PRESS RELEASE FROM Fretts For Congress (FL –01)
Reflections on Memorial Day
Once a year, on this solemn day, we take time from our busy lives to commemorate thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who gave their lives in defense of our nation and our way of life. One day of remembrance is a small thing to give to those who sacrificed so much.
I am no longer a private citizen, or I would not presume to address others on such a day. I aim to represent the valorous men of our military, both the living and the dead, in the halls of Congress, and to do justice to their memory. I seek the mantle of responsibility to assist and provide for those who defend our freedoms. Just as it is their duty to serve, it is my duty to speak.
I am not a veteran, and I cannot presume to understand the scars war has left on soldiers who have lost fellow comrades in arms. But I can listen, and humbly know that my own weak voice cannot lend any strength to the resounding chorus of our honored dead. I can only try to appreciate the depth of their devotion to those left behind, and to do right by all.
The following words may be hard to some, but as Patrick Henry said, “For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it.”
Memorial Day is not only about the past, but about the future. It is up to us to make sure the noble legacy of our armed forces, and the people who served in them, is not cheapened through time.
But a cheapened legacy is what we see.
We see it whenever our leaders betray liberty for security.
We see it when our country spends far more than can be sustained, even for defense.
We see it when the principles that built the Republic are not maintained, but exploited for short term gain; when the rule of law is sacrificed in the name of emergency.
It is preposterous to assume that the very same people who gave their lives for their families and buddies would accept losing the wealth and liberty of their own posterity today. It is absurd to think they would accept arbitrarily or capriciously going to war. But that is what many leaders ask of us in our beloved America today.
The best way to honor the dead is to not let their sacrifice be in vain. On this Memorial Day let us ask ourselves, who among those who have given everything fought for fewer freedoms, massive debt, and endless war?
Then let us resolve to set things right again.
Calen Fretts
P.O. Box 42
Valparaiso, Florida 32580
850-542-0042
info@FrettsForCongress.com
***
Additional Contact
Pete Blome
Campaign Manager FFC
204 Parkwood Circle
Niceville, Fl 32578
850-217-6590
blomep@cox.net
Monday, May 28, 2012
Friday, May 25, 2012
Even Atheist Promotes the Bible.
By Tom Rhodes, 5/25/2012
In a Guardian article where he promoted the idea that the King James Bible should be part of every British students education, author and evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins, said, "A native speaker of English who has never read a word of the King James Bible is verging on the barbarian." His motives were not to promote Christianity. Recognizing that many of the bloody events and wars in European history were the result of religious clashes, Dawkins argues that if people know what was in the Bible they would better be able to reject it.
"Whatever else the Bible might be - and it really is a great work of literature..." ~ Richard Dawkins
For once I agree with arch-atheist Richard Dawkins. Regardless of Dawkins motives, he is promoting exposing more young impressionable minds to God's Word. It's ironic and possibly prophetic how God uses even His enemies to proclaim His Word.
In a Guardian article where he promoted the idea that the King James Bible should be part of every British students education, author and evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins, said, "A native speaker of English who has never read a word of the King James Bible is verging on the barbarian." His motives were not to promote Christianity. Recognizing that many of the bloody events and wars in European history were the result of religious clashes, Dawkins argues that if people know what was in the Bible they would better be able to reject it.
"Whatever else the Bible might be - and it really is a great work of literature..." ~ Richard Dawkins
For once I agree with arch-atheist Richard Dawkins. Regardless of Dawkins motives, he is promoting exposing more young impressionable minds to God's Word. It's ironic and possibly prophetic how God uses even His enemies to proclaim His Word.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Why Is Statist Lust For Power Righteous But Business Greed For Money Evil?
By Tom Rhodes 5/24/2012
Democrats, Socialists, Progressives, Leftists, basically Statists of all types are irrational beings. The Obama mantra and strategy of capitalist big business being evil and government being good doesn’t pass any rational application of logic or thinking. No rational person can deny that the evils of the 20th Century, arguably the bloodiest in history, were caused by big governments and not businesses. Around 30 million citizens of the USSR died in the Gulag Archipelago. Considering that there were no private businesses in the USSR nobody can argue that businesses were the cause of that evil. The 75million Chinese people deliberately starved to death were not starved by the actions of Archer Daniels Midland but by the Chinese government. What business killed five million Ukrainians? Why business murdered 25% of the entire Cambodian population? It wasn’t Fokker, Mercedes Benz, or other German company that instituted the Holocaust, it was the Nazi State.
Conoco Phillips, British Petroleum, Marathon, Shell, Exxon, have small security forces but they have no ability to arrest you, they can’t tax you, they can’t confiscate your bank account, they can’t jail you, they can’t send a drone to kill you. Corporations don’t have police powers. Nobody from Coca-Cola is going to arrest you, take you from your home, interrogate you, and hold you. Today it is the government not any company has declared that they have the right to detain you without trial for as long as they want by merely claiming that you support terrorism with no evidence.
You are free to grow your own food, purchase it at Wall-Mart, Kroger, Fred’s, Winn-Dixie, or the corner produce stand. No business is using force or threat of force to make you purchase their product or service. It is only the government that uses force and the threat of force to compel you purchasing their service whether you want it, use it, or need it.
Yes it can be argued that government does good, and no anarchy is not better than government. But like parts of government the vast majority of businesses, private citizens, churches, and other voluntary associations do good. There is no private enterprise of any type that has done the vast amount of monstrous evil that governments have. Our forefathers understood that power corrupts so instituted a form of government that was limited, putting in harsh restrictions on the government not the people. From Matchless to the Hudson car company to Pan-Am to a zillion forgotten dot com’s those businesses that failed to protect and provide for their customers no longer exist. Businesses only prosper and do well by providing for the needs of their customers (unless government interferes with subsidies, mandates, licensing schemes, etc. to protected some businesses over others or protect businesses from bad business decisions).
Yes business is greedy for money; that is after all why they exist, to generate profit for the owner(s). As the above video by Walter Williams notes, it is in the best interests of business to protect and help its customers because they must compete for their business. Government has no such interest, and its driving force is its own propagation. It’s ability to use force to further its goals makes government far more dangerous. Tthe greed for power is far more frightening and dangerous to the people than mere greed for money. Statists throughout the last century were not greedy for money; they knew that with power the need for money was irrelevant. Consider Obama, his actual wage as president is not relevant, few if any have more of their needs provided with no personal costs than he and his family. He is set for life. None of the 20th Centuries infamous mass murderers, Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao showed preoccupation with monetary greed. Their lust for power was legendary. This is why statists, whether they call themselves, progressives, leftists, socialists, democrats or republicans are far scarier than the libertarian or even conservative aspects of the political spectrum. Statists of all stripes lust for power.
How can one rationally look at the horrors inflicted upon people by their own governments over the last century and claim that businesses and capitalism are the cause of peoples ills, especially when they then ask the people to give the government more power, and control more of everybody’s lives. Only the insane could accept this reasoning.
Economist Dr. Walter Williams notes that greed not government was a driving force in eliminating racial discrimination.
Dr. Williams is right “greed is good.”
Democrats, Socialists, Progressives, Leftists, basically Statists of all types are irrational beings. The Obama mantra and strategy of capitalist big business being evil and government being good doesn’t pass any rational application of logic or thinking. No rational person can deny that the evils of the 20th Century, arguably the bloodiest in history, were caused by big governments and not businesses. Around 30 million citizens of the USSR died in the Gulag Archipelago. Considering that there were no private businesses in the USSR nobody can argue that businesses were the cause of that evil. The 75million Chinese people deliberately starved to death were not starved by the actions of Archer Daniels Midland but by the Chinese government. What business killed five million Ukrainians? Why business murdered 25% of the entire Cambodian population? It wasn’t Fokker, Mercedes Benz, or other German company that instituted the Holocaust, it was the Nazi State.
Conoco Phillips, British Petroleum, Marathon, Shell, Exxon, have small security forces but they have no ability to arrest you, they can’t tax you, they can’t confiscate your bank account, they can’t jail you, they can’t send a drone to kill you. Corporations don’t have police powers. Nobody from Coca-Cola is going to arrest you, take you from your home, interrogate you, and hold you. Today it is the government not any company has declared that they have the right to detain you without trial for as long as they want by merely claiming that you support terrorism with no evidence.
You are free to grow your own food, purchase it at Wall-Mart, Kroger, Fred’s, Winn-Dixie, or the corner produce stand. No business is using force or threat of force to make you purchase their product or service. It is only the government that uses force and the threat of force to compel you purchasing their service whether you want it, use it, or need it.
Yes it can be argued that government does good, and no anarchy is not better than government. But like parts of government the vast majority of businesses, private citizens, churches, and other voluntary associations do good. There is no private enterprise of any type that has done the vast amount of monstrous evil that governments have. Our forefathers understood that power corrupts so instituted a form of government that was limited, putting in harsh restrictions on the government not the people. From Matchless to the Hudson car company to Pan-Am to a zillion forgotten dot com’s those businesses that failed to protect and provide for their customers no longer exist. Businesses only prosper and do well by providing for the needs of their customers (unless government interferes with subsidies, mandates, licensing schemes, etc. to protected some businesses over others or protect businesses from bad business decisions).
Yes business is greedy for money; that is after all why they exist, to generate profit for the owner(s). As the above video by Walter Williams notes, it is in the best interests of business to protect and help its customers because they must compete for their business. Government has no such interest, and its driving force is its own propagation. It’s ability to use force to further its goals makes government far more dangerous. Tthe greed for power is far more frightening and dangerous to the people than mere greed for money. Statists throughout the last century were not greedy for money; they knew that with power the need for money was irrelevant. Consider Obama, his actual wage as president is not relevant, few if any have more of their needs provided with no personal costs than he and his family. He is set for life. None of the 20th Centuries infamous mass murderers, Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao showed preoccupation with monetary greed. Their lust for power was legendary. This is why statists, whether they call themselves, progressives, leftists, socialists, democrats or republicans are far scarier than the libertarian or even conservative aspects of the political spectrum. Statists of all stripes lust for power.
