences or corollaries): a man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self- sustaining and self-generated action; the right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action-which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life. (Such is the meaning of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.)

If you read the Bill of Rights in the US constitution, you’ll note that it limits the government not individuals. You should also note that it limits the government from infringing on peoples actions, it does not limit objects. You don’t have the freedom to have something you have the freedom to do something. Your rights/freedoms are meaningless unless you have the right to the consequences of your actions. Hence property rights are a right to an action, they are not a insurance that a man will earn any property, but only an insurance that he will own it if he earns it. It is the right to gain, to keep, to use and to dispose of material values.

Go read the The Bill of Rights. What is common among all of them. They limit Government not individuals. None of these rights depends upon the action or property of another individual.

There is no moral ground for any individual to take the labor or force another to do any specific action. Since acquiring property is the result of the actions of individuals, no other individual has the right to the property of another.

Consider the eight listed economic rights from the 1960 Democratic Party platform, which mirror the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights

1. The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation.

2. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.

3. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.

4. The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home and abroad.

5. The right of every family to a decent home.

6. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.

7. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accidents and unemployment.

8. The right to a good education.

Above it was clearly stated that an individual has the freedom to the results of his own actions. Let’s look at the right to travel. If you have a right to travel, then you have the right to acquire means to travel. In the US that usually means a car. You have the right to own a car. You do not have the right to force others to give you a car, or if your car is broken to fix your car. Hence an auto mechanic has the right to be paid for his services; nobody has the right to force him to repair their car unless the mechanic voluntarily chooses to do so for whatever compensation is agreed upon. The mechanic may if he chooses offer his service for free, but is under no moral obligation to give away his service. You do not have the right to use force to make him fix your car.

Considering our "Healthcare Crisis" let’s just examine #6. Does an individual have the right to the labor of another without just compensation? The answer is clearly NO. You have a right to life, hence your body is your own, not somebody else’s. Just like the car in our example above, if your body is somehow broken you do not have a right to have a mechanic (doctors, nurses, hospital owners, and drug company share holders) fix it. How then can you have a "right" to adequate medical care? Your medical care depends upon the property and actions of other individuals. You have no right to another person’s labor so have no right to adequate health care.

Considering #5, you have a right to a decent home, but you do not have the right to force others to provide you with one.

Considering #7 You have the right to a good education, but you do not have the right to force others to provide you with one.

All of the Economic rights listed above are not rights, but means for government to convince people to give up their rights. All of these so called Economic Rights depend upon taking the labor of one person and giving it to another. To make this more clear, read Article 29 from the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

The UN believes that society can subject and limit individual rights to secure the "rights" of others. In other words society has the right to your labor to make sure others have property.

None of the activities of Obama (and most of Bush’s activities), corporate bailouts, healthcare, taking over GM, forcing Chrysler into a deal with Fiat, etc. are moral, or even constitutional. While we are distracted from the true nature and actions of our government over so-called but non-existent economic rights, we are missing the degradation of our political and property rights.

The wealthy, gun owners, property owners, drug companies, etc. are not a threat to other individual’s rights or freedom. A entity who resorts to physical force, fraud, etc. and violates the rights of others is a criminal-and men have legal protection against him. Remember that rights are moral principles which define and protect a man’s freedom of action, but impose no obligations on other men.

Obviously our government no longer believes in the principles the US was founded. The UN has never believed in those principles and even clearly states that individuals only have the rights that Law allows. Think about what it means to have the rest of the world which doesn't believe in our founding principles, determine what our laws should mean, or what we should have to do, or force their beliefs upon us.

Our government was created to protect the rights of individuals, not groups, not society, but individuals. How can any of the actions of our government over the receint past be considered to be doing what our government was instituted to do. Jefferson may have been right and from time to time the tree of liberty............


Thomas Jefferson Quotes of Interest

Thomas Jefferson Quotes of interest.

  • The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

  • When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.

  • When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

  • The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

  • The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
  • Friday, June 19, 2009

    Barney Frank declares he believes in Liberty.

    Hell must have frozen over - I can't believe it. I'm in full agreement with uber-liberal Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts.

    The following quote as unbelievable as it sounds is not from Ron Paul but Barney Frank.

    "Criminalizing choices that adults make because we think they are unwise ones, when the choices involved have no negative effect on the rights of others, is not appropriate in a free society," Rep. Barney Frank said in his new announcement about his plans for two bills.

    One bill would remove federal penalties for using marijuana and the second would let people in states where "medical marijuana" is allowed use it freely.

    The cosponsors on the bills include Reps. Ron Paul, R-Texas and Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y. This leads me to believe that Re. Frank's words may have been coached by libertarian Paul, but regardless they clearly espouse the libertarian ideas this country was founded on.

    I also agree with his quote, "To those who say that the government should not be encouraging the smoking of marijuana, my response is that I completely agree," Frank's statement said. "But it is a great mistake to divide all human activity into two categories: those that are criminally prohibited, and those that are encouraged."