How can one rationally look at the horrors inflicted upon people by their own governments over the last century and claim that businesses and capitalism are the cause of peoples ills, especially when they then ask the people to give the government more power, and control more of everybody’s lives. Only the insane could accept this reasoning.
Economist Dr. Walter Williams notes that greed not government was a driving force in eliminating racial discrimination.
Think about greed and racial discrimination. In 1947, when the Brooklyn Dodgers hired Jackie Robinson, why did racial discrimination by major league teams begin to drop like a hot potato? It wasn't feelings of guilt by white owners, affirmative action or anti-discrimination laws. It turned out that there was a huge pool of black baseball talent in the Negro leagues. It became too costly for teams to allow the Dodgers to gain a monopoly on this talent. Black players won the National League's Most Valuable Player award for seven consecutive seasons. Had other teams not stepped in to hire black players, allowing the Dodgers to hire them, it might have given the Dodgers a virtual monopoly on world championships.
Dr. Williams is right “greed is good.”
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Free Speech Victory in Seminole Co.
By Tom Rhodes 5/23/2012
The Orlando Sentinel reports that Tuesday a judge ruled that flashing your headlights to warn others of a speed trap is protected speech.
It’s a small victory but it is a step in protecting liberty over statism.
The Orlando Sentinel reports that Tuesday a judge ruled that flashing your headlights to warn others of a speed trap is protected speech.
It’s a small victory but it is a step in protecting liberty over statism.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Statists Use PC to Undermine Liberty
Statists use PC to Undermine Liberty
By Tom Rhodes, 5/22/2012
What is Political correctness (PC)? According to Professor Jonathan I. Katz; "Political correctness is the narrowing of the range of acceptable opinions to those held by a small group that enforces it. It is an attempt, often successful, to coerce the majority to accept the opinions of the enforcing group by suppressing any contrary opinion and making independent thought unacceptable. The enforcing group may be afraid of the consequences of open discussion, or of making the facts known. It generally has a practical motivation: it wants something of value (money, jobs, special privileges) to which it has a weak claim. So it attempts to enforce its claim by ruling any disagreement from it outside the bounds of acceptable discourse. This is unnecessary when the claim is self-evidently strong, but may be the only means of getting the claim accepted when it is weak."
The late Charlton Heston put it more succinctly: "Political correctness is tyranny with manners." Over 20 years ago, before being totally overtaken with Political Correctness (PC), Newsweek recognized the fact that PC is totalitarian saying in its Dec. 24, 1990 edition, "PC is, strictly speaking, a totalitarian philosophy." 20 years later Newsweek is now an ironic parody of George Orwell's "Newspeak" as coined in his famous work, "1984." The walls of Oceania's "Ministry of Truth", headquarters for propaganda and revisionist history, are festooned with three "Newspeak" phrases: War Is Peace, Freedom Is Slavery, Ignorance Is Strength. Today's PC press work on similar "Newspeak": Charity Is Entitlement, Envy Is Righteousness. Sin Is Love.
Let's talk about basic culture. Today's PC police want us to accept abject falsehoods as fact. The claim that all cultures are equal and that we must embrace diversity simply flies in the face of reality. Western culture based on representative government and liberty has provided most of the worlds progress, food, medicine, technology and the highest quality of life for more people; why is a culture that is ignorant openly oppressive, misogynistic, a culture where punishment for paltry offenses is the amputation of limbs and death is mandated for differing opinions on historic leaders, worthy of equal respect, value, or even tolerated by Western culture?
Political correctness works by squelching any opinion or idea that doesn't meet the goals of the enforcers of PC beliefs. As an example let's use the absurd policy that disregards common sense, consistently depresses wages and hurts our culture; unlimited immigration. Open discussion and debate would not help the promotion of unlimited open borders. Because parts of honest and open discussions may offend minority immigrants, and political correctness mandates nobody other than white males, should be offended, then open and honest discussions shouldn't happen. Those who would still openly and honestly discuss the effects of our unsecured borders are then treated with derogatory and vile labels, such as racist. Once this label is applied, statists use peer pressure both publicly and professionally on those opposed to unlimited open borders threatening promotions and jobs of those who refuse to toe the line. It's not PC to call people who break the law and criminally enter the US, illegal aliens.
Imagine you purchase a set of tools from your neighbor at a garage sale, and the next week the police come and inform you that what you purchased was stolen. Because you did nothing illegal are you entitled to keep the tools? Of course not, they are the property of their rightful owner and your only redress is to attempt to get your money back. This same concept applies to illegal immigrants. The big worry is for children who were brought here by their criminal parents. Just because those children committed no crime does not grant them the right to enjoy the benefits of their parents illegal activity. They do not have the right to remain in the US just because they didn't choose to come here, anymore than possessing stolen property gives somebody the right to keep it.
To rationalize something is to devise self-satisfying but false or inconsistent reasons for one's behavior, especially as an unconscious defense mechanism through which irrational acts or feelings are made to appear rational. The PC police have gone so far as to redefine what justice means to rationalize immoral behavior and policy. Terminologies such as "social justice" or "economic justice" are euphemisms for appropriation by both threat and use of force, of what justly belongs to another. "Social justice" and "economic justice" are misnomers to obfuscate injustice. In order to validate unequal treatment under the law, and rationalize the acceptance of selective racism the PC police have used and defend the term, "affirmative action." By using this term the PC police say that if a person has the right skin color they may be "entitled" to a job over a more qualified applicant. This is the definition of the injustice called racial discrimination. Political correctness rationalizes acts of racism as "social justice."
The statist's success of PC has changed the way we are allowed to discuss and treat charity. Charity is generally defined as generous actions or donations to aid the poor, ill, or helpless, or as something freely given to a person or persons in need. In the past the poor and disadvantaged were the grateful recipients of charity. Now because of PC rather than being thankful of the generosity by individuals, churches and other groups, organizations, today the poor and disadvantaged feel "entitled" to the labor and property of others. The very idea that charity, be it in the form of a government "safety-net" or private-sector origin is something which those who receive it "entitled" is a bizarre presupposition and totally dissonant thought to rationale-thinking persons. The result of "entitlements" rather than charity is that the recipients are now ungrateful. Why should somebody be grateful for receiving what they are entitled? This perversion of "charity" to "entitlement" has been used to justify forcing people to fund charity through taxation. What is lost is the honor, culture, respect, and belief that is associated with earning something, Of course earning is a concept lost on most cultures and languages, many don't even have a unique word to address the concept of earning and equate earning with winning, but then, pointing that out is not PC. We have also suppressed the moral obligation to take responsibility and be charitable to those in need. Why donate to charity when you already have through onerous taxes. "Entitlements" are the tool of Scrooge not a responsible and generous society. It was Ebenezer Scrooge in "A Christmas Carol," who said that his taxes supported institutions for the poor so he could ignore them.
The most PC of terms is "tolerance." Statists now expect and demand that everybody reject the moral norms of civilized societies for thousands of years and not only show "tolerance" but celebrate sexual immorality and deviancy. Minimally everybody is expected to remain silent and not utter a word of disapproval of what is a immoral, decadent, and demonstrably self-destructive behavior. The irony is seen in the total "intolerance" of homosexual activists who condemn, ridicule, and attacks all those who holds traditional views of what is moral and just.
The entire idea of political correctness PC is a battering on the freedom of the thought. PC operates on raw intimidation. In our PC culture, if the wrong people use the wrong word they are deemed ignorant, insensitive, intolerant, bigoted or hateful. The logical extension is that those who even think in a non-PC way are the same. The scorning, mocking, and visceral attacks by the PC are made to intimidate people from saying or standing up for what they really believe. The very core of PC is the unjust, immoral intimidation to make people think and speak in a certain way. It is statist mind control.
We are now in dangerous and foolish territory. Trying to placate the emotions of others by restricting speech and tolerating unjust and unequal treatment of everybody so that nobody is offended and their self-esteem is preserved is a prescription for losing our most basic rights. The vast majority of people lack the intellectual aptitude or emotional development to hear much less rationally discuss differing political opinions without taking personal umbrage. If we accept political correctness... accept communions only so long as nobody is offended... accept as legitimate peoples "comfort" with words, ideas, and beliefs as more important than open expression and debate... then we stifle, restrict, limit, and denigrate legitimate free speech.
Political correctness is sinister nature. PC goes beyond stifling legitimate opinions in the interest of indulging certain groups. PC furthers one opinion and belief at the expense of all other ideas. PC is a weapon to achieve both political and intellectual orthodoxy by silencing opposition. The head of what is arguably our countries most prestigious school, Harvard, was forced to resign for merely stating a PC heresy that there may be a scientific and natural basis for the variation in male/female IQ distribution. The PC police were successful in both removing Larry Summers, and silencing any who would dare express an idea contrary to accepted feminist dogma that all unequal outcomes between men and women are the result of discrimination by the white male hetero-patriarchy.
Truth, facts, and rational thinking are not allowed in the PC world, but propaganda if supporting the current PC police is allowed. In "documenting" Global Warming, Al Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth" is propaganda, not science. This is not just a biased claim but a legal ruling. A judge in the British High Court, accredited that there were at least NINE areas in his movie where the truth wasn't being told. At the time the politically correct British government was forcing the exposure of this propaganda to school children, and treating it as fact. The High Court classified "An Inconvenient Truth" as propaganda not fact, and ruled that it could only be shown in schools if the teacher pointed out all NINE of the falsehoods presented in Al Gore's movie. Those who would point out the NINE falsehoods in Al Gore's movie, are labeled "deniers" and vilified even though the facts and even legal findings make it clear that the movie its conclusion and recommendations are based on lies.
Thomas Jefferson said, "The legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions." PC promotes injustice and unequal treatment under the law. So called "hate" crimes are a prime example, which promotes some people and ideas are more worthy than others. This is prototypical Marxist ideology, PC guardians must protect the "oppressed;" racial minorities, homosexuals, women (when convenient), and non-Christians. The idea is that Christians and white men have been "privileged" for such an extended period of time that they no longer deserve equal protection under the law. This is a twisted concept of justice which grants special preference to some people based on race, gender, or geographic origins. Historically justice has been administered based on actual crimes committed, not the perceived or actual reason the crime was committed. What difference does it make the reason a mugger chose to beat and rob somebody, that victim is still assaulted and deprived of property through force. Whether convenience, boredom, sport, or hatred, criminals should be tried, judged, and punished based on their actions not thoughts. Since we as people cannot know the thoughts and desires of others, we can the only legitimately punish criminal acts not motives. It should not matter who the victim is, white, red, yellow, brown, or black; unknown or celebrity; homosexual or heterosexual; rich or poor; all people should be judged the same. This is both the traditional and biblical standard and the only morally acceptable rationale for justice. "Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly" (Leviticus 19:14-16). Any other standard amounts to criminalizing mere thoughts.
Without being allowed to speak plainly, we deny the ability to think clearly. What rationale can be used to deny the freedom of expression? Under the social dementia that is political correctness there is no place to refute, only the empty jingoism of people motivated by selfishness unrestrained by any sense of moral turpitude. The purveyors of PC nonsense don't comprehend or realize the repercussions of what they say, nor comprehend why espouse PC sayings. The social decline we are seeing is augmented by political correctness, as our society degenerates PC is used to rationalize the less restrained and less rational behavior of the public.
Nobody has the right not to be offended. Nobody has the right not to feel uncomfortable. Nobody has the right to have their "self-esteem" treated as a right. Nobody has the right to suppress opinion, thoughts, and ideas they don't like. Political correctness elevates feelings above the law and provides a path to accept injustice, immorality, sloth, envy, greed as righteous principles. This is the most effective tool that statists have developed to undermine liberty, and attack the foundational idea that power and authority come from the consent of the people, not from some ruling elite.
By Tom Rhodes, 5/22/2012
What is Political correctness (PC)? According to Professor Jonathan I. Katz; "Political correctness is the narrowing of the range of acceptable opinions to those held by a small group that enforces it. It is an attempt, often successful, to coerce the majority to accept the opinions of the enforcing group by suppressing any contrary opinion and making independent thought unacceptable. The enforcing group may be afraid of the consequences of open discussion, or of making the facts known. It generally has a practical motivation: it wants something of value (money, jobs, special privileges) to which it has a weak claim. So it attempts to enforce its claim by ruling any disagreement from it outside the bounds of acceptable discourse. This is unnecessary when the claim is self-evidently strong, but may be the only means of getting the claim accepted when it is weak."
The late Charlton Heston put it more succinctly: "Political correctness is tyranny with manners." Over 20 years ago, before being totally overtaken with Political Correctness (PC), Newsweek recognized the fact that PC is totalitarian saying in its Dec. 24, 1990 edition, "PC is, strictly speaking, a totalitarian philosophy." 20 years later Newsweek is now an ironic parody of George Orwell's "Newspeak" as coined in his famous work, "1984." The walls of Oceania's "Ministry of Truth", headquarters for propaganda and revisionist history, are festooned with three "Newspeak" phrases: War Is Peace, Freedom Is Slavery, Ignorance Is Strength. Today's PC press work on similar "Newspeak": Charity Is Entitlement, Envy Is Righteousness. Sin Is Love.
Let's talk about basic culture. Today's PC police want us to accept abject falsehoods as fact. The claim that all cultures are equal and that we must embrace diversity simply flies in the face of reality. Western culture based on representative government and liberty has provided most of the worlds progress, food, medicine, technology and the highest quality of life for more people; why is a culture that is ignorant openly oppressive, misogynistic, a culture where punishment for paltry offenses is the amputation of limbs and death is mandated for differing opinions on historic leaders, worthy of equal respect, value, or even tolerated by Western culture?
Political correctness works by squelching any opinion or idea that doesn't meet the goals of the enforcers of PC beliefs. As an example let's use the absurd policy that disregards common sense, consistently depresses wages and hurts our culture; unlimited immigration. Open discussion and debate would not help the promotion of unlimited open borders. Because parts of honest and open discussions may offend minority immigrants, and political correctness mandates nobody other than white males, should be offended, then open and honest discussions shouldn't happen. Those who would still openly and honestly discuss the effects of our unsecured borders are then treated with derogatory and vile labels, such as racist. Once this label is applied, statists use peer pressure both publicly and professionally on those opposed to unlimited open borders threatening promotions and jobs of those who refuse to toe the line. It's not PC to call people who break the law and criminally enter the US, illegal aliens.
Imagine you purchase a set of tools from your neighbor at a garage sale, and the next week the police come and inform you that what you purchased was stolen. Because you did nothing illegal are you entitled to keep the tools? Of course not, they are the property of their rightful owner and your only redress is to attempt to get your money back. This same concept applies to illegal immigrants. The big worry is for children who were brought here by their criminal parents. Just because those children committed no crime does not grant them the right to enjoy the benefits of their parents illegal activity. They do not have the right to remain in the US just because they didn't choose to come here, anymore than possessing stolen property gives somebody the right to keep it.
To rationalize something is to devise self-satisfying but false or inconsistent reasons for one's behavior, especially as an unconscious defense mechanism through which irrational acts or feelings are made to appear rational. The PC police have gone so far as to redefine what justice means to rationalize immoral behavior and policy. Terminologies such as "social justice" or "economic justice" are euphemisms for appropriation by both threat and use of force, of what justly belongs to another. "Social justice" and "economic justice" are misnomers to obfuscate injustice. In order to validate unequal treatment under the law, and rationalize the acceptance of selective racism the PC police have used and defend the term, "affirmative action." By using this term the PC police say that if a person has the right skin color they may be "entitled" to a job over a more qualified applicant. This is the definition of the injustice called racial discrimination. Political correctness rationalizes acts of racism as "social justice."
The statist's success of PC has changed the way we are allowed to discuss and treat charity. Charity is generally defined as generous actions or donations to aid the poor, ill, or helpless, or as something freely given to a person or persons in need. In the past the poor and disadvantaged were the grateful recipients of charity. Now because of PC rather than being thankful of the generosity by individuals, churches and other groups, organizations, today the poor and disadvantaged feel "entitled" to the labor and property of others. The very idea that charity, be it in the form of a government "safety-net" or private-sector origin is something which those who receive it "entitled" is a bizarre presupposition and totally dissonant thought to rationale-thinking persons. The result of "entitlements" rather than charity is that the recipients are now ungrateful. Why should somebody be grateful for receiving what they are entitled? This perversion of "charity" to "entitlement" has been used to justify forcing people to fund charity through taxation. What is lost is the honor, culture, respect, and belief that is associated with earning something, Of course earning is a concept lost on most cultures and languages, many don't even have a unique word to address the concept of earning and equate earning with winning, but then, pointing that out is not PC. We have also suppressed the moral obligation to take responsibility and be charitable to those in need. Why donate to charity when you already have through onerous taxes. "Entitlements" are the tool of Scrooge not a responsible and generous society. It was Ebenezer Scrooge in "A Christmas Carol," who said that his taxes supported institutions for the poor so he could ignore them.
The most PC of terms is "tolerance." Statists now expect and demand that everybody reject the moral norms of civilized societies for thousands of years and not only show "tolerance" but celebrate sexual immorality and deviancy. Minimally everybody is expected to remain silent and not utter a word of disapproval of what is a immoral, decadent, and demonstrably self-destructive behavior. The irony is seen in the total "intolerance" of homosexual activists who condemn, ridicule, and attacks all those who holds traditional views of what is moral and just.
The entire idea of political correctness PC is a battering on the freedom of the thought. PC operates on raw intimidation. In our PC culture, if the wrong people use the wrong word they are deemed ignorant, insensitive, intolerant, bigoted or hateful. The logical extension is that those who even think in a non-PC way are the same. The scorning, mocking, and visceral attacks by the PC are made to intimidate people from saying or standing up for what they really believe. The very core of PC is the unjust, immoral intimidation to make people think and speak in a certain way. It is statist mind control.
We are now in dangerous and foolish territory. Trying to placate the emotions of others by restricting speech and tolerating unjust and unequal treatment of everybody so that nobody is offended and their self-esteem is preserved is a prescription for losing our most basic rights. The vast majority of people lack the intellectual aptitude or emotional development to hear much less rationally discuss differing political opinions without taking personal umbrage. If we accept political correctness... accept communions only so long as nobody is offended... accept as legitimate peoples "comfort" with words, ideas, and beliefs as more important than open expression and debate... then we stifle, restrict, limit, and denigrate legitimate free speech.
Political correctness is sinister nature. PC goes beyond stifling legitimate opinions in the interest of indulging certain groups. PC furthers one opinion and belief at the expense of all other ideas. PC is a weapon to achieve both political and intellectual orthodoxy by silencing opposition. The head of what is arguably our countries most prestigious school, Harvard, was forced to resign for merely stating a PC heresy that there may be a scientific and natural basis for the variation in male/female IQ distribution. The PC police were successful in both removing Larry Summers, and silencing any who would dare express an idea contrary to accepted feminist dogma that all unequal outcomes between men and women are the result of discrimination by the white male hetero-patriarchy.
Truth, facts, and rational thinking are not allowed in the PC world, but propaganda if supporting the current PC police is allowed. In "documenting" Global Warming, Al Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth" is propaganda, not science. This is not just a biased claim but a legal ruling. A judge in the British High Court, accredited that there were at least NINE areas in his movie where the truth wasn't being told. At the time the politically correct British government was forcing the exposure of this propaganda to school children, and treating it as fact. The High Court classified "An Inconvenient Truth" as propaganda not fact, and ruled that it could only be shown in schools if the teacher pointed out all NINE of the falsehoods presented in Al Gore's movie. Those who would point out the NINE falsehoods in Al Gore's movie, are labeled "deniers" and vilified even though the facts and even legal findings make it clear that the movie its conclusion and recommendations are based on lies.