    Just because the government through protecting liberty, doesn't infringe on an individuals right doesn't mean that the government approves of or encourages that specific action. Bungee Jumping is an great example.

    Our "War on Drugs" is an total failure, and should be ended. So should thousands of other laws both here in Citrus County, in the great state of Florida, and in the entire USA. If all laws were reviewed with Rep. Barney Frank's remark we'd all have more freedom, and be better off. How can anyone logically argue with his statement?

    "Criminalizing choices that adults make because we think they are unwise ones, when the choices involved have no negative effect on the rights of others, is not appropriate in a free society."
    - Barney Frank (2009)

    Monday, June 15, 2009

    My New Retirement Plan

    I'm thinking of following in my Grandfather's Footsteps. He was rum-runner, bootlegger, independent boatman, or whatever else you call a man who purchased Canadian whisky in Windsor, and transported it across the Detroit river for resale in the 20's. Read my essay on Prohibition Here

    Believe it or not the Republicans are calling for a ban on cigarettes (all tobacco products). If politics goes as Republican Tom Coburn plans all tobacco products will be illegal. I'm sure that if that happens I'll be able to retire in 2 or 3 years from running bootleg cigs. This is a cash plan that can't fail.

    For all the same reasons that the above link to my discussion on prohibition mentions this will be a colossal failure for the government, hurt millions of citizens, but for a few willing to ignore the law, will be a very profitable enterprise.

    Why doesn't our government learn that more liberty not less in virtually every instance is better for the people, the government, and society.

    Friday, June 12, 2009

    Being a Man - politically incorrect right now

    It's the 30th anniversary of John Wayne's death. Not a lot of men like this in the media anymore, not sure our current media would allow them. Although he played a variety of characters in the movies he is best known and will always be thought of as a Cowboy with uncompromising values. I a sense a man's man. Although considered a right wing extremist, his quotes have espoused values are definitely more libertarian than conservative.

    John Wayne Quotes:

    • I don't give jobs, I hire men.

    • Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.

    • somewhat troubled by the absence of a consistent policy governing our willingness to permit the President to participate in these private, commercial tributes . . . .

    • I have found a certain type calls himself a liberal . . . Now I always thought I was a liberal. I came up terribly surprised one time when I found out that I was a right-wing conservative extremist, when I listened to everybody's point of view that I ever met, and then decided how I should feel. But this so-called new liberal group, Jesus, they never listen to your point of view . .

    • High Noon (1952) was the most un-American thing I have ever seen in my whole life. The last thing in the picture is ol' Coop [Gary Cooper] putting the United States marshal's badge under his foot and stepping on it. I'll never regret having run [screenwriter Carl Foreman] out of this country.

    • I'm not going to give you those I-was-a-poor-boy-and-I-pulled-myself-up-by-my-bootstraps-stories, but I've gone without a meal or two in my lifetime, and I still don't expect the government to turn over any of its territory to me. Hard times aren't something I can blame my fellow citizens for. Years ago, I didn't have all the opportunities, either. But you can't whine and bellyache 'cause somebody else got a good break and you didn't, like these Indians are. We'll all be on a reservation soon if the socialists keep subsidizing groups like them with our tax money.

    • Sure I wave the American flag. Do you know a better flag to wave? Sure I love my country with all her faults. I'm not ashamed of that, never have been, never will be.

    • I've known Jane Fonda since she was a little girl. I've never agreed with a word she's said, but would give my life defending her right to say it.

    Good guys vs Bad guys and a big battle to determine the winner, with no trouble telling which is which. Morality plays, even his non westerns were westerns. No moral nuances in his movies, and no regret at all. They were definitely not pity parties.

    His movies expressed libertarian values not psychobablebullshit. You never saw the Duke trying to get in with his inner child. You did see him standing up for principles and protecting those rights for others.

    30 years since his death and his last movie, The Shootist. His movies are still loved by virtually everybody, and still criticized and hated by socialists and liberals who just don't get it and think that they should control others who don't make the decisions they would make.

    I'll close with my favorite John Wayne Quote, from the Shootist:

    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on... I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them

    Thursday, June 4, 2009

    Democrats are pushing for Fascism, but don't call it that

    Back On March 30'th I said America is becoming a Fascist state (Click to read the entry)

    On April 28th I showed More evidence Obama is a Fascist (Click to read the entry)

    Today's Townhall.com article by Jonah Goldberg titled
    Don't Call It 'Socialism'!(Click to read it)
    uses similar arguments to come to the same conclusion.

    Goldberg's article concludes:
  • "Personally, I think socialism is the wrong word for all of this. "Corporatism" -- the economic doctrine of fascism -- fits better..."

  • Since this blog is Libertarian, and not yet widely read, it's nice to read that others in the media are logical, believe in individual liberty, and see the danger in where Obama is taking this country.

    I do disagree and openly call it full out Fascism, because liberals are not only wanting and working to implement economic fascism, but are also trying to destroy the Bill of rights, as they get in the way of their fascist goals.