Thomas Jefferson said, "The legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions." PC promotes injustice and unequal treatment under the law. So called "hate" crimes are a prime example, which promotes some people and ideas are more worthy than others. This is prototypical Marxist ideology, PC guardians must protect the "oppressed;" racial minorities, homosexuals, women (when convenient), and non-Christians. The idea is that Christians and white men have been "privileged" for such an extended period of time that they no longer deserve equal protection under the law. This is a twisted concept of justice which grants special preference to some people based on race, gender, or geographic origins. Historically justice has been administered based on actual crimes committed, not the perceived or actual reason the crime was committed. What difference does it make the reason a mugger chose to beat and rob somebody, that victim is still assaulted and deprived of property through force. Whether convenience, boredom, sport, or hatred, criminals should be tried, judged, and punished based on their actions not thoughts. Since we as people cannot know the thoughts and desires of others, we can the only legitimately punish criminal acts not motives. It should not matter who the victim is, white, red, yellow, brown, or black; unknown or celebrity; homosexual or heterosexual; rich or poor; all people should be judged the same. This is both the traditional and biblical standard and the only morally acceptable rationale for justice. "Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly" (Leviticus 19:14-16). Any other standard amounts to criminalizing mere thoughts.
Without being allowed to speak plainly, we deny the ability to think clearly. What rationale can be used to deny the freedom of expression? Under the social dementia that is political correctness there is no place to refute, only the empty jingoism of people motivated by selfishness unrestrained by any sense of moral turpitude. The purveyors of PC nonsense don't comprehend or realize the repercussions of what they say, nor comprehend why espouse PC sayings. The social decline we are seeing is augmented by political correctness, as our society degenerates PC is used to rationalize the less restrained and less rational behavior of the public.
Nobody has the right not to be offended. Nobody has the right not to feel uncomfortable. Nobody has the right to have their "self-esteem" treated as a right. Nobody has the right to suppress opinion, thoughts, and ideas they don't like. Political correctness elevates feelings above the law and provides a path to accept injustice, immorality, sloth, envy, greed as righteous principles. This is the most effective tool that statists have developed to undermine liberty, and attack the foundational idea that power and authority come from the consent of the people, not from some ruling elite.
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Socialism is the embodiment of the Seven Deadly Sins
by Tom Rhodes, 5/19/2012
In the name of “fairness” socialists like Spread-the-Wealth-Obama, famous for such statements as “At some point you’ve made enough money,” have taken the Seven Deadly Sins and attempt to make them morally acceptable.
The Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath, Greed, Sloth, Pride, Lust, Envy and Gluttony, make up the basis for socialism and statist actions.
Wrath: Obama told Charlie Gibson in an interview that although raising the taxes on the rich would decrease not increase government revenue, it had to be done to make things “fair”. Wrath, or revenge, upon those people who are more successful than most is the rationale, not fairness. In Obama's world it is only "fair" if the rich are punished for being successful.
Greed: Statists greedily want control and power even more than money. They hate individual liberty and freedom. Protecting individual liberty removes power from them. Look at the fight against changing our tax code which gives them the control and power to reward and punish using the tax code. Legally GE can get away with paying no taxes, while doctors and other small businessmen are crippled using the same laws. Tarp, the Stimulus, etc. are all socialist policies to reward those in power. Too Big to Fail is the excuse used to justify greed.
Sloth: Socialism, and current statists use “entitlements” to reward those who don’t work by “spreading the wealth.” From paying farmers not to plant certain crops or not to plant crops at all, to making it possible for generations to live on the dole, our entitlement programs have morphed from good programs taking care of the needy, to dependency programs rewarding those who can but won’t work.
Pride: Despite the historic failure of socialism wherever implemented, socialists continue to make claims to its moral superiority to free markets and liberty. From the first British colony to the USA to the 20th century Communist collapses, socialism has always resulted in poverty, starvation, and privation for the masses with luxury for the ruling elite. The claim that capitalism, not socialism, is the cause of poverty is an example of extremely prideful hubris.
Lust: This is one of the primary tools of socialists, from Marx to Hitler to Obama. All have shown that they use and embrace lust in the masses to destroy the social foundations of free and moral societies. The destruction of the traditional family has been espoused and is the method they are and have used to further enable power in the state and not with the people. Although no longer open about destroying the family, they now use “tolerance” to force normalization of lust on society. Obama's approval and call for same sex marriage as the moral equivalent of traditional marriage is a primary example of normalizing lust.
Envy: Socialists are simply envious of those who individually make life better for themselves. They support wealth redistribution, because they envy those who are successful. J. K. Rowling is obscenely rich, made so by hundreds of millions of people poorer than she freely trading some of their wealth for her stories. Socialists envy J.K. Rowling and her wealth saying that the hundreds of millions of people who’ve purchased Harry Potter and made J.K. Rowling wealthy were abused. The entire occupy movement is based on class envy and embraces envy as morally righteous.
Gluttony: Look at the ruling elite who espouse socialistic statism. The prime example is Al Gore who tells us all to live without internal combustion engines and use less power while personally and consistantly using more energy than a small town. Gluttony is the rule not the exception to the ruling elite, especially the socialist ruling elite who can never have enough power.
Thinking like socialistic statists the seven deadly sins are virtues, and are openly used to espouse both socialism and statism.
In the name of “fairness” socialists like Spread-the-Wealth-Obama, famous for such statements as “At some point you’ve made enough money,” have taken the Seven Deadly Sins and attempt to make them morally acceptable.
The Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath, Greed, Sloth, Pride, Lust, Envy and Gluttony, make up the basis for socialism and statist actions.
Wrath: Obama told Charlie Gibson in an interview that although raising the taxes on the rich would decrease not increase government revenue, it had to be done to make things “fair”. Wrath, or revenge, upon those people who are more successful than most is the rationale, not fairness. In Obama's world it is only "fair" if the rich are punished for being successful.
Greed: Statists greedily want control and power even more than money. They hate individual liberty and freedom. Protecting individual liberty removes power from them. Look at the fight against changing our tax code which gives them the control and power to reward and punish using the tax code. Legally GE can get away with paying no taxes, while doctors and other small businessmen are crippled using the same laws. Tarp, the Stimulus, etc. are all socialist policies to reward those in power. Too Big to Fail is the excuse used to justify greed.
Sloth: Socialism, and current statists use “entitlements” to reward those who don’t work by “spreading the wealth.” From paying farmers not to plant certain crops or not to plant crops at all, to making it possible for generations to live on the dole, our entitlement programs have morphed from good programs taking care of the needy, to dependency programs rewarding those who can but won’t work.
Pride: Despite the historic failure of socialism wherever implemented, socialists continue to make claims to its moral superiority to free markets and liberty. From the first British colony to the USA to the 20th century Communist collapses, socialism has always resulted in poverty, starvation, and privation for the masses with luxury for the ruling elite. The claim that capitalism, not socialism, is the cause of poverty is an example of extremely prideful hubris.
Lust: This is one of the primary tools of socialists, from Marx to Hitler to Obama. All have shown that they use and embrace lust in the masses to destroy the social foundations of free and moral societies. The destruction of the traditional family has been espoused and is the method they are and have used to further enable power in the state and not with the people. Although no longer open about destroying the family, they now use “tolerance” to force normalization of lust on society. Obama's approval and call for same sex marriage as the moral equivalent of traditional marriage is a primary example of normalizing lust.
Envy: Socialists are simply envious of those who individually make life better for themselves. They support wealth redistribution, because they envy those who are successful. J. K. Rowling is obscenely rich, made so by hundreds of millions of people poorer than she freely trading some of their wealth for her stories. Socialists envy J.K. Rowling and her wealth saying that the hundreds of millions of people who’ve purchased Harry Potter and made J.K. Rowling wealthy were abused. The entire occupy movement is based on class envy and embraces envy as morally righteous.
Gluttony: Look at the ruling elite who espouse socialistic statism. The prime example is Al Gore who tells us all to live without internal combustion engines and use less power while personally and consistantly using more energy than a small town. Gluttony is the rule not the exception to the ruling elite, especially the socialist ruling elite who can never have enough power.
Thinking like socialistic statists the seven deadly sins are virtues, and are openly used to espouse both socialism and statism.
Monday, May 14, 2012
It’s Time For Libertarian Economics
We have had 30 years of Democrat economics and Republican economics. Both have been different faces of the same scam, and it’s time for a change.
There has in fact been no real economic expansion since 1980. Not one three month period has elapsed where the economy expanded faster than did total debt from 1981 to 2009. From 2002-2008 the amount of true inflation, measured against the increase in earnings of the population, averaged nearly 10% a year. Compounded over six years this is enough to destroy 75% of your purchasing power.
That’s the truth from a monetary perspective. It’s why we “needed” an Internet and housing bubble -- so you didn’t immediately starve, riot and put a stop to the scams. You, the common person, were played as a rube for the benefit of a tiny fraction of the population in Washington DC and on Wall Street.
2007 and 2008 laid the facts bare; the economy and markets collapsed as the ability of individuals to borrow more and more money came to an end. The economy has not recovered -- over the last year on a population-adjusted basis we have in fact lost 1.3 million jobs; 6 million jobs have vanished since the alleged “recovery” began in the summer of 2009.
Government cannot provide what you are not willing to pay for in the form of taxes here and now. Anything else is economically unstable just as it is if you lose your job and then run up your VISA card to pretend you still have an income.
Libertarians believe that the initiation of force -- including fraud -- is always wrong. Whether that force comes via fraudulent claims made by companies selling stock, crooked appraisals and mortgage deals, robosigned documents in foreclosures, offshoring your job while repressing people in slave labor and destroying their environment or laws allowing certain firms to charge 1,000% more for a drug here than in Canada, it’s unacceptable. When government promises benefits it knows it cannot pay for, including Medicare and public-sector pensions, that’s theft from you and your children. Today, government fraud -- borrowing with no ability or intent to pay, ever -- is a full 10% of the economy and has been for the last four years.
Economic prosperity requires a stable currency and honesty between government and the people, in which the services people want are paid for with current taxes. This is the essence of a balanced budget. It begins with recognition that government inflation of the economy by 10% every year and effective counterfeiting of the dollar by banks and The Fed issuing un-backed credit are mathematically unsound.
Only Libertarians are willing to bring this discussion to the public. We’re the third-largest political party and the only one with answers that will prevent economic Armageddon. That resolution will not come without pain, just as ceasing drinking requires that you deal with the hangover, but if the alternative is liver cancer and death isn’t the hangover a better option?
Karl Denninger is a former CEO in the Internet space, a popular economic blogger who operates The Market Ticker (http://market-ticker.org) an at-large Executive Committee member of the Libertarian Party of Florida and Secretary of the Libertarian Party of Okaloosa County. The opinions expressed are his own.
Karl Denninger
The Market Ticker ®
Cuda Systems LLC
314 Olde Post Road
Niceville FL 32578
karl@denninger.net
850- 376-9364
There has in fact been no real economic expansion since 1980. Not one three month period has elapsed where the economy expanded faster than did total debt from 1981 to 2009. From 2002-2008 the amount of true inflation, measured against the increase in earnings of the population, averaged nearly 10% a year. Compounded over six years this is enough to destroy 75% of your purchasing power.
That’s the truth from a monetary perspective. It’s why we “needed” an Internet and housing bubble -- so you didn’t immediately starve, riot and put a stop to the scams. You, the common person, were played as a rube for the benefit of a tiny fraction of the population in Washington DC and on Wall Street.
2007 and 2008 laid the facts bare; the economy and markets collapsed as the ability of individuals to borrow more and more money came to an end. The economy has not recovered -- over the last year on a population-adjusted basis we have in fact lost 1.3 million jobs; 6 million jobs have vanished since the alleged “recovery” began in the summer of 2009.
Government cannot provide what you are not willing to pay for in the form of taxes here and now. Anything else is economically unstable just as it is if you lose your job and then run up your VISA card to pretend you still have an income.
Libertarians believe that the initiation of force -- including fraud -- is always wrong. Whether that force comes via fraudulent claims made by companies selling stock, crooked appraisals and mortgage deals, robosigned documents in foreclosures, offshoring your job while repressing people in slave labor and destroying their environment or laws allowing certain firms to charge 1,000% more for a drug here than in Canada, it’s unacceptable. When government promises benefits it knows it cannot pay for, including Medicare and public-sector pensions, that’s theft from you and your children. Today, government fraud -- borrowing with no ability or intent to pay, ever -- is a full 10% of the economy and has been for the last four years.
Economic prosperity requires a stable currency and honesty between government and the people, in which the services people want are paid for with current taxes. This is the essence of a balanced budget. It begins with recognition that government inflation of the economy by 10% every year and effective counterfeiting of the dollar by banks and The Fed issuing un-backed credit are mathematically unsound.
Only Libertarians are willing to bring this discussion to the public. We’re the third-largest political party and the only one with answers that will prevent economic Armageddon. That resolution will not come without pain, just as ceasing drinking requires that you deal with the hangover, but if the alternative is liver cancer and death isn’t the hangover a better option?
Karl Denninger is a former CEO in the Internet space, a popular economic blogger who operates The Market Ticker (http://market-ticker.org) an at-large Executive Committee member of the Libertarian Party of Florida and Secretary of the Libertarian Party of Okaloosa County. The opinions expressed are his own.
Karl Denninger
The Market Ticker ®
Cuda Systems LLC
314 Olde Post Road
Niceville FL 32578
karl@denninger.net
850- 376-9364
Friday, May 11, 2012
Environmental Extremist Calls for More Tyranny
By Tom Rhodes, 5/11/2012
In an editorial in the May 10, 2012, NY Times titled, "Game Over for the Climate", Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies Jim Hansen makes the same prediction he made 13 years ago, and is now calling for international draconian government restriction on both sovereign government and all individual choices in energy commerce. Eminent catastrophic events have been the scare tactic of statists who moved from the failed socialist and communist movements into the environmental movement. The problem is that Hansen's claims are not based on factual scientific evidence and scientific methodologies; his predictions and theories have proven to be wrong.
Way back in 1999, Dr Hansen published an article titled "The Global Warming Debate". This link uses the WaybackMachine, because it has been removed from the official NASA site.) This article made a good many predictions as was far more balanced than the his recent editorial in the NY Times.
Doing a good accurate comparison of the data presented in 1999 with the actual data collected since then we see that Dr. Hansen's predictions and theories have been falsified. Read "A Blast From The Past: James Hansen on 'The Global Warming Debate' from 13 years ago" for complete details. Actual temperatures do match one of the 3 models Dr. Hansen presented back in 1999; that model assumed zero CO2 production from the year 2000 onward. I'm pretty sure that since 2000 CO2 production has increased and not dropped to zero. Obviously he was wrong in 1999, and his editorial offers no evidence or scientific reference to support his past failed models which he is still using to claim that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change.
The political nature, and lack of supporting science to current Global Warming theory and models is so egregious that 50 of NASA's scientists have made a "request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled."
In 2007 Vice President Al Gore north polar ice cap may lose virtually all of its ice within the next five to seven years. Oops, wrong. In 2005 Al Gore said about global warming induced hurricanes would increase in both number and severity. The truth is that in past 7 years since Hurricane Katrina, US hurricane frequency and energy have decreased radically, and are at historic record lows. Globally tropical cyclone accumulated energy (ACE) is at the lowest level since 1977. Again observed scientific data falsifies extreme environmentalists' theory.
Widely reported on October 11, 2005 the http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/oct/12/naturaldisasters.climatechange1 > UN predicted 50 Million environmental refugees by end of decade. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of 'eco-refugees,' threatening political chaos. They actually first predicted this 1989, but I couldn't find the original article, the 2005 reference is close enough. Where are these refugees? Could the UN have been wrong? Since the observed facts contradict global warming theory why do UN and other government "science" organizations refuse to reject what is a clearly falsified theory.
Since it is clear the science on manmade global warming is wrong, the scientific predictions concerning global warming have observationally proven to be wrong, if the scientific method were applied then the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming on purely scientific grounds has been falsified, hence should be rejected. Because the science does not support his ideas, Hansen's call to stop Canada from extracting oil and call to stop future exploration of oil and other fossil fuels is an editorial, not a scientific paper.
If the scientific method were applied to global warming theory and models, since the observed environmental conditions do not match the theory or models then both the theory and models must be rejected or significantly modified. Rather than reject or modify either the theory or models, the action has been to lie about and change the data to fit the models. Climategate and Climategate-II provide ample evidence that the scientific method applied to climate science is not the goal of environmentalists.
The goal of environmentalists is not scientific, it is political. Specifically the goal is the concentration of power in ruling elite to control of the masses of people. With the failure of socialism on economic and political grounds, "climate change" is the excuse they are using to justify enhanced statism.
Private property and private property rights are the bane of statists and environmentalists. Note virtually all their actions call for the infringement on how individuals own and use private property. So called "sustainability" goals, are to increase population density, reduce number of property owners, and curtail how individuals can use property, giving control of property into the hands of government, specifically unelected bureaucrats. You want evidence go and google what the BLM is doing to Tombstone Arizona.
Dr. Hansen's editorial, is simply a call for tyranny and concentration of power. Environmentalist is a misnomer; they are in fact statists who are using environmental scare scenarios to promote statism. If you don't know what statism is look it up at www.dictionary.com
Consider this very small sampling of very inconvenient developments. Most are about 5 years old to reflect a long standing argument against AGW. Peer-reviewed studies, analyses, and prominent scientists continue to speak out to refute climate fears.
U.S. Senate Minority Report: "Over 400 Prominent Scientists (and rapidly growing) Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007" & An August 2007 report detailed how proponents of man-made global warming fears enjoy a monumental funding advantage over skeptical scientists. LINK
RUSSIAN SCIENTISTS CHALLENGE CLIMATE CHANGE CONSENSUS - Russian scientists 'reject the very idea that carbon dioxide may be responsible for global warming' - The Hindu - India"s National Newspaper: July 10, 2008:
Excerpt: As western nations step up pressure on India and China to curb the emission of greenhouse gases, Russian scientists reject the very idea that carbon dioxide may be responsible for global warming. Russian critics of the Kyoto Protocol, which calls for cuts in CO2 emissions, say that the theory underlying the pact lacks scientific basis. Under the Theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, it is human-generated greenhouse gases, and mainly CO2, that cause climate change. "The Kyoto theorists have put the cart before the horse," says renowned Russian geographer Andrei Kapitsa. "It is global warming that triggers higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not the other way round." [...] When four years ago, then President Vladimir Putin was weighing his options on the Kyoto Protocol the Russian Academy of Sciences strongly advised him to reject it as having "no scientific foundation." ( LINK )
'Considerable presence' of global warming skeptics exist, science group admits - July 16, 2008 - Australian's The Herald-Sun
Excerpt: What consensus? The American Physical Society reports: There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution. - So it has opened a debate, kicked off by Christopher Monckton: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) concluded that anthropogenic CO2 emissions probably caused more than half of the "global warming" of the past 50 years and would cause further rapid warming. However, global mean surface temperature has not risen since 1998 and may have fallen since late 2001. The present analysis suggests that the failure of the IPCC"s models to predict this and many other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of the three factors whose product is climate sensitivity… More importantly, the conclusion is that, perhaps, there is no "climate crisis", and that currently-fashionable efforts by governments to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions are pointless, may be ill-conceived, and could even be harmful. ( LINK )
India Issues Report Challenging Global Warming Fears - July 9, 2008
Excerpt: India issued its National Action Plan on Climate Change in June 2008 disputing man-made global warming fears and declared the country of one billion people had no intention of stopping its energy growth or cutting back its CO2 emissions. […] The report declared: "No firm link between the documented [climate] changes described below and warming due to anthropogenic climate change has yet been established." ( LINK ) Canvass of more than 51,000 Canadian scientists in 2008 reveals 68% disagree that global warming science is "settled" - March 6, 2008 Excerpt: A canvass of more than 51,000 scientists with the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta (APEGGA) found 68% of them disagree with the statement that "the debate on the scientific causes of recent climate change is settled.'" According to the survey, only 26% of scientists attributed global warming to "human activity like burning fossil fuels." APEGGA"s executive director Neil Windsor said, "We're not surprised at all. There is no clear consensus of scientists that we know of." (LINK) & ( LINK ) [Note: The oft repeated notion of "hundreds" or even "thousands" of scientists affiliated with the UN agreeing to a single "consensus" does not hold up to scrutiny. Out of all the scientists affiliated with the UN, only 52 scientists participated in UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers , which had to adhere to the wishes of the UN political leaders and delegates in a process described as more closely resembling a political party"s convention platform battle, not a scientific process. - LINK & LINK - In addition, the so-called "consensus" statements by scientific groups like the National Academy of Sciences, the American Meteorological Society, and the American Geophysical Union are only voted on by two dozen or so governing board members with no direct vote cast by rank-and-file scientists - LINK ] Team of 13 International Scientists Write Letter To UN Sec. Gen. - IPCC "Must be called to account and cease its deceptive practices" - 14th of July, 2008 ( LINK ) Australian scientist reverses view on man-made warming - Now a Skeptic! Now says 'new evidence has seriously weakened' the case - (By Mathematician, Rocket Scientist & Engineer Dr. David Evans, who did carbon accounting for the Australian Government) - July 18, 2008 ( LINK ) Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever, Declares Himself Dissenter: "I am a skeptic" - 'Global warming has become a new religion' - July 2, 2008 - ( LINK ) Top UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Turns on IPCC. Calls Warming Fears: "Worst scientific scandal in the history" - June 27, 2008 - By Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist who specializes in optical waveguide spectroscopy from the Yokohama National University, also contributed to the 2007 UN IPCC AR4 (fourth assessment report) as an expert reviewer. ( LINK ) New scientific paper shows CO2"s effect on temperature was overstated 500-2000% - Published in Physics and Society journal of the American Physical Society - July 2008 ( LINK ) Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, formerly of NASA, presented "smoking gun" analysis showing UN IPCC models ‚significantly overstated climate sensitivity to human climate forcings" - June 17, 2008 - ( LINK ) Four prominent scientists warn 'global warming out, global cooling in'- "Potential for a significant decline in the average mean temperature' - July 12, 2008 ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) Arctic ice INCREASES by nearly a half million square miles over same time period in 2007 - July 18, 2008 - ( LINK ) Australian astronomical Society warns of global COOLING as Sun's activity 'significantly diminishes' - June 29, 2008 - ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) New Study Exposes UN IPCC as "single-interest organization" with echo chamber process - July 15, 2008 - By Climate data analyst John McLean ( LINK ) Atmospheric Scientist Tennekes: 'Sun may cause some cooling' - 'No evidence at all for catastrophic global warming' - July 14, 2008 (By Atmospheric scientist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute.) ( LINK ) Atmospheric Physicist James Peden Dissents from man-made CO2 Fears - "The so-called Greenhouse Effect is a Myth" - Peden is formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh and Extranuclear Laboratories in Blawnox, Pennsylvania, studying ion-molecule reactions in the upper atmosphere. ( LINK ) South African Scientist: 'There is no evidence man-made CO2 causes climate change' - By Dr. Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa"s Atomic Energy Corporation. ( LINK ) Climatologist dismisses extreme weather predictions due to man-made warming as "complete nonsense" - By Hydro-climatologist Stewart Franks, an Associate Professor of Environmental Engineering at the University of Newcastle in Australia. ( LINK ) Another scientist dismisses fearmongers: Midwest Floods and "Completely Unjustified" Climate Change Fear Mongering - June 22, 2008 - By Mike Smith is a certified consulting meteorologist and a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society He is CEO of WeatherData Services, Inc., an AccuWeather Company, based in Wichita.) ( LINK ) U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) report shows Hurricanes declining, NO increases in drought, tornados, thunderstorms, heat-waves - June 20, 2008 - ( LINK ) Going Down: Death Rates Due to Extreme Weather Events ( LINK ) Analysis in peer-reviewed journal finds COLD PERIODS - not warm periods - see INCREASE in floods, droughts, storms, famine - April 24, 2008 - ( LINK ) Top Australian Scientist: Why so much climate change talk is hot air - (By William Kininmonth. formerly head of Australia's National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological Organization. He is author of Climate Change: A Natural Hazard (Multi-science Publishing, 2004) ( LINK ) MIT Scientist Dr. Robert Rose wrote on July 8, 2008, "Cooler heads [are] needed in global warming debate" and linked warming and cooling cycles to the "orbit and the tilt and wobble of the axis of the Earth's spin." Rose also questioned climate model predictions by stating, "Clearly, these are not "facts." They are computer models." (Rose is a professor of Materials Science and Engineering at MIT with approximately 50 years of experience teaching various scientific disciplines at the graduate and undergraduate levels.) ( LINK ) Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology declared she was skeptical of man-made climate fears - February 27, 2008 - Excerpt: "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly," Simpson, formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies, wrote in a public letter on February 27. "As a scientist I remain skeptical," she wrote. Simpson was described by former Colorado State Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr. as "among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years." ( LINK ) Veteran UN Climate Scientist Resigns Science Group in Protest: "AN ORCHESTRATED LITANY OF LIES" By UN IPCC Chemist Dr. Vincent Gray ( LINK ) Award-winning Philippines ecologist and evolutionary biologist Dr. Perry Ong declared climate fears were "hyped up." - May 18, 2008 - Ong is the director of the Institute of Biology at the University of the Philippines" College of Science.) ( LINK ) International climate declaration tops 1,100 endorsers - Man-made climate fears rejected - June 19, 2008 - ( LINK ) Prominent scientist refutes his own theory, finds warming does not increase hurricanes - July 15, 2008 - Dr. Kerry Emanuel, an MIT professor of atmospheric science ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) Another prominent hurricane expert reconsiders view: New study says global warming not worsening hurricanes - May 19, 2008 - By Meteorologist Tom Knutson of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration"s fluid dynamics lab in Princeton, N.J. ( LINK ) UK Scientist Calls Man-Made Warming Fears "Dangerous Nonsense of the Age" - July 17, 2008 - By Biogeography Professor Philip Stott, emeritus of the University of London ( LINK ) Global Warming Has Ended - The Next Climate Change to A Pronounced Cold Era Has Begun - The Space and Science Research Center Issues A Formal Declaration: - July 1, 2008 ( LINK ) U.S Army Chief Scientist Dr. Bruce West Says Sun, Not Man, Is Driving Climate Change - June 3, 2008 - ( LINK ) Oceans Cooling! Scientists puzzled by "mystery of global warming's missing heat"- March 19, 2008 - ( LINK) New Data from NASA"s Aqua satellite is showing "greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide." - March 22, 2008 - ( LINK ) Report: 31,000 + scientists dispute UN"s man-made global warming claims! - May 16, 2008 ( LINK ) New Peer-Reviewed Study Finds Greenland Ice Melt "not changing" or "dropping" - July 4, 2008 - ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) Peer-reviewed study finds Antarctic fails to warm as climate models predicted - May 7, 2008 - ( LINK ) Media Hype on "Melting" Antarctic Ignores Record Ice Growth - March 27, 2008 - ( LINK ) Arctic ice INCREASES by nearly a half million square miles over same time period in 2007 - July 18, 2008 - ( LINK ) New Peer-Reviewed Study Shows Arctic COOLING Over last 1500 years! - Feb 5, 2008 - Published in Climate Dynamics on 30 January 2008 ( LINK ) Numerous Peer-Reviewed Studies Show Natural Causes of Arctic Warming and Ice Reduction - Jan. 2008 - ( LINK ) New analysis finds Arctic ice reduction may be due to undersea volcanoes - June 26, 2008 - ( LINK ) New Report finds global sea ice GROWING: "World sea ice in April 2008 reached levels that were "unprecedented" for the month of April in over 25 years." ( LINK ) U.S. Senate Report Debunks Polar Bear Extinction Fears - Jan 30, 2008 - ( LINK ) Top Ivy League Forecasting expert Dr. Scott Armstrong says polar bear models critically flawed - Bear populations increased in recent decades - May 8, 2008 - ( LINK ) Swedish scientists: 'No concrete global warming proof in polar region' - June 21, 2008 - ( LINK ) Climate Audit: May Global Sea Ice at '10th highest on record' - June 20, 2008 ( LINK ) Study: 'Absolutely no evidence of warming for all of Antarctica' - July 1, 2008 - Study conducted by Vesa Laine of the Finnish Meteorological Institute in Helsinki; the work was funded by the Academy of Finland and the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation ( LINK ) Global warming may not affect sea levels, study finds - Jan 11, 2008 - ( LINK ) After being stripped of his title, skeptical Oregon state climatologist George Taylor steps aside - Feb 22, 2008 - ( LINK ) [ See also July 2007 comprehensive report detailing how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation - LINK ] Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, formerly of NASA, found not one peer-reviewed paper has 'ruled out a natural cause for most of our recent warmth' - March 20, 2008 - ( LINK ) UN IPCC in 'Panic Mode' as Earth Fails to Warm, Scientist Paleoclimatologist Dr. Bob Carter says - March 25, 2008 - ( LINK ) UN IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri "to look into the apparent temperature plateau so far this century." - January 24, 2008 - ( LINK) Canadian Climatologist Dr. Timothy Ball: CO2 from human or natural sources is not causing global warming - June 23, 2008 - ( LINK ) New scientific analysis shows Sun "could account for as much as 69% of the increase in Earth's average temperature"- March 2008 - ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) Scientists find dust free atmosphere may be responsible for up to .36 F rise in global temps - March 3, 2008 - ( LINK ) New York Times Laments Media's incorrect hyping of frogs and global warming - March 24, 2008 - ( LINK ) MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen"s March 2008 presentation of data from the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office found the Earth has had "no statistically significant warming since 1995."- ( LINK ) An International team of scientists released a March 2008 report to counter UN IPCC, declaring: "Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate" ( LINK ) Emitting MORE CO2 may 'be good for life on Earth', says atmospheric scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, formerly of NASA in May 2008. ( LINK ) Former Colorado State Climatologist Pielke Sr. Rails Against Abuse of the scientific method" in global warming study ( LINK ) Sun in deep slumber: 10.7 solar flux hits record low value - July 16, 2008 - By Meteorologist Anthony Watts ( LINK ) Science Daily: Scientists not sure why Sun 'continues to be dead' - June 9, 2008 ( LINK ) Climate models fail again! Scientist 'startled' to discover 50% of ozone destroyed in lower atmosphere - June 26, 2008 - ( LINK ) Report: In praise of CO2: Earth 'is the greenest it's been in decades, perhaps in centuries' - June 7, 2008 - ( LINK ) 'Global Warming Will Stop,' New Peer-Reviewed Study Says - Global Warming Takes a Break for Nearly 20 Years? - April 2008 - ( LINK ) Cooling Underway: Global Temperature Continues to Drop in May - 'Significantly Colder' - 16-month temperature drop of -0.774°C! ( LINK ) Earth's 'Fever' Breaks: Global COOLING Currently Under Way - February 27, 2008 - ( LINK ) Alaska sees "longest stretch of no-nineties in the Alaska climate record, since 1904" - June 25, 2008 - By Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks ( LINK ) Chill out: Alaskan faces 'cool gloomy' summer - July 17, 2008 - ( LINK ) Peru declares state of emergency due to record-breaking cold spell - 61 children die - June 19, 2008 - ( LINK ) Why have the oceans been cooling for 5 years? - July 2008 ( LINK ) Delaware: "Unheard of" Cold ocean temperatures in July slow fishing - July 16, 2008 - ( LINK ) Meteorologist: 'It's mid-summer and Lake Superior is still chilly' - July 15 , 2008 - By Meteorologist Karl Bohnak of Michigan"s TV6 and holds the American Meteorological Society"s broadcast seal of approval) ( LINK ) Geophysicist calls man-made climate fears "a fraud" and "hysterical scare tactic" - June 29, 2008 - (By Dr. David Deming is a geophysicist and associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma who has published peer-reviewed climate studies) ( LINK ) U.S. Scientists Sign Document Refuting Man-made Climate fears - "Prominent Americans among those demanding an end to climate hysteria" - June 27, 2008 - ( LINK ) Climate Audit's Steve McIntyre: IPCC 'claimed to have destroyed all their working documents' - Violates 'objective, open and transparent' process! - June 20, 2008 ( LINK ) Report: Nature may soon cool climate debate as 'fairly cold period' set to begin - June 18, 2008 - ( LINK ) Meteorologist says Man-Made Global Warming Movement "Rapidly Running Out of Gas" In past year - June 17, 2008 - (By Award winning Chief Meteorologist James Spann of Alabama ABC TV) ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) NASA Aerospace Engineer Rejects Man-Made Climate fears (By Dirck T. Hartmann, who worked on the Apollo Space Program and many other significant NASA projects. Hartmann is a scientist/ aerospace engineer/physicist) ( LINK ) How cold is it getting? Harsh winters force Mongolian horsemen to abandon nomadic life ( LINK ) Somaliland resident in Africa: Global warming hysteria, "more to do with Europe"s prosperous middle class politics than Science" ( LINK ) Another Dissenter: "There is only 1/19 as much CO2 in the air today as there was 520 million years" - By Geologist/Earth Scientist Greg Benson: - July 15, 2008 - Benson is an earth scientist with 30 years of geologic study and currently works as a research specialist in geologic modeling. ( LINK ) New study finds cleaner skies 'contributing to at least half the warming that has occurred' - July 9, 2008 From New Scientist ( LINK ) UN Scientist Debunks Warming Fears: "No correlation between the anthropogenic emissions of GHGs and global temperature" - By IPCC Reviewer and climate consultant Richard Courtney - ( LINK ) "No 'greenhouse' gas other than water has ever influenced the global climate perceptibly" By Chemical Scientist Dr. Brian G. Valentine, professor at University of Maryland ( LINK ) UK scientist Dissents: "More proof that global warming is natural" - June 26, 2008 (By Botanist Dr. David Bellamy) - ( LINK ) " "No convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide…will cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere" - By Dr. Fred W. Decker, Professor of Meteorology at Oregon State University, signed the 2008 Oregon Petition dissenting from man-made climate fears. ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) Thermometers Are Doing the Talking - by global warming author and environmental economist Dennis T. Avery - June 9, 2008 - ( LINK ) "Sun is the primary temperature driver" - By Stephen Wilde has been a Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society since 1968 - ( LINK ) Update: June 15, 2008: More Signs of the Sun Slowing Down - 'We continue to slide into a deeper than normal solar minima, one not seen in decades' By Meteorologist Anthony Watts - ( LINK ) National Post: Global Cooling! 'Spotless Sun' prompts scientists to fear 'dramatic turn for the worse' - May 31, 2008 - ( LINK ) Sea Level Falling? - By Meteorologist Joe D"Aleo of IceCap.US - ( LINK ) RIP: Renowned Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Reid Bryson Dies At 88 in June 2008 - Declared: "You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide." ( LINK ) & ( LINK ) Dr. Bryson was prominently featured in the U.S. Senate"s report of now over 400 skeptical scientists of man-made global warming fears. (See: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport ) 'IPCC theory of anthropogenic warming is a hoax' says Env. Canada Meteorologist - June 9, 2008 - Canada"s The Hill Times - By Patrick Carroll, retired Environment Canada meteorologist. ( LINK ) South African Professor says 'man-made global warming is not real' - Professor Dr. William J.R. Alexander, Emeritus of the Department of Civil and Biosystems Engineering at the University of Pretoria in South Africa and a former member of the United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters. ( LINK ) Geologist: 'Earth has had massive changes in temperature unrelated to carbon dioxide' - (Article features Prize-wining Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide in Australia.) ( LINK ) New Zealand Professor Dr. Ron Smith Says "No Consensus" On Global Warming - ( LINK ) Weather Channel Founder: 'I ask Al Gore, where"s the global warming?' - By Meteorologist and Weather Channel Founder John Coleman ( LINK ) Global Warming as Religion and not Science By Dr. John Brignell is a UK Emeritus Engineering Professor at the University of Southampton who was awarded the Callendar Silver Medal by InstMC and served on a committee of the Institute of Physics. ( LINK ) Cooling Underway: Global Temperature Continues to Drop in May - June 4, 2008 'Global Warming Will Stop,' New Peer-Reviewed Study Says - April 30, 2008 Global COOLING Currently Under Way - February 27, 2008 U.S Army Chief Scientist Says Sun, Not Man, Is Driving Climate Change - June 3, 2008
Thursday, May 10, 2012
New York Town Implements Libertarian Taxing Strategy
By Tom Rhodes 5/10/2012
New Rochelle N.Y., looking at decreased revenue and increased costs, like many US towns is strapped for cash. Being responsible to its citizens and recognizing that they have limited funds, in their 2012 budget New Rochelle eliminated some of their towns holiday celebrations including their Fourth of July Fireworks, their Memorial Day and Thanksgiving Parades. Although these civic events are very important they took the responsible action.
Canceling these events saves the citizens of New Rochelle $135,000. Such austerity measures are hard to accept for many people, and the city of New Rochelle wants to put these events on for its businesses, citizens, and community. So rather than raise taxes or borrow money, they have asked for citizens for VOLUNTARILY support (tax themselves) to pay for these traditional holiday celebrations.
So far these targeted donations have covered the cost of the Memorial Day parade, and it looks like donations will also cover the Thanksgiving parade. These Parades cost $30,000 each. It doesn't look like they will collect enough to put on the July 4th Fireworks, at $75,000 it is a substantial cost.
New Rochelle Mayor, Noam Bramson, said New Rochelle is in a "time of fiscal challenge" and depends on the support of donations to help out. What an awesome position for a town to take, that it can and does depend upon its citizens and business community to make the right decisions about what the town can and can't do. No, it hasn't eliminated property taxes, but it is a huge step in the right direction. A town recognizing that it governs and provides services at the consent of the governed, including "depending" upon citizen and local businesses to support for such actions as parades, fireworks, etc. is the reality of implementing of libertarian ideology.
If you want to support a town calling for truly voluntary not forced taxation, for the communities luxuries you can donate by calling 914-654-2087.
New Rochelle N.Y., looking at decreased revenue and increased costs, like many US towns is strapped for cash. Being responsible to its citizens and recognizing that they have limited funds, in their 2012 budget New Rochelle eliminated some of their towns holiday celebrations including their Fourth of July Fireworks, their Memorial Day and Thanksgiving Parades. Although these civic events are very important they took the responsible action.
Canceling these events saves the citizens of New Rochelle $135,000. Such austerity measures are hard to accept for many people, and the city of New Rochelle wants to put these events on for its businesses, citizens, and community. So rather than raise taxes or borrow money, they have asked for citizens for VOLUNTARILY support (tax themselves) to pay for these traditional holiday celebrations.
So far these targeted donations have covered the cost of the Memorial Day parade, and it looks like donations will also cover the Thanksgiving parade. These Parades cost $30,000 each. It doesn't look like they will collect enough to put on the July 4th Fireworks, at $75,000 it is a substantial cost.
New Rochelle Mayor, Noam Bramson, said New Rochelle is in a "time of fiscal challenge" and depends on the support of donations to help out. What an awesome position for a town to take, that it can and does depend upon its citizens and business community to make the right decisions about what the town can and can't do. No, it hasn't eliminated property taxes, but it is a huge step in the right direction. A town recognizing that it governs and provides services at the consent of the governed, including "depending" upon citizen and local businesses to support for such actions as parades, fireworks, etc. is the reality of implementing of libertarian ideology.
If you want to support a town calling for truly voluntary not forced taxation, for the communities luxuries you can donate by calling 914-654-2087.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
40% of Democrats prefer Federal Inmate 11593-051 over Obama.
By Tom Rhodes, 5/9/2012
From a cell in a Texas penitentiary, Inmate 11593-051 was able to mount a bid for US President. In the West Virginia Democrat Presidential Primary, 40% of the Democrat voters chose Federal Inmate 11593-051, Keith Judd, over sitting US President B.H. Obama. What does it say when the sitting president, who is virtually uncontested in his own party, loses 40% of his own party members to prison inmate single handedly running a campaign from an out of state federal prison?
All I can say is that when the Gallop poll shows Romney ahead in single digits, the GOP has jumped the shark. When federal prisoners can get 40% of his home state's Democrats to vote for him, spending a mere $2500 in a filing fee, and issuing some press releases from prison, it's clear that the voters don't want Robama or Obamney. The only difference in the two is hair style and in what year the graduated from a Northeastern Elitist School.
If you want something different then ever expanding federal government, political favoritism, don't keep voting the same way. Insanity is doing the same thing you did in the past and expecting a different result. Voting Republican or Democrat and expecting a different result is insane.
You have a real viable alternative to choose from. At the LP Convention last week the Libertarian Party overwhelmingly selected former governor Gary Johnson to be our presidential candidate. He will be on the ballot where you live, since you one single vote won't really make any significant difference in the outcome, at least if you vote for Johnson, you will be able to say, "Don't Blame Me I didn't vote for Him." If either of the two elitist statists offered by the major political parties wins in November.
Check out Gary Johnson 2012
From a cell in a Texas penitentiary, Inmate 11593-051 was able to mount a bid for US President. In the West Virginia Democrat Presidential Primary, 40% of the Democrat voters chose Federal Inmate 11593-051, Keith Judd, over sitting US President B.H. Obama. What does it say when the sitting president, who is virtually uncontested in his own party, loses 40% of his own party members to prison inmate single handedly running a campaign from an out of state federal prison?
All I can say is that when the Gallop poll shows Romney ahead in single digits, the GOP has jumped the shark. When federal prisoners can get 40% of his home state's Democrats to vote for him, spending a mere $2500 in a filing fee, and issuing some press releases from prison, it's clear that the voters don't want Robama or Obamney. The only difference in the two is hair style and in what year the graduated from a Northeastern Elitist School.
If you want something different then ever expanding federal government, political favoritism, don't keep voting the same way. Insanity is doing the same thing you did in the past and expecting a different result. Voting Republican or Democrat and expecting a different result is insane.
You have a real viable alternative to choose from. At the LP Convention last week the Libertarian Party overwhelmingly selected former governor Gary Johnson to be our presidential candidate. He will be on the ballot where you live, since you one single vote won't really make any significant difference in the outcome, at least if you vote for Johnson, you will be able to say, "Don't Blame Me I didn't vote for Him." If either of the two elitist statists offered by the major political parties wins in November.
Check out Gary Johnson 2012
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Clarity on Citizens Rights
By Tom Rhodes, 5/3/2012
"It is unclear how disarming law abiding citizens would better protect them from the dangers and threats posed by those who would flout the law." ~ Gov. Rick Scott, 2012
That was the response to the Mayor of Tampa’s request to have the Florida Governor to take away the right of the people to keep and bear arms in Tampa during the RNC convention this August. When faced with the actual evidence the fears expressed by Tampa Mayor and city council are completely irrational. Furthermore it is incumbent upon those who would restrict a fundamental right, ostensibly to make us all safer, to actually provide evidence that such restrictions of a constitutional right will in fact produce the increased safety they use to rationalize limiting liberty. There is no evidence that disarming licensed concealed weapons carriers will make anybody except criminals safer, however there is evidence to conclude that the increase in private gun ownership and number of armed citizens has resulted in increased safety.
Looking at the numbers since both the right to carry concealed arms in Florida was protected by law, and since the passing of the Stand Your Ground law in 2005, regardless of what anti-gun people want to say or claim, Florida is safer not more dangerous. Opponents can note that the number of justifiable homicides in Florida (excluding police shootings) has just about tripled since the law was passed. The average number of justifiable homicides between 2000 and 2004 was 12 while the average between 2006 and 2010 has increased to 35. Considering the size of our population, and the fact that now 6.5% of the Florida residents are licensed to carry concealed weapons the number is very low. Looking at that increase in justifiable homicides would be unjust and unfair and untrue without also noting that Florida's overall violent crime rate fell by 23% in the five years since the Stand Your Ground law was passed.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence claims that Florida’ liberal concealed carry law is responsible for "year after year of carnage," that is quite simply a lie. If you look at the data you would find that since 1987, when the nondiscretionary carry license law was passed, Florida’s overall violent crime rate has been cut just about in half. In fact the evidence is clear; the crime rate of those people whom Florida has issued a license to carry a concealed weapon is far less than that of the general public and the violent crime rate related to firearms of those people is so minuscule it is virtually nonexistent.
Governor Scott’s response to the Tampa Mayor was not just political, it was logical. His response provided clarity based on facts and evidence; disarming law abiding citizens will not protect them from the dangers and threats posed by those who would flout the law.
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ~ John Adams, 1770
"It is unclear how disarming law abiding citizens would better protect them from the dangers and threats posed by those who would flout the law." ~ Gov. Rick Scott, 2012
That was the response to the Mayor of Tampa’s request to have the Florida Governor to take away the right of the people to keep and bear arms in Tampa during the RNC convention this August. When faced with the actual evidence the fears expressed by Tampa Mayor and city council are completely irrational. Furthermore it is incumbent upon those who would restrict a fundamental right, ostensibly to make us all safer, to actually provide evidence that such restrictions of a constitutional right will in fact produce the increased safety they use to rationalize limiting liberty. There is no evidence that disarming licensed concealed weapons carriers will make anybody except criminals safer, however there is evidence to conclude that the increase in private gun ownership and number of armed citizens has resulted in increased safety.
Looking at the numbers since both the right to carry concealed arms in Florida was protected by law, and since the passing of the Stand Your Ground law in 2005, regardless of what anti-gun people want to say or claim, Florida is safer not more dangerous. Opponents can note that the number of justifiable homicides in Florida (excluding police shootings) has just about tripled since the law was passed. The average number of justifiable homicides between 2000 and 2004 was 12 while the average between 2006 and 2010 has increased to 35. Considering the size of our population, and the fact that now 6.5% of the Florida residents are licensed to carry concealed weapons the number is very low. Looking at that increase in justifiable homicides would be unjust and unfair and untrue without also noting that Florida's overall violent crime rate fell by 23% in the five years since the Stand Your Ground law was passed.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence claims that Florida’ liberal concealed carry law is responsible for "year after year of carnage," that is quite simply a lie. If you look at the data you would find that since 1987, when the nondiscretionary carry license law was passed, Florida’s overall violent crime rate has been cut just about in half. In fact the evidence is clear; the crime rate of those people whom Florida has issued a license to carry a concealed weapon is far less than that of the general public and the violent crime rate related to firearms of those people is so minuscule it is virtually nonexistent.
Governor Scott’s response to the Tampa Mayor was not just political, it was logical. His response provided clarity based on facts and evidence; disarming law abiding citizens will not protect them from the dangers and threats posed by those who would flout the law.
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ~ John Adams, 1770
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Communist Holiday is Now USA's Loyalty Day
By Tom Rhodes, 5/2/12
Obama Declares May Day as Loyalty Day.
C. E. Ruthenberg wrote in the 1923 May Day edition of the Weekly Worker,: "May Day - the day which inspires fear in the hearts of the capitalists and hope in the workers - the workers the world over - will find the Communist movement this year stronger in the U. S. than at any time in its history.... The road is clear for greater achievements, and in the United States as elsewhere in the world the future belongs to Communism."
"Socialism appeals to better classes and has far more strength. Attack the state and you excite feelings of loyalty even among the disaffected classes; but attack the industrial system and appeal to the state, and you may have loyalty in your favor. " ~ John Bates Clark
If you look at any of our oaths of office, you find no required "loyalty" but instead, promises to defend the Constitution form all enemies foreign and domestic. Or declaration boldly proclaims that the people not only aren't required to be loyal, but have the right and duty to do away with the government if it fails to protect the people's rights.
"Loyalty of the law-making power to the executive power was one of the dangers the political fathers foretold. " ~ Garet Garrett
Obama's Mayday proclamation pretty much renders the United States to being a mere parody of itself. How would the press and Obama supports have reacted if Ronald Reagan, or Richard Nixon made the same calling for the people of the USA to recognize May Day as "Loyalty Day." The parody is complete; Obama has called for the quintessential communist Holiday, to be celebrated in loyalty to the state.
"Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it." ~ Mark Twain
Obama Declares May Day as Loyalty Day.
In order to recognize the American spirit of loyalty and the sacrifices that so many have made for our Nation, the Congress, by Public Law 85-529 as amended, has designated May 1 of each year as "Loyalty Day." On this day, let us reaffirm our allegiance to the United States of America, our Constitution, and our founding values.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 1, 2012, as Loyalty Day. This Loyalty Day, I call upon all the people of the United States to join in support of this national observance, whether by displaying the flag of the United States or pledging allegiance to the Republic for which it stands.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-sixth.
C. E. Ruthenberg wrote in the 1923 May Day edition of the Weekly Worker,: "May Day - the day which inspires fear in the hearts of the capitalists and hope in the workers - the workers the world over - will find the Communist movement this year stronger in the U. S. than at any time in its history.... The road is clear for greater achievements, and in the United States as elsewhere in the world the future belongs to Communism."
"Socialism appeals to better classes and has far more strength. Attack the state and you excite feelings of loyalty even among the disaffected classes; but attack the industrial system and appeal to the state, and you may have loyalty in your favor. " ~ John Bates Clark
If you look at any of our oaths of office, you find no required "loyalty" but instead, promises to defend the Constitution form all enemies foreign and domestic. Or declaration boldly proclaims that the people not only aren't required to be loyal, but have the right and duty to do away with the government if it fails to protect the people's rights.
"Loyalty of the law-making power to the executive power was one of the dangers the political fathers foretold. " ~ Garet Garrett
Obama's Mayday proclamation pretty much renders the United States to being a mere parody of itself. How would the press and Obama supports have reacted if Ronald Reagan, or Richard Nixon made the same calling for the people of the USA to recognize May Day as "Loyalty Day." The parody is complete; Obama has called for the quintessential communist Holiday, to be celebrated in loyalty to the state.
"Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it." ~ Mark Twain
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
